The article feels very coherent to the point that I want to follow its advice. But will it work?
>Status, like money and power, is a form of capital. If we can learn to tolerate our feelings of “not-enoughness,” we can then use status in service of what we care about, rather than being addicted to it as an end in itself.
If we can tolerate 'not-enoughness', what would be there that needs change? As a society, don't we have to tolerate addiction because that's the loop that drives our progress?
>Casey Rosengren is a founder and executive coach based in New York. If you’d like to learn more about ACT and values-oriented coaching, drop him a note.
'founder' - Does he use the title 'in service' or is he still trapped in the status game? In the latter case, is his advice still valid?
Have you seen bioemerl's comment about television? The one who controls the weights in TikTok's selection algorithm determines what people are going to believe.
Are you seriously suggesting that the Chinese government is actively adjusting the weighting of the TikTok algorithms to sway mass opinion on the TikTok app? It’s already a stretch saying that the Chinese government controls ByteDance because they clearly don’t.
I don’t believe that social media has nearly as much influence on most people as people seem to believe. I think it absolutely impacts some people, but most people have much stronger social influence from their local social sphere - family, friends, school.
But still some people are strongly influenced and that’s not good. But to what end? I think if it started pumping out Chinese communist party propaganda folks would notice. So, what’s left?
I’ve heard “dumbing people down” by pointing to the fact the Chinese version of TikTok shows more educational and improving content.
This isn’t because TikTok thinks Chinese people prefer educational content or that they get more revenue, it’s because the Chinese government requires them to show educational content. They show everyone else whatever garbage addicts them because, just like every other social media company, showing addictive garbage creates addicted customers and therefore dollars. If our government, say, instead of banning tiktok, did whah the Chinese government is doing - required social media to present more wholesome content to its users, guess what - tiktok would show more wholesome content to its users. As would Facebook, instagram, YouTube, and hacker news.
At least with Apple, they've been working on a "good" AR experience for over a decade - whereas any department calling itself "metaverse" is a low-interest-rate phenomenon
unhappily, i was diagnosed with arthritis at quite an old age (60+) after happily eating tomatoes and tatties for all my life. i won't say what i think about advice like this.
Assuming so, something that might be worth considering is medical cannabis, which has been legal in the UK since 2018 - I mention it, as very few people are aware of this. Both THC oil and dried cannabis flower for vaping are available. I use it for chronic neuropathic and muscular pain, and it works amazingly well.
Alternatively, as some others have mentioned, your body may not process codeine correctly (quite a few people can't), so you may wish to try co-dydramol, a mixture of paracetamol and dihydrocodeine. I personally found dihydrocodeine to work much better than codeine.
not a scot (actually i'm english - shock, horror) but i was married to a scottish girl and lived in edinburgh off and on for about 10 years, and some things have stuck.
i think that i am processing codeine ok, as when i took some of my late mum's pure codeine tablets (she got them for awful menstrual/menopause problems) it sent me off into a warm nice place. but try getting them from your gp these days, if you are a man.
Arthritis and inflammation in general can be caused by many things. For some, it can be the good one eats. Nightshades are a real problem for some people.
How can they? SVB has made it clear that it is very difficult to maintain value. If Binance has invested all their money in securities, it's not unlikely that their investments have gone done down with the rising of the interest rates.
If they keep all money in regular banking accounts, they may still have it. But they are exposed to the risk that their bank or their banks become insolvent.
I have doubts about their finances but that comparison makes no sense. SVB is a bank, Binance is a cryptocurrency exchange that doesn't have the fiat custody issue to that extend because they're mainly not dealing in fiat. It's more of a question of how companies like Tether have invested their dollars and the answer is nobody really knows.
They claim most of their money is not with banks (number 1 is supposedly commercial paper). Also what is with banks certainly isn't with American ones. But this goes back to the point earlier about users having no idea about the reserves. No one should use Tether and I don't trust Binance for a second, pretty sure they trade against their own users. But it's also more resilient than many think, including people who are in crypto. Binance isn't well trusted by insiders and whales. But they have a lot of customers, especially in developing countries less served by more reputable exchanges and banks. And since they offer USDT, USDC as well as their own stablecoin, whatever that's backed by, it would not be catastrophic for them even if one of the stablecoin issuers went down.
They claimed that before the banking crisis, after there was considerable pressure on them to disclose where the reserves are kept (many in crypto doubted if all the money even exists). At the time it didn't look good because what everyone wanted to hear was that they keep it as cash in a bank, so the commercial paper disclosure was seen as negative and risky. Ironically it turns out that this might actually be safer than what USDC did. They played by the book and wanted to prove full solvency by having every single dollar in bank custody. Which nearly cost them their neck with the SVB failure when parts of the funds got frozen and users panicked.
In which way will they make it different from the Meta headsets? The Apple branding won't be enough to turn an average headset into a successful product.
My guess would be that their headset is just a set of goggles that requires an iPhone for computation. Then, they can sell them for $300 or even $150.
The article suggests that VR is a tool for long-distance relationships. For $300, that could become possible.
Focusing on the "protocol" is the limit. Nobody among regular people cares about the protocol, they care about a social media experience on-par or better than what they're currently using. If they have to figure out this whole technobabble mess that is the "fediverse" it becomes a non-starter.
Yes. That would be doing it wrong for mass adoption. Doing it right means that users don't have to care about the protocol.
But there still has to be infrastructure. Instead of reinventing the wheel, a new social network could be built on the Mastodon foundation. There would already be users and there would be an exit strategy for power users if the new network fails. Right now, it's not worth investing time in a new network because the social graph doesn't survive the end of the network. With Mastodon, it would be easy to migrate to a new service.
>Status, like money and power, is a form of capital. If we can learn to tolerate our feelings of “not-enoughness,” we can then use status in service of what we care about, rather than being addicted to it as an end in itself.
If we can tolerate 'not-enoughness', what would be there that needs change? As a society, don't we have to tolerate addiction because that's the loop that drives our progress?
>Casey Rosengren is a founder and executive coach based in New York. If you’d like to learn more about ACT and values-oriented coaching, drop him a note.
'founder' - Does he use the title 'in service' or is he still trapped in the status game? In the latter case, is his advice still valid?