Man, this made me remember that the win+period -window used to have a search bar in it. Loved it. Then suddenly I guess Microsoft thought that it was too convenient because it vanished.
It still -kind of- does, it’s just not super intuitive anymore. Open the menu, select the tab, then just start typing your search. The text you type will appear in the text field you were typing in before opening the win+. menu, but as you type it’ll filter the emojis and symbols down to the ones that match your input, and then replace your input when you click one.
Israel is gonna pay for the for the reconstruction willingly & proudly. They’ve been doing it for more than 70 years. All the Palestinians’ apartment buildings that was destroyed for the past 70 years, Israel rebuild it, and then the Jews moves into the new area. Rinse and repeat until no more Palestine
Oh boy, yeah, a lot more came out about it. There’s actually been a lot over the years, but a few years ago a pretty serious documentary came out about it. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaving_Neverland
He asked them to show their butt holes and masturbated in front of them, so not as severe as rape but definitely sexual abuse (allegedly).
What swung it for me is when Louis Theroux said that anyone claiming he’s not a pedophile is in denial. If you’re willing to look the other way because “he made great music though”, then shame on you.
It’s available to watch on Netflix and Amazon Prime. I watched this honestly with a mind that wasn’t just open, but sceptical with a view that some “hangers on” were just after a quick payday and I ended up feeling pretty sick.
I’m on the fence about him, as I haven’t really dug into it, but i get the impression that it’s mostly allegations without proof. His sister made some outlandish claims, but her credibility has been called intoquestion.
There were some settlements/payoffs, but I’m not going to speculate whether that was for covering something up, or if it was an attempt at appeasing people who just wanted a quick buck.
It can be said with certainty that he liked being around kids, possibly in a purely innocent manner. Anything beyond that is hard to say for certain. And the stories about kids sharing bedroom with him often fail to take into account that his bedroom was larger than most houses.
Whatever you do, make sure that you learn legally and avoid those horrible sites that steal the hard work of researchers and prevent publishers from properly incentivizing academic research by allowing just anyone to download research for free. You know, horrible sites like LibGen, SciHub, or Anna’s archive.
Totally disgusting sites that you should definitely avoid.
Do not go to sci-hub.se! Can you believe someone had the audacity to allow access to government funded research papers for free? Everyone knows that only elite institutions deserve the benefits of publicly funded projects.
Support your local capitalist by paying them for the content they rightfully stole.
As a quick reminder to everyone: Researchers have to pay to get their papers published in scientific journals. They receive no money back from those journals. The journals are all double-dipping by charging both the author and the reader to use them. It isn’t stealing from researchers when researchers don’t get paid for your usage regardless.
In fact, one of the most ethical ways to get access to research papers is to go to journals, find the author(s) of the paper you want to read, and email them directly to politely ask for a copy. They’ll gladly send it to you for free, because they also hate the journal system that they’ve been forced into using.
YSK: That publishers do not fund or incentivize academic research.
Authors of scientific papers do not receive money for publishing them (sometimes they have to pay). The peer reviewers work for free. The high prices of scientific journals simply turn into obscenely huge profit margins for the publishers. Publishers harm research by siphoning off money from research budgets and also by preventing better ways of sharing research. Their obscene profits depend on doing things a certain way.
Funny story: Traditionally, researchers have transferred the copyrights to their papers to the journal. When the internet had become a thing, authors made their own papers available directly for download. Publishers then went after the authors for sharing their own research.
But surely the journals provide some sort of service for the researchers, right? Like paying for experts to review their scientific claims, or fact checking their citations, or even basic grammatical proofreading, right? If the journals are earning so much from research, then conducting academic research must be a lucrative field with so many publishers competing to be the first ones to publish a paper.
I see what you are asking: Why doesn’t market competition drive down prices?
People have to publish in prestigious journals to make a career in science. So, that’s the “service”. Their position in the system lets them extract payment for something that other people deliver.
Even if someone opens up a competing journal, they are not likely to get quality submissions, because publishing in some unknown journal does not help the CV.
At the same time, the cost is mostly born by other people. Librarians pay for the subscriptions. I’m not sure why there is not more pushback from that angle. Eventually, institutions need access to these journals.
The cost to scientific research is spread over all society. No one person feels it. No one can even be sure how much better things would be under a reformed system.
Progress happens only when someone goes too far and causes outrage in the academic community. There has been some progress to move to a better model. But all that money can pay for a lot of PR.
ETA: On second thought, I’m probably simply not aware of the efforts of librarians, etc.
I was being sarcastic. Many journals don’t provide any of those services. Some journals even charge researchers for the “prestige” of publishing a paper. Peer review is mostly unpaid work, and some reviewers act as gatekeepers.
No, please don’t. Do it using word choice and tone of your writing. Sarcasm exists for a reason and denoting it with a single symbol is a bad idea. Sarcasm functions through its subtlety, in writer and reader.
Sarcasm is using categorical imprecision to point out how obvious the truth is. It’s words face-planting on purpose to get themselves out of the way of your eyes. To clearly label the sarcasm as such screws up this whole effect. It’s bird shit on the lens — now they’re looking at the surface of the lens not the thing you want to show them.
It’s a structure that points elsewhere, and requires an intuitive leap. Adding the /s bridges what should be a leap and the utility of the technique as a means of communication is lost.
If you find yourself tempted to use the /s, what you’re discussing is probably too important for sarcasm anyway and you should just say what needs to be said.
Let’s trace it back. Why do academics need to get published in order for their career to succeed? Why wouldn’t a paper published in a no-name journal carry any weight?
Does it boil down to whoever would be hiring them not having the time to read their research, so they rely on someone else’s judgment?
One problem is that one wants an objective way to judge someone’s productivity. You cannot truly judge the quality of a paper unless you are an expert in that same field. Your institution may not have such an expert. Besides, in science you really don’t want to rely on personal judgment, if possible. Maybe there’s also marketing efforts going on that encourage doing things in away that allows extracting monopoly rents but I don’t have evidence.
IMHO the overarching problem is that the whole of academic publishing has not arrived in the internet age. You have all the usual problems with reforming social systems and, on top of that, there’s a lot of money at stake for some people.
Often it’s a requirement of the workplace (typically acadaemia, e.g. R1 institutions), and it’s paid for in large part by various grants from the government. Or done for free in “spare time” as is the case where I work. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Honestly - if it’s a specific article, then just email the author. Unless they’re a blowhard they’ll usually be happy to shoot off a copy of the final PDF or at least a preprint. Doubly so if you’re a grad student and say how excited you are about their research.
I read Montaigne’s essays (written in the 1500’s) and while his views are remarkably modern in many ways, one thing that stuck out to me was how unabashedly elitist he is. The translation I had used the phrase “common herd” to refer to the large majority of people who failed to impress him due to their lack of education or strength of character. I hesitate to speak for him since I think he was a wiser man than I am, but I expect that our modern notions about democracy would have seemed ridiculous to him. He might accept that universal suffrage is in practice the least-bad option currently available to us, but he would argue that at least in principle it would be better to exclude people who don’t actually know how to run a country from the process of deciding how the country is to be run.
(He would also be unashamed to say that the life of an exceptional person is worth more than the life of someone ordinary, but we think that in the modern day too. We just consider it rude to be so explicit about it.)
Without knowing his works, I’d argue for him that he’s right to some extent towards an uneducated population, BUT the reason we have universal suffrage is that our founding fathers assumed that:
Everyone would be well-educated and make rational if not reasonable assumptions about politicians (eg, not elect morons who immediately try and sabotage the government, citizenry, and friends)
Politicians would serve as public servants and would be even better educated and would work hard to brush up on things so that the common man wouldn’t have to learn the ins and outs of complicated decisions in terms of complex trade agreements, city planning and zoning law, and universal medical systems that work across state lines.
Obviously, it didn’t quite go that way. But it’s why I’m such an advocate for good public schools and free education, because it pays itself back in spades when it comes to R&D/innovation and an informed populace who make the country and world a better place to live.
The founding fathers did not believe in universal suffrage; at the time only people who owned land could vote–to say nothing of even less privileged groups than that–and they were fine with that policy, in part because these were considered to be the people with the most skin in the game.
To be fair, our modern concept of democracy really is quite shitty and the only reason we use it is because it is better than anything else we came up with so far.
But generally the notion that the common person cannot be entrusted with politics holds true even if we find it distasteful. The average person is a fucking idiot and objectively not qualified to decide on political matters.
Compounding the problem, this environment rewards charlatans and sociopaths. There will always be some that will exploit a weak spot in the system, in bad faith, no matter what the system is.
I wish there were smart phones with those little slide out keyboards like on some older phones, like a blackberry keyboard but slide out so it’s hidden unless you are actively wanting use it. And forward, back, play buttons for music and podcasts without having to eff around with the screen and unlocking and stuff.
As someone who has more hobbies than time, I seriously don’t understand how people can have no hobbies. How do these people live? How do they find fulfillment? What do they do in their spare time, only entertainment?
We’re too tired. That’s the answer. It’s not that watching TV is my hobby, it’s that I’m burnt out and don’t have the mental energy to do anything. My old hobbies feel like chores. New hobbies seem like so much work
I feel you and I’ve been fighting this. I feel like personally I’m a lot happier and find it easier to do things when I actually do my hobbies… It’s kind of like exercise. You often don’t want to do it when you’re busy and tired, but if you do it consistently you usually have more energy and feel better in the long term. Totally understand it can be a luxury to even consider doing a hobby, and I definitely don’t know your situation, but I hope you can push through and get to a better balance! Life’s too hard sometimes :(.
I’m also a person with a million hobbies. I’ve got TV or audiobooks on in the background as I do woodworking, smoke meat, play instruments, record music (ok, there’s nothing on in the background while I’m recording), go sing karaoke, rock climb, work on motorcycles, garden, or one of the other million things I might be doing. My family passively sits and watches television.
As far as I’m concerned, that’s fine. If it makes them happy then I’m happy for them. I couldn’t be content that way but it takes different strokes to move the world.
Not ruined, but pretty fucking annoying. In laws came for a few weeks to visit for the holidays. We don’t see them as much as we’d like, and its nice. But MIL wants to include her sister too - the deadbeat aunt-in-law boomer who still can’t get her shit together for over 70 years. Whatever - we tolerate it.
Except she fucking shows up sicker than a dog and is hacking non stop. You know the kind of coughs where you can hear gallons of snot being coughed up - ya that. Wtf - I give it one week and we’ll all be miserable with that exact cold/flu/covid whatever the fuck it is. Fucking loser boomer bitch who thinks of nothing but herself. Sigh.
Earplugs. Put them in as soon as you scan your boarding pass and are waiting in the jetway to get on the plane. Nothing that is said to you after that point will be important until you’re off the plane; and if it is, you can just take out one earplug and say “say again?” You can avoid most of the annoyance of in-flight announcements and advertisements, screaming babies, and jet engines.
Drugstores. Your destination probably has them. You don’t need to pack any toiletries that you can easily obtain in one. If you are flying to New York City, you do not need to bring toothpaste with you; they have toothpaste in New York City, and you can just buy it in the Duane Reade shop that’s a block from your hotel. They have toothpaste in San Juan and Paris too. In any tropical destination, they have sunscreen there — and the sunscreen they sell there is actually safe for the coral reefs.
Water bottles. Many major airports have stations for refilling water bottles after you clear security. You can take an empty water bottle, fill it up, and carry it on the airplane.
Masks. In the old days before COVID, nobody wore masks in airports, and lots of people got colds or flu when traveling. These days, you can wear a mask and people may think you’re weird but you are less likely to pick up random respiratory diseases. I regularly wear a standard 3M N95 mask in American airports and no longer get the sniffles every time I travel.
The mask thing is not a joke. My cousin came to visit and the moron didn’t get the 2023 vaccination. Came over, and spend 80% of thanksgiving struggling with covid.
300 people in a crowded plane… Circulating the same air, what do you think was going to happen?
There's an additional reason why masks are popular in Asian countries: During flight, in-cabin air tends to get quite dry and that can easily upset your throat.
A mask reduces the humidity loss caused by the dry air exchange.
I disagree with the toiletries thing. It’s no panic if you forget them, but straight after a long haul flight, you want to refresh which includes brushing teeth.
If you’re flying somewhere hot, you want to apply sunscreen and get straight in the pool at your destination. It really makes it feel like the holiday is started,
Don’t forget that sunscreen can be expensive depending on your destination. Going to a family or friends house and the beach? NBD. Flying to Cancun and into a resort? That on prem sunscreen is gonna cost ya mucho dinero compared to BYO.
Remember a lot of effort and money is spent into brainwashing us from young ages to be constantly be buying shit we don’t need and to feel like we are living bad lives if we don’t have it.
Remember it’s bullshit, remember that you are more than the fucking trinkets and landfill filling they want you to trade all your time for.
Boycott shit, find any reasonable moral cause as a good reason not to buy something. There’s almost always a good reason not to buy something that you don’t need.
I feel like it would take just as much effort and basically a whole other upbringing, in a sense, to become accustomed to all the things we were raised with. So i get what you mean, but I dont know exactly how possible it really is, or none of us would really be here, for example.
asklemmy
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.