gramontblanc

Games are a pretty interesting category of software in that they're possibly the only interactive software a user would voluntarily use for its own sake. Anti-games policies and agreements seem pretty suspiciously like "you can write any software you please as long as nobody ever uses it". Perhaps open source software development was only ever allowed under the assumption that open source software could never build a userbase competing with parent companies.

Competition could be pretty broadly scoped -- a hobby game could be dangerous to a tech company if it makes no money and has no special proprietary technology but concentrates enough technical acumen and useful experience in its developers/audience that they could recruit internally to found new companies.

  Location: Santa Clara, CA.
  Remote: Yes.
  Willing to relocate: Within SF region.
  Technologies: HTML/CSS/Javascript, AWS/Git/Docker, Python, C++
  Résumé/CV: On request.
  Email:grapefruitmontblanc@gmail.com
  

Hit me up for detailed resume, social media, samples of work, or my organic chemistry / traditional illustration portfolio. References to hiring processes that lean on coding samples, objective measures of programming skill, or are accomodating to non-traditional backgrounds would be really appreciated!

I think many (most?) "Digital natives" already found a superior answer to these problems; pull people you're actually friends with (defined by whether they'll join your small group chat) into small group chats, and blog the daily experience of life mostly into those small chats.

Solves many privacy problems (but not all), avoids Dunbar number violations, and gives a genuine source of social attention (which humans need) from people who are more involved in your life. Getting enough social attention (and giving enough in turn) seems to calm a kind of anxiety that might otherwise suck people into social media.

Didn't mean to assert a dichotomy, more wondering whether the size of the effect of importance of emotional safety for expressive freedom varies with some kind of external measure of confidence

If it has an effect it could be worth pursuing just to measure the size of the effect. If perfection isn't needed, "good enough" might be better.

I wonder if the same effect holds true if a team is made up of mostly confident/brash people, or if safety-to-project-yourself can be trained and elevated independent of any other aspect of social environment.

Maybe improv classes or subsidizing employees to exhibit art or publicly perform music?

Substitutions are omnipresent in my experience, but I view that as a symptom of almost all stores having really profoundly bad inventory tracking (do the developers for the web platform even know whether they have any items on the shelf at all?) so even with ordinary infrastructure hiccups I'd expect there to never be completely filled orders.

I don't know too much about the way the restocking priorities are established, but it appears to be totally ad hoc and at the behest of the shift worker on the line at the moment your order us started from what I've seen. The stores would need to have inventory systems fine grained enough to know that there are high margin items in stock to be swapped in to implement this kind of malicious action plan, but I think most stores (that aren't Walmart) don't even have their inventory spatially mapped at all, let alone multiple times per day to actively dump target items.

Seems like a bold prediction that most (maybe any?) grocery stores have the level of corporate organization or even level of education to even consider a "secret order substitution to prole cart-pushers who will then have to answer customer service calls asking why their order was amended to add a more expensive item".

Someone down the line has to actually act out the 'evil algorithm', and will then have to actually interact with the aggrieved customers. In a third party delivery service I imagine it would be trivially easy to get the line workers to betray the customer / rest of the organization, but there are also none of the incentives to, for example, try to dump low velocity items through deliberate substitution errors.

It could be appropriate to consider them cross-genre games containing elements of both soothing-slice-of-life gameplay cycles and conflict-oriented-'normal'-game gameplay cycles. Games mixing placid, relaxing gameplay loops seem to definitely hold a different overall tone even if you can't play through them without any aggression or violence.

A pure iyashikei game feels like an aspirational ideal and fairly rare.

The use of psychiatric techniques as torture is the history of psychiatry. This is not some petty joke or argumentative stance.

Do you think that Henry Cotton was a problem of political ethics? Supposedly his reputation and political status were so high in his society that patients and their families actively asked for their teeth, gallbladders, ovaries, testes, tonsils, ... to be spuriously removed.

Edit: I mean to say that serious contemplation of the risks and benefits of any medical interventions should always be taken seriously regardless of how severe a medical problem might seem or how exciting a miraculous new cure might appear to be. Most miraculous cures not only don't 'work', but also caused serious harm to their subjects throughout the history of psychiatric medicine.

Yes? Do you approve of the idea of using any combination of therapies found effective to cure people of believing in their religion, or to 'solve' political dissidents?

Intellectual freedom,literally in this case, is important.(1)

1. Die Gedanken Sind Frie

The phenomenological impact of poor diet and harsh glycemic index ASDR cannot be overstated. 'refined sugars negatively impact mood and emotional well-being' might be one of the most rock solid universals of human nature.

All medical interventions should include the no-brainer diet, vitamins, exercise, self-esteem interventions.

As the saying goes: have you tried self-conducted sleep deprivation, exercise, improved diet, vitamin d, sun lamps, having sex, talk therapy, or any of the clinically evaluated pharmchems yet? Why not?

(if the study replicates), the targeted precision and long term persistence of therapeutic effects. If someone prescribes you a pill for being gay and you don't want to be cured of being gay, you could always just stop taking it later if you were able to leave the despotic regime / cruel family structure / religious community binding you.

I agree, and think both pose serious social problems (already realized with ECT) just by their availability as treatments.

Moral problems arise not from curing suffering being morally wrong, but the leakage of moral responsibility in medical/psychiatric practice outside of research.

Any tool to 'correct associative pathways' will be used for the conversion therapy of children, punishment of apostates by repressive states, and torture of the criminally convicted within one generation of it's inception. My primary hope for the memory reconsolidation therapies require some kind of actual moment by moment deliberate cooperation by the treated, and can't be performed without an expert (hopefully) bound by professed vows.

Is there an outside definition of medical ethics that can really be impartially compared from generation to generation? I'm certain all previous generations thought they were acting in good faith as well.

Progress towards 'changing people's minds' is dangerous for the same reasons across all times and places.

This reads as extremely ethically dangerous. I'm not sure it's possible to justify any course of treatment leading towards individual neurocircuitry 'tweaks', even for an unambiguously good cause.

Harkens too closely to 'scientist seeks to cure homosexuality through direct brain stimulation' in the 1950s. ( en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Galbraith_Heath )