From 63e5c7819dd3170a1713195c1e57a1d60ffe4c2a4f39b420335e2f6bf3c298b7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicholas Johnson Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0000 Subject: Replace 'whether or not' with 'whether' 'whether' is shorter. --- content/entry/antinatalism.md | 2 +- content/entry/exposing-zoom.md | 2 +- content/entry/identifying-and-processing-emotions-with-alexithymia.md | 2 +- content/entry/newcombs-paradox-resolved.md | 2 +- content/entry/police-mistake-autism-for-suspicious-behavior.md | 2 +- content/entry/re-on-transgender-athletes.md | 2 +- content/entry/website-tosdr.md | 2 +- content/entry/what-is-sensory-overload-like.md | 2 +- 8 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/entry/antinatalism.md b/content/entry/antinatalism.md index b852495..59453ff 100644 --- a/content/entry/antinatalism.md +++ b/content/entry/antinatalism.md @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ Antinatalists claim that most people do not evaluate reality correctly. They cla Some antinatalists further argue that the lives of all animals are very bad, not only the lives of humans. This philosophy is known as "universal antinatalism". According to universal antinatalism, since humans are the only species capable of understanding the predicament, we ought to sterilize other animal species to save them from their default state in the wild which is a life of struggle. -I don't know whether or not depressive realism is true. I'm also not sure whether animals suffer more than they flourish. I will give the antinatalists credit on these points. The suffering of descendants does seem to be the strongest argument in favor of no one having children and animal sterilization out of all the antinatalist arguments. +I don't know whether depressive realism is true. I'm also not sure whether animals suffer more than they flourish. I will give the antinatalists credit on these points. The suffering of descendants does seem to be the strongest argument in favor of no one having children and animal sterilization out of all the antinatalist arguments. However there is the possibility that future technology might deliver us eternal bliss so good it would retroactively justify all humanity's past suffering and the suffering of all other beings. This is a point Matt Dillahunty made when he addressed antinatalism. However it's not a valid point since it seems equally plausible that future technology could create suffering, perhaps even unfathomable torment beyond anything we've ever experienced. As a side note, [Matt's criticism of antinatalism](https://yewtu.be/embed/n9BFG0Xh4Wg?local=true) seems to miss the point. diff --git a/content/entry/exposing-zoom.md b/content/entry/exposing-zoom.md index bc99226..e76d174 100644 --- a/content/entry/exposing-zoom.md +++ b/content/entry/exposing-zoom.md @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ The [privacy policy](https://explore.zoom.us/en/privacy/) is always where it get The recordings section is explaining that anyone in a Zoom call can record a meeting on their local device and save it and that Zoom acknowledges they have no control over this. Despite this, Zoom Phone makes it easier for customers to record calls. "Zoom Phone allows customers to record phone calls, receive voice mail recordings, and obtain transcripts of voicemail, all which may contain personal information and also be stored in our cloud". Privacy Policy. (2020, March 29). Retrieved May 23, 2020 from Zoom, Zoom privacy policy website, [https://explore.zoom.us/en/privacy/](https://explore.zoom.us/en/privacy/). Creating the transcripts happens automatically which means that the audio data of a call is fed into some automated system which has to listen to the call to create the transcript. ## Attention Tracking -The section on attention tracking in the Privacy Policy explains that if the host of the meeting is sharing their screen, they can activate a feature called "attention tracking". This means the host can see whether or not the participants have the Zoom window open or are doing something else. This gives whoever the host might be (employers, teachers, etc.) power to invade the participants' computers (employees, students, etc.) to check if they are paying attention or not. Zoom does not give participants any kind of forewarning that what they are doing on their own computers is being monitored and sent to the host other than it being buried in the Privacy Policy which, let's be real, nobody reads. And even if people did read it, they still are not in a position to understand the significance of some of the data collected on them like IP address, MAC address, etc. +The section on attention tracking in the Privacy Policy explains that if the host of the meeting is sharing their screen, they can activate a feature called "attention tracking". This means the host can see whether the participants have the Zoom window open or are doing something else. This gives whoever the host might be (employers, teachers, etc.) power to invade the participants' computers (employees, students, etc.) to check if they are paying attention or not. Zoom does not give participants any kind of forewarning that what they are doing on their own computers is being monitored and sent to the host other than it being buried in the Privacy Policy which, let's be real, nobody reads. And even if people did read it, they still are not in a position to understand the significance of some of the data collected on them like IP address, MAC address, etc. It's peculiar how Zoom website obviously tries to give the overwhelming impression that you can trust the software, yet it's against their terms of service to reverse engineer it and their own privacy policy shows they collect enormous amounts of data that isn't strictly necessary or relevant to video conferencing. Do they really need your MAC address or know which OS you're using? But not only does Zoom obtain data when you are using Zoom. They obtain data from you even when you are not using their service. diff --git a/content/entry/identifying-and-processing-emotions-with-alexithymia.md b/content/entry/identifying-and-processing-emotions-with-alexithymia.md index b65c684..5a9e9a4 100644 --- a/content/entry/identifying-and-processing-emotions-with-alexithymia.md +++ b/content/entry/identifying-and-processing-emotions-with-alexithymia.md @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ For example, if the frequency of my autistic self-stimulation increases a lot in ### Meditation Practice "How do you notice the thoughts and behaviors that indicate an emotion?" I train myself to notice them through a specific form of meditation. I sit upright with my eyes closed watching my breath and wait for an intention to show up. Maybe I want to adjust in my seat or scratch my shoulder. Whatever it is, I just notice the intention to act. Then I purposely don't satisfy it. -The benefit of not satisfying the intention is that keeps it around for longer as an object of meditation. It also strengthens my ability to be comfortable before my intentions, wishes, desires, and goals are met. Then, instead of automatically fulfilling them as soon as possible, I have the power to decide whether or not I want to. It reduces my automaticity of thought so I'm no longer just on autopilot chasing pleasure and avoiding pain. +The benefit of not satisfying the intention is that keeps it around for longer as an object of meditation. It also strengthens my ability to be comfortable before my intentions, wishes, desires, and goals are met. Then, instead of automatically fulfilling them as soon as possible, I have the power to decide whether I want to. It reduces my automaticity of thought so I'm no longer just on autopilot chasing pleasure and avoiding pain. Meditation isn't necessary for noticing your conscious intentions and behaviors, but it definitely helps. As you get better at noticing the internal and external manifestations of emotion, you may even begin to notice what before was subconscious mental activity. diff --git a/content/entry/newcombs-paradox-resolved.md b/content/entry/newcombs-paradox-resolved.md index 7140b9e..7c44fff 100644 --- a/content/entry/newcombs-paradox-resolved.md +++ b/content/entry/newcombs-paradox-resolved.md @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Long answer: There is a very subtle contradiction in the definition of Newcomb's Meanwhile taking only box B is supported by mathematical expected value, which doesn't rely on free choice being available after the prediction. It just says "If you take only box B, you can expect $1,000,000. If you take both boxes, you can expect $1,000". There's no notion of free will there. It's a purely statistical argument. The strategic dominance principle only seems appealing because of the strong intuition of having a free choice after the predictor has made the prediction. While [retrocausality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality) doesn't actually occur in Newcomb's Paradox, it's not a bad mental model for thinking about the problem. Since the predictor is infallible, it has effective retrocausality. What the predictor did in the past is based on the box it already knows you're going to take. There's no real paradox, you just can't outwit the predictor even though your intuitions tell you that you "feel free". -You might think it doesn't make sense to prescribe players the strategy of choosing box B only, since they have "already made the choice" whether or not to take only box B. But, consider that by the same token, we have "already made the choice" whether or not to prescribe the player the strategy to take box B. So, it is equally coherent for us to prescribe the player to take box B as it is for the player to actually take box B. Saying there's no point in prescribing the player a course of action is akin to saying you'll just stay in bed all day since you have no free will. The "choice" to do nothing is also not of your own free will. In other words, you're not escaping your lack of free will by doing nothing. We aren't escaping the lack of the player's free will by not prescribing them a best course of action as we don't have free will either. So, there's no reason not to tell the player to take only box B. +You might think it doesn't make sense to prescribe players the strategy of choosing box B only, since they have "already made the choice" whether to take only box B. But, consider that by the same token, we have "already made the choice" whether to prescribe the player the strategy to take box B. So, it is equally coherent for us to prescribe the player to take box B as it is for the player to actually take box B. Saying there's no point in prescribing the player a course of action is akin to saying you'll just stay in bed all day since you have no free will. The "choice" to do nothing is also not of your own free will. In other words, you're not escaping your lack of free will by doing nothing. We aren't escaping the lack of the player's free will by not prescribing them a best course of action as we don't have free will either. So, there's no reason not to tell the player to take only box B. # Closing Some of the points I've written down in this post come from my own intuition. I couldn't write a single methodology for how I come up with it all. In philosophy, it's hard to define a single methodology that can solve problems since each problem is unique and touches on many different things. Maybe some day someone will come up with an algorithm for doing philosophy. Although that would be equivalent to finding an [algorithm for truth](https://yewtu.be/embed/leX541Dr2rU?local=true), so no one would be able to agree that it actually worked. diff --git a/content/entry/police-mistake-autism-for-suspicious-behavior.md b/content/entry/police-mistake-autism-for-suspicious-behavior.md index e808c9b..e576d27 100644 --- a/content/entry/police-mistake-autism-for-suspicious-behavior.md +++ b/content/entry/police-mistake-autism-for-suspicious-behavior.md @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ For example, police use of indirect communication and body language leads to mis There's supposed to be autism training in police departments to reduce this problem. However, from what I've read, the training is inconsistent. For someone like me who is autistic and decent at masking (pretending I'm not autistic) in public, police will never realize I'm autistic unless I disclose it. In other words, their training is useless unless I disclose my autism. -It's always my discretion whether or not to inform the police that I'm autistic, but it poses a dilemma: +It's always my discretion whether to inform the police that I'm autistic, but it poses a dilemma: Suppose I disclose my autism to a police officer. Many neurotypicals, perhaps even most, treat autistic people poorly. It has been my personal experience that, if a neurotypical becomes angry enough at me, they will eventually make fun of my autism or try to use it as a weapon against me. How do I know the police won't do the same? I've certainly heard cases where they did treat known autistic people worse. So maybe it's better that they don't know. diff --git a/content/entry/re-on-transgender-athletes.md b/content/entry/re-on-transgender-athletes.md index b6dc0ba..732483c 100644 --- a/content/entry/re-on-transgender-athletes.md +++ b/content/entry/re-on-transgender-athletes.md @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ It's true that looking at chromosomes is a useful method for identifying biologi > "Biological women who don't want to compete against trans women aren't being antitransgenderist. They just don't want to get crushed by trans women who, in many cases, have clear biological advantages over them." -I would go further and say that trans people who participate in sports leagues without disclosing that they're trans are probably acting in bad faith. It's not for trans people to judge whether or not they have a distinct biological advantage in the league they wish to participate in. +I would go further and say that trans people who participate in sports leagues without disclosing that they're trans are probably acting in bad faith. It's not for trans people to judge whether they have a distinct biological advantage in the league they wish to participate in. > "We choose how to divide people up and there's plenty of room for reasonable people to disagree about the divisions." diff --git a/content/entry/website-tosdr.md b/content/entry/website-tosdr.md index f5e3ea8..447de13 100644 --- a/content/entry/website-tosdr.md +++ b/content/entry/website-tosdr.md @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ It provides a searchable online database cataloguing and simplifying the terms o > "I have read and agree to the Terms." -Each service also has a grade based on its terms. You can interpret the grade however you want, but I interpret it as a measure of whether or not I ought to use the service. It's incredibly useful for quickly ascertaining the risks of using a service. +Each service also has a grade based on its terms. You can interpret the grade however you want, but I interpret it as a measure of whether I ought to use the service. It's incredibly useful for quickly ascertaining the risks of using a service. [The people behind the project](https://tosdr.org/about) participate in free software, free culture, and law. They're funded by non-profits and [individual donations](https://thanks.tosdr.org) and all the info on the site is open data. If you want to contribute, ToS;DR has a [forum](https://tosdr.community/) and [community](https://tosdr.org/community) page. diff --git a/content/entry/what-is-sensory-overload-like.md b/content/entry/what-is-sensory-overload-like.md index 4172f62..1a942b7 100644 --- a/content/entry/what-is-sensory-overload-like.md +++ b/content/entry/what-is-sensory-overload-like.md @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Have you ever been lost in a lecture before? You were listening to the professor For example, during sensory overload, it's harder for me to find things. It's not that I don't see them. It's just that my brain stops labeling what I'm seeing and giving meaning to it. It's closer to pure seeing. The normal object recognition filter applied to seeing is diminished. There's just a sphere of color and light full of nameless purposeless objects. -You might be thinking "How the hell can object recognition cease? It's automatic.", and to that I'd respond "The same way sentences lose meaning when you're lost in a lecture". The lecture either makes sense or it doesn't, and whether or not it makes sense in the moment is fundamentally a mysterious process. We can talk about the psychology of why certain lectures make more sense to certain people and we can come up with post hoc rationalizations about why particular lectures make sense to us. But ultimately, from our own subjective perspective, it's a mystery. All we can say is "it just makes sense" or "it just doesn't make sense". +You might be thinking "How the hell can object recognition cease? It's automatic.", and to that I'd respond "The same way sentences lose meaning when you're lost in a lecture". The lecture either makes sense or it doesn't, and whether it makes sense in the moment is fundamentally a mysterious process. We can talk about the psychology of why certain lectures make more sense to certain people and we can come up with post hoc rationalizations about why particular lectures make sense to us. But ultimately, from our own subjective perspective, it's a mystery. All we can say is "it just makes sense" or "it just doesn't make sense". So how is it that I lose the ability to recognize objects? It's the same as with the lecture. I just do. If you've never experienced sensory overload yourself, there's no way for me to communicate it to you. That analogy is the best I can do. -- cgit v1.2.3