Elder care is a difficult and painful topic, and change is clearly needed. I feel like I am missing something in the article's argument though. A quick google says that the profit margin of nursing homes is in the 5-10% range. If the profit motive is to blame for conditions, doesn't that mean that costs could be 10% lower if nobody was making profit?
I guess maybe that doesn't account for profits being made by any contractors providing medicines, food, etc, which maybe could be done more cheaply without the profit motive. But 10% just doesn't scream "evil nursing home executives getting fat off of the elderly" to me.
It's a labor-intensive and difficult service to provide. The article's suggestion to professionalize care work seems right, but will increase costs. The two areas of dissatisfaction (high cost and poor quality) seem fundamentally at odds to me, are there proposals which would address them both?
If this holds, can cops still ask for whether a specific phone number was present on a cell tower at a certain time? I can't tell if it's the breadth of the data collection that's unconsitutional because it catches lots of innocent people's data; or if it's the concept of using cell towers altogether.
It's the breadth. Searches have to be narrowly tailored to provide evidence of the specific crime being investigated. There's discussion of this on pages 12–13 of the judge's opinion.
"events have given us no choice but to fight Trump as if there were no antisemitism, even while we continue to fight antisemitism as if there were no Trump."
Great line which sums up the correct stance to take in the current environment.
If this was actually happening, what would you expect to see different? The reason we have due process is so that we don’t have to rely on second-hand reports to monitor the justice system. Get rid of due process and this is what we have.
> Use "if (condition()) { ifBlock(); } if (!condition()) { elseBlock(); }" -- assuming that ifBlock() can't possibly change the result of condition().
What?? That seems terrible to me - just asking for `condition` to be updated to be modifiable by `ifBlock`, or for some completely undebuggable race condition to occur.
My team has an ongoing style war about guard clauses:
if foo:
bar()
baz()
vs
if foo:
bar()
else:
baz()
Consensus seems to favor the first option but I prefer the second because it helps me keep in mind the conditions that lead me to `baz()`. Otherwise I have to scan up the whole function to figure out the restriction `!foo`.
As someone who lives here, I'd actually be surprised if we even got that. I expect lots of taxpayer funded websites, manifestos, PowerPoints and numerous discussions and ultimately nothing.
That'd be very very good actually. I'd be happy if institutions would use that where one could TECHNICALLY (maybe just a miniscule amount of people would do that) verify data from end to end, instead of some "open" model that is actually not open at all. A little worse performance is a good trade-off imo
What's with this American mentality that everything needs to always be the best, and if it isn't, it should't even exist? I know USA is alright with breaking the law, invading people's privacy and lobbying its government to the point where it's really the corporations that elect politicians into power, but why do you also need Europe to be the same way? I thought us Europeans have made it pretty clear we don't like your way of governing, so stop forcing it on us. I'd much rather use a less capable LLM if it meant that the LLM isn't driven on top of mountains of illegally collected data.
I'm increasingly annoyed that we can't have nice things without exposing ourselves to attentional strip-mining.
I really want to be able to see my close friends' Instagram posts and read interesting tweets from ~50 people I've chosen to follow in my field. There are no technical blockers to letting me do these; they aren't even much technical work. It would be a material life improvements for me (and I believe for everyone). But I'm not allowed to use the subsets of consumer tech which would enrich my life without exposing myself to the Reels button, the For You feed, and an avalanche of black magic attention hacking. I am bad at moderating my use and I have a low tolerance for doomscrolling, so I don't let myself use these products. As a result I'm cut off from the genuinely life improving subsets of social media which could be so easily made available.
We just accept that _of course_ you have to be willing to get your frontal lobe mined if you want to see what your friends have been doing. _Of course_ you have to be willing to scroll an infinite feed of AI-generated slop if you want to read opinions from people you respect.
I'm perfectly happy to see ads, I'm happy to pay money, I'm happy to come to any fair economic arrangement; but I value my attention highly and I can't pay the attentional price demanded of me, so I don't get to use these products.
People on this site might say "just don't use Reels / For You Feed" and maybe they're right. But for me and the vast majority of people that's not an option, it's my individual willpower pitted against an army of designers, PMs and data scientists every hour of the day.
I am happier without social media than I was with it; but I would be much happier still with the genuinely enriching subset of social media which is there for the offering. As social media becomes a bigger and bigger part of modern life it feels more like essential infrastructure which we _should_ be able to access in ways which work for us. The Fediverse is a great step though I haven't gone as far as to built a custom frontend which works for me (I think it's a big untapped market).
Youtube is the clear winner here. They let you turn personalization off - at which point the Recommended tab disappears, Youtube Shorts don't work, and I can still see new videos from people I subscribe to and follow links to videos when I need to watch them. It's a fantastic compromise and I live in fear of some PM (maybe reading this thread) inevitably realizing they could squeeze a few more minutes of sweet attention juice out of me by taking it away.
reply