HN user
I think this is a very useful framework for "choosing the right tool for the job".
For me personally, there isn't much difference between the Chef's Hat and the Teacher's Hat; the way I make code presentable is the same as how I make it self-documenting. I can tell I did a good job if the person reading my code feels smart.
Self diagnosis is not reliable
Professional diagnosis is not reliable either. ADHD and autism are often misdiagnosed as one-another, especially in girls.
If you don't have an official diagnosis you can't be certain you really have ADHD
A lot of the time, the mental health professional making the determination doesn't have specialty in ADHD/Autism. All they're doing is looking at symptoms and making their best guess. Which is exactly what people are doing when they make a self-determination. In many cases, people with high-functioning autism know more about autism than the people who are supposed to know. And it's not like the diagnoses can be validated when we're still figuring out what autism even is.
Press X to not be violated
People can't just choose to stop feeling unsafe. Chronic stress causes brain damage and reduces tolerance to further stress. This is a fact. Calling people in this situation irrational accomplishes nothing.
Crime isn't the only thing that impacts people's health.
- Difficulty getting insurance to see the doctor impacts peoples' safety and sense of safety. - Fear of gaps in insurance coverage keeps people in toxic jobs where they feel unsafe. - Many people can't get prescription medicines they need, impacting health. - Homelessness is increasing - Polarized political speech, including hate speech, causes legitimate anxiety, contributing to poor psychological health.
None of the above things were as big of a problem 20 years ago. Using "crime" as a measure of unsafety only makes sense if you have access to healthcare, a stable job, and don't face discrimination.
Why put "feeling unsafe" in scare quotes? There's a lot to feel unsafe about right now.
I can't imagine what it would be like to actually have to deal with the scenario you described.
This feels like a J-class SCP
They probably know that it doesn't hold water legally. The hope is to victim blame as much as possible so that fewer people sue them in the first place. The next step will be to "remind" people about the TOS that they totally agreed to.
Help us, European Union. You're our only hope.
I would love a search engine that only catalogs pages without ads.
Humans and AIs both evolve as the result of some iterations dying. In both cases, we tacitly erase the ones who don't make it (by framing the discussion around the successful, alive ones). The difference is that humans have had a broader training set.
The answer is either to educate the public about the value of public wealth...
That's not a solution because the people in power materially gain by feigning ignorance.
Teachers are always going to lose out on that one.
How can you openly admit that the incentives don't work and still defend them?
I didn't make it explicit, but the point was about where you draw the line. Obviously a software engineer has a lot more bargaining power, but anyone is paid less if they believe in their work because the desirability of the job is a factor in the pricing. The more people who are conscientious and care how their work affects others, the more market forces drive down the price of important work.
Imagine that lot contains your home, one you've lived and loved for decades and raised your family in and you're rather fond of it. Just because an 8-plex goes up next door, shouldn't mean now you are forced out because they start taxing your little house as if it was an 8 unit building.
Except your house wouldn't be taxed like it was an 8-unit building. The tax would only go up if the 8-plex increased demand for the land itself. If it's a poorly-placed 8-plex, the opposite could actually happen; but if the land value does go up, it would only go up a little bit unless they started developing a lot in your area, at which point you'd have the same sorts of problems either way.
LVT is based on the cold clinical idea that land is nothing but an investment...
No. LVT discourages land investment. LVT is based on the idea that land belongs to everyone, so no one should profit just off of owning land.
Does that logic still apply to teachers? How about public defenders? Food bank staff?
Punishing people for believing in their work is called "exploitation".
Taking away land isn't the goal; it's just the logical consequence of making it prohibitively expensive to rent-seek.
The problem goes away if you don't treat land ownership as a right. What is the advantage of letting people possess empty lots?
Who decides what they’re worth?
The poster above you; they're the one who made an implicit claim about the value of software developers' work. You're welcome to disagree. Do you think everyone is paid fairly?
I find it deeply troubling that so many people conflate “being smart” with “min-maxing labor and earning”
And they're veeeery vocal other people trying to get something for nothing.
So I feel like you just agreed with my premise, no?
Maybe. I can't tell if we're talking past each other.
The value (and thus the tax) on my empty lot with nothing but dirt is going to be set by the tax of the developed lot right next to it, which might contain a highrise apartment building.
Yes, the empty lot will be higher because of the highrise apartment next to it, BUT...
So you're saying I will be taxed on the value of an imaginary building I don't actually have, just because the neighboring lot has one.
No, because the appraiser wouldn't include the building's value; they'd only be appraising the average value of land in the area.
So there's no way I can afford to pay that since the bare dirt doesn't give me any income. So I will lose this land due to the tax.
That's intentional. If the land is only profitable for highrise apartments, then you should sell it to someone who can afford to build some. Note that this would help with the housing crisis.
The LVT idea isn't really to tax the bare land, it is to tax it as if it was being used by the most financially productive way possible.
Yes and no. You're not taxing the land as if it was bare or as if it was full; you're taxing it based on the perceived value to a developer.
So, tell me how is that not a tax that is based on something that doesn't actually exist today? The assessor can say: Sure, it's just bare dirt, worth nothing right now, but you could have a skyscraper there and if you did, it'd be worth a lot. So we'll pretend it's worth a lot and tax based on that.
The value of an empty lot is approximately equal to the value of the developed lot right next to it. This is already being done.
The other bad consequence of LVT is that it's supposed to force every bit of land to the most financially productive use. Do you want to live in such a society? Something like a free playground is never the most income-generating use for a patch of land, but it's a wonderful thing to have in towns.
Government-owned land could be tax-free since (in theory) it's being used for public good.
Uh huh, so you’re taxing land based on some theoretical “highest and best use”?
Someone has to eat the opportunity cost of sub-optimally used land. Would you rather it be corporations and house-flippers, or renters and homeowners?
Pure academic nonsense.
Several places have implemented LVT (eg Pennsylvania). What's nonsense is treating it like idle theory-crafting when there's evidence to judge.
Punishing people for not doing what YOU want with THEIR land.
Not all societies believe in land ownership to begin with. Owning land keeps other people from using it, so it should come with a sense of duty.
Also, no one under either system is arbitrating the correctness of land use to pick winners and losers. The free-market still decides what is or isn't effective land use; it's just that under LVT people are disincentivized from speculating on empty land.
If tax is based on land improvement, a flat parking lot in a busy area is profitable, even if it doesn't provide optimal value to the community. The owner may wish to add some buildings to the lot, but land improvement tax means they have to pay extra to have and keep those buildings, even if a recession keeps them empty.
Land value tax flips this, removing some of the risk of adding value to a property while discouraging hoarding.
I don't disagree that modern features can be useful, nor do I disagree that some modern cars do it right. I'm saying that one car making the user say "pretty please" before disabling a distraction is one too many.
This. Any friction between the user and controls that affect safety is a serious flaw. Old cars don't make me look at a screen to make the window less foggy.
That's really smart.
It's possible to be both a victim and a perpetrator, for example, if you give power to someone who uses that power to hurt you and others.
Radar-detector-detector-detectors are thing
Just because it's there, doesn't mean I want the same programs to use more.
Teacher here (high school CS). The article has its issues, but the content filtering is naive and overly-broad, just like it says. Here are some actual examples in my district: - A tool for converting Scratch programs to portable webpages was blocked as "shareware". - A reference page about the use of SSSP algorithms in game development was blocked under the category "games". - Whiteboard apps are sometimes blocked as "insufficient content". - Pages about infosec topics like hashcat are blocked under the category (you guessed it) "hacking". - Pages with the Minecraft source code (which I use in my AP Java class) are often blocked, so I have to spend extra time converting them to PDFs instead of just pasting the links into my lesson plans. - Github was blocked until enough CS teachers in the district pushed back.
Issues like this cost me time which I don't have enough of as it is. Since the students just find games that aren't blocked, I'd rather have the ability to access all pages (except adult content) and give consequences to off-task students as needed.