Cylusthevirus @ Cylusthevirus @kbin.social

Science and expert opinion should be respected, "your own research" is usua

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

427

Joined

2 yr. ago

Which instances are we talking about? I've not seen this debate crop up on Kbin or Beehaw.

On one side men who may not be the most well informed about women issues; will get immediately defensive at being compared to a large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive.

Nah. Defensiveness in this context is a red flag because it is transparently obvious why a woman would choose the bear. It needn't be a strictly rational choice; it's a vote of no confidence in men earned through lived experience. The fact that it's even a question should be a seen by men as deeply sad: a reminder of the work that must still be done. The very act of trying to convince a woman of the error of her choice is a sign of a failure to understand the nature of the problem, the exercise, or both.

large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive

This is by no means what bears are known for. Black bears will frighten off easily. Brown bears are dangerous, yes, but much depends on the nature of the encounter.

It was never going to end in a productive, calm or rational discussion

It already has, but thanks for the self report?

Why would home gardeners optimize for yield and cost effectiveness? They can't deploy automation or economies of scale.

You garden at home because you enjoy the flavor, freshness, and variety. Those are the perks. Miss me with those mealy, flavorless grocery store tomatoes.

You mean the Ottoman Empire? Is that supposed to be the same entity? I have no fuckin' clue anymore.

The cool thing about it is that the core of it is really just one page.

There's a page in there with a list of types of tests and their respective r values, which is a number between zero and one that explains how well a given type of test predicts job performance based on this gigantic meta analysis the researchers ran. Zero means there's no relationship between the test and job performance and one means the test predicts job performance perfectly.

Generally you want something better than .3 for high stakes things like jobs. Education and experience sits at ... .11 or so. It's pretty bad. By contrast, skills tests do really well. Depending on the type they can go over .4. That's a pretty big benefit if you're hiring lots of people.

That said it can be very hard to convince people that "just having a conversation with someone" isn't all that predictive at scale. Industry calls that an "unstructured interview" and they're terrible vectors for unconscious or conscious bias. "Hey, you went to the same school as me..." and now that person is viewed favorably.

Seriously this stuff is WELL STUDIED but for some reason the MBA lizards never care. It's maddening.

How do you write this article and not once reference I/O Psychology or the literature that examines how well various tests predict job performance? (e.g. Schmidt and Hunter, 1998)

I swear this isn't witchcraft. You just analyze the job, determine the knowledge and skills that are important, required at entry, and can't be obtained in a 15 minute orientation, and then hire based on those things. It takes a few hours worth of meetings. I've done it dozens of times.

But really what all that boils down to is get someone knowledgeable about the role and have them write any questions and design the exercises. Don't let some dingleberry MBA ask people how to move Mt. Fuji or whatever dumb trendy thing they're teaching in business school these days.

Someone in that org needs to be an adult and say no to pointless rebrands and brain dead consolidation. Literally nobody, even Google, is benefiting from this spastic behavior.

So there's definitely a Zionist wing of the party. What's gonna happen when they come into contact with the Nazi wing of the party?

That's a referral to a series of specialists and probably an MRI or two at minimum. Cancer is a deeply shitty way to die, go talk to your doctor ASAP.

In Cyberpunk 2077, Judy's icon is a ghost popping out of a clamshell. There's two jokes in there.

What a strange way to tell us that your sense of ideological purity is worth more than people's actual lives.

I dunno, the insulated water cup I use is made of metal. A lot of them are.

Much better for a science district IMO. Look at all those mountains

Jesus lived in a region conquered by the Roman Empire. Many of his fans at the time wanted him to be a conquering ruler and overthrow them. His answer in the text amounted to, "that's not why I'm here." Nominal Christians trying to install a Christian Government have missed the point of their own text so hard it's actually kinda funny.

Jesus: Share resources among those that need them, it's very hard for rich people to enter heaven.

His Followers: Temporarily embarrassed billionaires who idolize wealth and build literal golden statues of their favorite rich guy.

Jesus: Hangs out with tax collectors (i.e., agents of the Romans, who were not popular), hookers, low status foreigners, and people with terminal diseases.

His Followers: Ew, drag queens and brown people. Gross.

Jesus: Encourages non-violent responses to his own capture pending execution. Tells many parables about forgiveness and treating foreigners as neighbors.

His Followers: Immigrants are invading us! They terk our jerbs! BOMB IRAN!

Anyone seeing a pattern here? The reality is that Christianity isn't really a belief system for them, it's a cultural identity or tribal marker. You don't have to actually believe any of this shit or behave accordingly. All you have to do is say the right words and present the right image. Right wing Evangelical Christianity is a hollowed out husk; an empty aesthetic presenting as a belief system that promises that anything you do will be wiped away if you say the right words and give money to whatever charlatan is giving his Dollar General Ted Talk today.

Then what's the stuff in your original post about "being afraid of ideas?" Which ideas, exactly, were you referring to? Being nominally Communist and functionally Fascist?

The CCP are not an ethnic or national group, they're a malevolent political movement and opposing them is the farthest thing from xenophobia. They run China and create untold misery for Chinese citizens. Being originally from Singapore does not mean you're not working for the CCP and that is absolutely relevant to this situation. Data privacy is one issue, nation state surveillance is another. There are quantitative and qualitative differences between them and both must be addressed. Google, Meta, and Amazon et al need to be reigned in, broken up, and some board members should see jail time. TikTok, (yet another front for the CCP like ALL Chinese Corps), needs to be handled differently and the CCP's malfeasance should be exposed and talked about.

Compare and contrast Huawei and say, Cisco. Cisco's equipment is occasionally annoying and bad for consumers and their business practices suck. Huawei equipment is a national security risk. Big difference and you can't even get into that without referencing the CCP because they're driving it.

Tom Cotton's a dipshit and worded the question in the dumbest possible way, but stopped clock, etc.

What the fuck? The CCP is no more Communist than North Korea is a Democratic Republic. I don't give a shit about the CCP's ideas because there's only one they seem to care about: power. You can tell because of how they treat their own people. Corporations operating out of China are either controlled by the CCP behind the scenes or their leadership gets disappeared if they get too critical. It's happened a number of times; ask Jack Ma and several others ... if you can find them.

The fucking CCP is every bit as bad as the damned Nazis and anyone that simps for them should go live under their regime. I'm sure you'll have a great social credit score. Just don't depict Emperor Xi as Winnie the Pooh or watch the fuck out.