Lurker > COVxy

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

For some people, what they want to do is actually impossible, again, for any number of reasons. I'm all for hard work and determination and a positive can do attitude but realistically speaking, even that isn't enough sometimes.

Like I said, I agree. But I think that the cases in which this isn't the case are a lot more prevalent than when it is, at least in the US.

However, it's an easy coping mechanism to call for impossibility so that you don't feel guilty about not trying. It's the same underlying pattern when students in college start "accepting" certain grades in certain classes. "I'm happy with my C in Calc II because that's all I could have really expected given my ability in math".
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Conflict posted...

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

Also luck is a factor no matter how much some people want to act like it isn't. Some people are just blessed with more opportunities than others. Unless my life experience has been exactly the same as someone else's I don't tell them "I did it, you can too!" Maybe they actually CAN'T for any number of reasons.

Precisely what I've been trying to say. This applies to mental illness too, and how people like to say those very six words in regards to it

I mean, I understand very well that people are born with fewer opportunities. Largely that means you have to work harder than everyone else to get to the same place. It's shitty that this is the case, but it also doesn't mean that these things are, again, impossible.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Conflict posted...

I mean when you cut down my post like that you make it seem like you're personally asking me a question which I explained wouldn't apply to me. I try to be open-minded and consider that what might be easy in one field or prospective situation might not be that easy in another, and multiple people itt who ARE actually college graduates are basically making that clear.

The logic if it were easy then everyone would do it fails because the premise is assumed false by everyone. Nobody is saying that it is easy.

The point is that unless you are endorsing that those who have your dream job are intrinsically better than you and/or have such large store of luck, then you are endorsing that it is possible. Of course there are circumstances where your dream job is indeed infeasible and/or impossible. But in the large majority of cases, people just give in an accept it as an aphorism that everyone works a job they hate and that it's just part of being an adult.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Conflict posted...

Huh?

I don't see what's confusing you.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Conflict posted...

just easily get a job

The entire point is that it's not easy. But do you really think those people in those positions are actually fundamentally and intrinsically that much better than you are? Are all of them that much 'luckier' than you?

If the answer is no, then the clear answer is that you just gave up. Not that it's not feasible, but that you gave up.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Antifar posted...

COVxy posted...

Unless I'm misreading things, the focus is on Obama-Trump flip voters.

Antifar posted...

The pollsters also conducted focus groups with so-called drop-off voters — people who voted for Obama in 2012 but didn’t vote in 2016 — in the same states and polled 800 drop-off voters nationally.

Ah, I see, I missed it because none of the results for the drop-off voters were listed in your summary post, only the Obama-Trump voters.

But there in lies the rub anyway: the focus is still on Obama-Trump flip voters in support of the white working class revolution narrative that largely doesn't seem to be supported by voting data. This is misleading, a rabbit hole we've thrown ourselves down. In reality, the "democrats need to pay attention to the working class white!" isn't really where we should be going.

In reality, I imagine the schism of the democratic party between Ideological Purists, namely the Bernie or Bust movement, and it's traditional set of voters did more to lead to our current situation than the "working class revolution".
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Darkman124 posted...

which...was part of the study

Unless I'm misreading things, the focus is on Obama-Trump flip voters.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Darkman124 posted...

i expect it would be actually

trump won because he eked out narrow wins in PA/MI/WI (and also ohio and florida, but those were less close and not expected dem strongholds)

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/the_myth_of_the_rust_belt_revolt.html

The shift was mostly in democrats simply not voting.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Antifar posted...

The poll found that Obama-Trump voters, many of whom are working-class whites and were pivotal to Trump’s victory

I'm relatively certain that this narrative isn't supported by the actual voting data.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

The main thing that separates you and the person that does indeed have your dream job is the motivation to work for it. People give up in the face of adversity and decide that everyone hates their job, so they should just take a job they hate like everyone else.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Pittance/yr, but sometimes I get a nice "good job" from my advisor. Hard to measure it in monetary worth, such benefits.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Nomadic View posted...

Protesting doesn't mean you're protected from criticism. Nothing wrong with the BBQ.

But what exactly is the criticism?

Workers protesting for better treatment. Is the criticism that you should just take any perceived mistreatment from your employer and shut up about it? It seems to me that it's much more likely that this was enacted by a bunch of undergrads with no perspective on the issue, but decided that they wanted to make a political statement with an issue that is, at its heart, fairly apolitical.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Seems like a weird protest to oppose. There was just a graduate student work-in protest at my uni about the administration cutting into TA/GA salaries indirectly via student fees. Met with no opposition from the student body.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

YonicBoom posted...

Falling for the higher education meme is like this for any major though.

He said, having no experience in higher education.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

kingdrake2 posted...

COVxy posted...

In reality it depends on what your goal is. If you are not attempting to pursue any post-bachelor education, and you have some internship experience, then it really doesn't matter.

looks like we found another.... it's you're damnit.

Wut?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

In reality it depends on what your goal is. If you are not attempting to pursue any post-bachelor education, and you have some internship experience, then it really doesn't matter.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

nexigrams posted...

He has a BS in Mechanical Engineering. Baccalaureate of Science.

I have a friend on Facebook who has a BS in Ecology who calls himself an ecologist. He's a pretentious dbag.

I don't think most people know what a scientist is. And I think that's a big problem, especially given today's political climate.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

green butter posted...

honestly, id be a little weirded out of any posters on here were doing research to back up a post on a video game message board

That attitude is why it's hard to have serious discussions on CE.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

A is usually 93 and above in my experience.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

pinky0926 posted...

COVxy posted...

pinky0926 posted...

If you're salaried, it's stupid to pull regular overtime and be the martyr that no one cares about.

In some lines of work it is necessary, though.

Sure, but you have to weigh that up. If you're in a job like say, journalism, where you have to work to a deadline which means everyone works till midnight on the day before print, then sure. Everyone expects that. Similarly if you're a concrete worker you can't just abandon post in the middle of a pour just because it's 5:01pm. There's got to be a payoff somewhere though. You wouldn't do those hours all the time.

But if you're consistently working 90 hour weeks but getting paid a regular 38 hour salary, you are a chump.

I mean, like I said, sometimes it is simply necessary. Take my field for example. If you are not working 60+ hours in academic science, then you are almost certainly not going to be productive enough to make tenure, and you are certainly not going to have sent out enough grant applications to have a well funded lab.

And you can't just be like, "fuck this, I'm gonna find another employer", because that's simply how the whole system works. So if you want to work in academic science, and those who are interested in becoming scientists do, there's no getting around it. Like, you can go into industry and take a job, one that most certainly wont fulfill you as much as an academic science job. But that's essentially like switching careers entirely.

I guess it's a little different in motivation for those in academic science, since it's both a hobby and a profession for most.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

pinky0926 posted...

If you're salaried, it's stupid to pull regular overtime and be the martyr that no one cares about.

In some lines of work it is necessary, though.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

E32005 posted...

COVxy posted...

Consciousness is a bullshit question. It's the 'hard problem' because people are chasing a problem that doesn't exist.

Y?

Because the entire reason consciousness has been studied is due to an elevation of subjective experience as profound. Your moment by moment experiences, the feeling of you-ness, are so profound that we must think of them as otherworldly.

We study "consciousness" everyday in cognitive neuroscience labs. However, these studies are denied by people interested in consciousness for the very reason that they are physical, rather than metaphysical. If I can explain the processing and consolidation of long term memory through analysis of hippocampal circuitry, that can't be an explanation of conscious experience because it's too mundane. It's not profound enough.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Consciousness is a bullshit question. It's the 'hard problem' because people are chasing a problem that doesn't exist.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Bump.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Arguing to the logical extreme is not the same as strawman.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Maybe we can frame an argument to get people emotionally invested in the truth!
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

pinky0926 posted...

Here's what I think the truth is. People respond better to convincing rhetoric than to hard data argued in a logically sound manner. That's why politicians like Trump succeed and why scientists and engineers don't rule the world.

I mean, that's probably true. I think we all wish it weren't. Which leads to this angst. Gahhh.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

pinky0926 posted...

That said, I fucking hate when people talk about science like "believe in science" or "the science is always right" or other things that people like Neil DeGrasse Tyson say that sounds more like pontificating than a genuine desire to educate.

Right, it's, of course, dishonest. But, I also get why they do it. If you convey the intrinsic uncertainty of science, people will latch onto that uncertainty in an attempt to, consciously or unconsciously, maintain their current belief system.

I'm very much in the camp of conveying scientific information very honestly. Which also means that if it needs to get complicated, then it needs to get complicated. However, like is alluded to in the article, if we're just talking about success in convincing others of scientific ideas, this is the wrong way to go. Better off to appeal to emotion.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/04/explaining_science_won_t_fix_information_illiteracy.html

It's interesting. Been struggling with this idea over the last year. The issue being that it almost seems self defeating. If you're going to convince people to believe a particular scientific framework, getting them to do so in a non scientific way seems to defeat the point. But it is true that the deficit model doesn't seem really accurate.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

A scientist, by professional definitions, has a PhD in a scientific field and works either in an academic lab or some other equivalent, as a PI.

Calling Bill Nye a scientist would be extremely loose.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Microwaved_Eggs posted...

i thought i was trans (and still might be)

welchfist hated me

Oh, you are that person who thinks because you don't like masculine things that means your trans, right?
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

PrinceDBF posted...

COVxy posted...

No such thing as good and evil.

then how would you describe isis attacking populated civilian areas? how would you describe anonymous donations to charity?

Mechanistically rather than spiritually.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

No such thing as good and evil.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Vyrulisse posted...

Holy shit hypercringe

I mean, that's the point. Her entire schtick is cringy socially awkward songs.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Xeno14 posted...

She also committed lewd acts with the children and those charges got dismissed as part of the plea deal.....
Nice job leaving that out la times

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/04/23/28218/

You clearly didn't click on the link.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

ChromaticAngel posted...

COVxy posted...

If everything goes right, then it's easy. If a single thing goes wrong, it can be a nightmare.

And when something goes wrong you have to learn how to troubleshoot it and when you're done you emerge a more knowledgable person with a better understanding of hardware and with the ability to fix your own problems.

I'm not saying that's not true. But the point is that if a single item comes DOA, it can be a multi-day project. And pretending like DOA items is an extreme rarity would be simply lying.

Troubleshooting is fun for me, but I could very much understand if someone wouldn't want to deal with the possibility.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

If everything goes right, then it's easy. If a single thing goes wrong, it can be a nightmare.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

fenderbender321 posted...

Every time the government shuts down, nothing bad happens at all. If that isn't proof that government is overrated and mostly worthless, I don't know what is.

http://www.nature.com/news/nih-shutdown-effects-multiply-1.13872

I had multiple colleagues whose experiments were interrupted due to the shutdown. Sometimes timing really matters, and the shutdown likely caused numerous studies to have various time confounds.

Not to mention the effect of the sequestration that followed.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Page minimums encourage really shitty writing habits.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Sartre would say otherwise =P.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

I think I like the original the best, but criminal intent will always hold a special place in my heart because of Vincent D'Nofrio.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

COVxy posted...

Anyone who tries to "psychoanalyze" or diagnose a person from public appearances is a quack looking for media attention.

---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

This reads as a cringy Facebook repost.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Anyone who tries to "psychoanalyze" or diagnose a person from public appearances is a quack looking for media attention.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

The Admiral posted...

So, no, it's not because that area "just happens to be poor" that people are radicalized. The area is poor because people have radical religious views and have long since rejected moderate ones that the western world has adopted.

You don't have any real evidence to suggest that the causality is in that direction, and there's been a large amount of research demonstrating that the general phenomenon can be driven by the reverse direction. Where reduced resources causes shallower processing and focus on quick simple short term solutions.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

The problem is blaming the Islamic ideology rather than the geopolitical scarcity that has largely driven the modern culture within heavily Islamic nations, primarily those in the middle east.

The issue has a lot more to do with economics and power than it does religion.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

That_Happened posted...

You know if you spend all day on Twitter you're bound to find someone upset about almost everything. The pieces of shit who run websites and publications that capitalize on that should be pantsed in a public forum.

Most sensible post this topic will get.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]

Antifar posted...

Man, 6 years ago Conservatives were on about Obama being a secret Muslim Kenyan. Let's not act like things are only bad now.

I think despite whatever hyperbole exists in the OP, it's a valid point of discussion that both sides have polarized in this unproductive way.

I think good amount of thought needs to be put in to bring the possibility of discussion across the aisle back into play.
---

=E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])]