• boredtortoise@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    We should live more instead of wasting time at work but we can’t because we’re forced to get income to live

    • Technological_Elite@lemmy.oneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Exactly. I’ve heard a “counter-argument” to this saying “I need to keep myself busy, I need to work.” Why not be able to optionally work more?

      • boredtortoise@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d love to work in areas, communities and industries which don’t have the resources to usually pay for professional skills. Just gotta detach from the time waste of getting salary to live first.

  • Chadus_Maximus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Fundamental attribution error. Wanting something to happen ≠ believing it should happen. When wanting becomes believing, you are fucked.

    Too many people think that the world should bend the laws of reality to conform to their ideas. Gamblers are the prime example. They take something solvable by pure math and completely discard the solution, opting for a solution based on their wants instead of reality.

    • sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m going to M A N I F E S T my problems away!

      It is amazing to me that millions of idiots whole heartedly believe in some variant of magic/placebo/prayer/astrology, some very slightly different version of it becomes popular when someone figures out some new lingo that sounds neat, and can lie convincingly in a video.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think you’re conflating a fundamental attribution error with a some other cognitive bias.

      The fundamental attribution error refers to an individual’s tendency to attribute another’s actions to their character or personality, while attributing their behavior to external situational factors outside of their control. In other words, you tend to cut yourself a break while holding others 100 percent accountable for their actions.

      https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/the-fundamental-attribution-error

  • Presi300@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    That documentation is supposed to explain how a thing works to people who don’t know how it works. I know, sounds extremely obvious, but you’d be surprised how much documentation out there is written in a way, expecting you to already know what it’s talking about. No. I do not. It is the documentation’s job to explain ME what IT is talking about…

  • it_depends_man@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    We have figured out how to run everything, absolutely everything, in the 1950s.

    The original computer “AI” craze was started by “cybernetic systems” and for good reason. You probably only know of the bastardizations of “cyber-” that don’t have anything in common with the original concept.

    The original concept goes like this:

    1. set a goal
    2. perform an action
    3. measure how much impact that had, did it get you closer to your goal or not?
    4. If you are at your goal, you’re done,
    5. otherwise adjust your actions, got to 2. (This is “feedback” and the reason that word is now so common. People at the time knew)

    The faster you go through the loop, the faster you will figure out what works.

    You can measure anything you want, as vague is you want. Happiness, money, productivity. It’s the way democracy is designed to work, in which case the feedback is vague and the cycle time is measured in years. It runs your thermostats, in your home, big national power grid power plants. It’s how autopilots autopilot.

    The idea that “nobody could have predicted…” or “nobody responsible” is a myth. We have the science. We know how it works.

    Every failure we still experience is a failure we allow to happen. Because of profit, politics, or whatever.

    Didn’t catch something “going on for years”, maybe someone should check more often. “Crazy single individual causing a tragedy”? No, that’s a person at risk, probably with social or mental problems you didn’t take care of before, didn’t flag, and didn’t stop in time.

    “Nobody wants to work on our open source project” Really, how is your onboarding? Do people take a look at the docs/culture and run away screaming? Yeah?

  • lath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    That other than a niche we specialize in, we’re pretty fucking dumb at everything else.

  • MilitantVegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    That carnism is an extremely entrenched mass psychosis or mania, and an insane amount of people need to sober the fuck up.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Here’s one that’s not as consequential as other posts here. It’s not going to change the world, but would make things slightly better.

    Split lock washers are worse than useless. They’re supposed to be a spring against the bolt to help resist it turning back out over time. They don’t. If anything, they make it worse.

    Here’s a NASA publication on fastener design (because of course there’s a NASA publication on fastener design): https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19900009424

    The lockwasher serves as a spring while the bolt is being tightened. However, the washer is normally flat by the time the bolt is fully torqued. At this time it is equivalent to a solid flat washer, and its locking ability is nonexistent. In summary, a Iockwasher of this type is useless for locking.

    This was published in 1990, but we’re still using this shit. Stop. There are many other kinds of fastener locking that work, like nylon locking nuts or threadlock, and we don’t need these.

  • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m a relatively good driver (not the greatest) I’ll never understand how people don’t understand there’s more you can do to control your vehicle speed besides just hitting the gas then the brake. It’s terrifying seeing someone speed up on someone then hit the brakes ever every 3 seconds. I’ve had my set of brakes on for nearly 7 years I know people who change them yearly and I’m strictly talking about the ones I know for a fact get the same level of quality brakes that I get. I own a truck hauling stuff around nearly every day so in theory I should be going through brakes WAY more than the average person.

    • iarigby@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      and that kind of driving affects not just brakes, but gas, engine wear, etc. not to say how horrible the whole experience of being bumped back and forth is. it’s SO simple and really reflects how careless and ignorant people choose to be about almost everything, and then that makes me really irritated

    • meleecrits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      What frightens me is when you see a vehicle put on their brake lights while they are clearly accelerating. I tend to back way away from that type of driver.

      • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t understand ? brake lights light up when you brake ? how could you do both ?

        • d00phy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          In case you’re not being sarcastic, this is about 2-footed drivers. They tend to always have their left foot “resting” on the brake pedal “just in case.” What they ignore is there’s a small amount of movement in the brake pedal that will light up the lights but not engage the brakes. So even if they’re not just wearing down the brakes, they look like they’re braking ALL. THE TIME.

          I also hate this.

          • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            wtf ? people drive with their left foot on the brakes ? no, I had no idea. I never ever heard of this

        • Krzd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          If you only slightly press down your brakes you can easily overcome that by applying more gas.

          IMO that happens extremely rarely though

        • meleecrits@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It means they are pushing on both the brake and accelerator at the same time. In essence, they are revving the engine, engaging the power train AND applying brake force to it all at the same time.

    • n3m37h@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Or the people who slow down at the bottom of a hill to accelerate UP HILL. Also all automatics you can shift to neutral and coast too.

  • Copythis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    The spices at the grocery store I’ve been going to for the past 25 years has had the spices alphabetized this entire time.

    Edit, I misread the question but I’m not fixing my response