nancylebov: (green leaves)
Before Balticon, I cleared out a lot of button slogans that I didn't think were selling well enough.*

So I've got about a thousand buttons that I have no obvious use for. They're generally in good condition and they're sorted by slogan.

I could just throw them out, but does anyone have any better ideas?

Would anyone like to pick up the buttons? I'm in South Philadelphia. Or I could mail them. I'm estimating the postage at $50 to $100, paid in advance. I'll come up with something more exact if anyone is interested.

*Removing "Free Hugs" was an error. I'll be putting it back in the trays.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
Useful information from John Tangent:

If the link failed goto and look for the Device Manager. You can make it ring no matter the setting, lock and even erase it.

And from Kirin Wagle:

iOS devices do include a standard feature that emits a beeping sound when you go to Find My iPhone and clap the "play a sound" button. They also report their last known position when the battery dies.
nancylebov: (green leaves)

This is monstrous-- 15 year *minimum* for teenagers involved in sexting. "Involved" includes encouraging another teen to sext. The picture doesn't even have to be sent.

Name of bill: "Protecting Against Child Exploitation Act of 2017"

Here's the roll call list in case you have a Representative you'd like to praise or punish.

Please call your Senators about this.

You are, of course, under no obligation to read comments at the link, but I'm an occasional comment reader at Reason, and this is the first time I've seen them turn against Republicans in general.

I have phoned my Senators. Both phone lines were open. If you need contact information for your Senators, here it is.

Reason is the nearest thing to a major news organization which has covered the story. Should you have a habit of hating on libertarians, please remember this-- there's so much going wrong that one point of view and one bunch of activists isn't enough to keep it covered.

The other two sites with stories about the anti-sexting bill were
Unicorn Booty (gay) and The Ring of Fire Network (progressive).
nancylebov: (green leaves)

They are the Dark Knights of the office: lone vigilantes who police the workplace, ever watchful for heinous crimes that cannot go unpunished. Woe to those who step out of line and return from break two minutes late, leave food in the office fridge too long and fail to refill the photocopier...Researchers [Katy DeCelles and Karl Aquino] in Canada asked 2,000 people in the US if they had come across workplace vigilantes, meaning those who took it upon themselves to dob in their colleagues for breaches of company policy, or what they deemed to be egregious moral violations. 58% had, and on average, respondents recalled four work colleagues over the course of their career who fitted the description. (From The Guardian, ). You can read the original paper here.

Here's what I noticed: That sort of enforcement is a very strong drive for the people who do it.

Office vigilantes *might* get fired, but management apparently doesn't use the problem to motivate looking at whether some of the rules don't make sense.

It's been a while since I've read The No Asshole Rule (a book about why management should never tolerate workplace bullies) but if this sort of bullying wasn't included, it should have been.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
If you see a typo in one of your years' old posts, do you feel compelled to correct it?
nancylebov: (green leaves)

This seems like an unmanageable science fiction premise-- it's quite possible that aliens living in the hole in the microwave background wouldn't be able to learn as much about the early history of the universe. This should matter for something, but what?

Also, is there any way to automatically enlarge the images from apod_rss?
nancylebov: (green leaves)

It took me a little time to figure out how to add xkcd to my reading list, so this resource might not be obvious for everyone else.
nancylebov: (green leaves)

I was torn. "Friends" leads to emotional issues. "Readers" is the DW term. "So people from livejournal can find you" might be vaguely threatening. So "contacts".

Anyway, I think the link is to a very helpful project.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
This is a private person who's willing to fund 3 projects that sound interesting to her-- 5K each.
If you have a 5Kish project that you can't get off your mind, you might want to take a look.

I’d like to fund something that’s personally meaningful to you, whether that’s moving to the city of your dreams, building a better mousetrap, or bringing strangers together.

I’ll also prioritize projects where:
Funding isn’t readily available for this kind of project
You have a unique take on the project, or your backstory is interesting
Impact extends beyond the life of your project (ex. new program vs. one-time event)
Timeline is shorter (ex. 2 months) vs. longer (ex. one year)

Get creative! I’m open to suggestions. While your project should have a sense of beginning and end, I’ll gladly fund exploratory periods like sabbaticals or research.

I’m also happy to consider proposals like an extracurricular class or moving expenses, if they’re a major obstacle standing in between you and your dreams.
nancylebov: (green leaves)

This is really excellent-- it compares Manichaean evil (evil is a force) with Augustinian evil (evil is the absence of good) and demonstates that the plot of LOTR-- and especially the climax at the Cracks of Doom are solidly consistent with the idea that victory comes from doing the right thing, even when it seems completely impractical.

Link found here. Sherwood Smith is doing a reread of LOTR.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
The subject line pretty much covers it.

If you haven't heard, livejournal has imposed a new and possibly sketchy terms of service on its users, and more people are leaving lj and heading to dw.

I'm not sure it makes sense to post my request at dw as well as lj, but I'm not sure it doesn't, so I'm cross-posting.

I'm very grateful that the original lj had open-source software so that it's possible to mirror a livejouranl (including the old posts) at dw.
nancylebov: blue moon (Default)
I've come up with a non-dairy comfort food.

1 medium butternut squash
4 medium small sweet potatoes
1 medium onion and a shallot
1/2 pound bacon
4 assorted somewhat hot peppers and a little hot sauce
garlic (Auntie Arwen's dried garlic mix)
some maple syrup, maybe a couple of tablespoons

I steamed the squash (20 minutes). I found that the skin was edible, which was convenient-- some people don't like the texture, but it's a pain to remove the skin. (Second thought, maybe it's worth the trouble to pick the skin out.)

Microwaved the potatoes.

Fried the bacon, then fried the chopped peppers and onions in the bacon grease.

Mashed the squash, potatoes, bacon, peppers, and onions together. That was when I decided it needed more heat and salt, and added a little hot sauce and the maple syrup.

This is pretty comforting as it is, but would be more comforting without the hot peppers. My original plan included collard greens, but I don't think they were necessary.

The hot peppers (one light orange and wrinkly, one good-sized dark green and with an oval cross section, a smaller dark green pepper which wasn't quit as oval, and a medium-sized dark red spherical pepper) were from a mixed bag from Whole Foods. They had an interesting variety ot flavors, but I'm not sure what to do with them-- I'm not bad at improvised cooking but they were beyond my level of subtlety.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
Richard Stallman ordered a button from me-- the top half had blue writing on white which said BLUE LIES MATTER*, the bottom half had black writing on yellow "Prosecute Perjury", and the whole thing had a red ring around the edge to make it more eye-catching.

What could possibly go wrong?

He wore it to Boskone, and several people saw it as being about lies from Democrats.

I considered redoing it with "Prosecute Police Perjury". However, most police lies aren't in court and therefore aren't committing perjury.

Please discuss this at DW/LJ, not on Facebook.

*read it carefully, there's a gotcha
nancylebov: (green leaves)
Daryl Davis is a black man who befriends KKK members, starting from a premise of trying to understand how people can hate him without knowing him, and also meeting people where they are.

He's got about 30 KKK robes which were given to him by people who left the KKK.

There's been a book by him for a while, but now there's a movie, available on the PBS site until 2/28.

Do *not* watch it at Film Lush, they're scammers.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
I'm currently planning to maintain two parallel blogs, posting from DW to LJ.

The interesting question is how to handle my presence in both-- reading habits (some of the more prolific posters are in both DW and LJ, and I don't want to unsubscribe from them at one site and then have to keep track if they change where they are) and commenting (comment where there are already comments or what?).

I'm planning on maintaining paid accounts at both because I want to be able to edit my comments easily. Like so many people, I don't seem to see typos until after I hit send. I was nervous about saying that I value editing LJ comments more than I dislike letting the Russian owners of LJ get a few dollars a year (I assume that most of the fee is for maintaining the site), but then I decided that I might as well tell the truth and see what happens.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
From [ profile] kalimac:

I'd totally forgotten this, but I've been going through my posts of the last year in preparation for writing a year-end post, and found this: On January 31st, I predicted that, given a straight fight between Trump and Clinton, Trump would be elected President.

Let me repeat that: On January 31st, 2016, I predicted that Trump would be elected President.

Here's the relevant part of what I wrote:
The article's second argument is that "there are simply not enough struggling, resentful, xenophobic white people in the US to constitute a national majority sufficient to win a presidential election." The flaw in that reasoning is that, if Trump wins the nomination, he won't need merely that category. Unless the party splits over him, and I wouldn't count on it doing so, other Republicans will have nowhere else to go. Trump has high negatives, yes, but so does Clinton (if she's the Democratic nominee), and she doesn't have the enthusiasm of her party's base. Enthusiasm is what means turnout, and - as the difference between 2008 and 2010 amply shows - between two strong bases, it's turnout that wins elections. Combine that with the prospect of a sluggish economy, and in a straight fight between Clinton and Trump, it'd be a wonder if Trump didn't win.

Then I wrote, "Never say that a strong candidate can't win," with a link to a collection of quotes from as late as the day before the 2008 election saying that Obama can't, or won't, win.

A bunch of people saying that Obama couldn't possibly win

I tell you three times, this wasn't my prediction. I thought Clinton would win.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
There's currently a migration to Dreamwidth because the LJ servers have been moved to Russia. This is a security risk (though I hope not a serious one for people who aren't living in Russian controlled territory*) and also puts LJ accounts at more risk for being deleted for arbitrary reasons.

If you're on my friends list on LJ, using a different name on DW, and don't mind letting me know what it is, could you let me know?

*insert scenario about Trump)
nancylebov: (green leaves)
Literally speaking, "You should have known better" makes no sense. How can people have known things before they knew them? How can there be a moral requirement which is impossible? It was a revelation to me that moral strictures should be achievable-- I thought they were just floating out in the ether being correct.

I got a lot of "you should have known better" when I was a kid, and I have no patience for it now. However, logical consistancy requires that I not blame people for not knowing better than to say it.

If I feel compelled to give advice about something someone did, I say "for future reference" to make it clear that I don't think they could or should make the past different.

On the other hand, people do say "You should have known better" quite a lot. Most people (that is to say, non-geekish people) use language very approximately, and they seem to manage. My theory is that "You should have known better" is shaming someone for making a mistake-- it's an effort to make sure they don't make that particular mistake again. There may be some hope that they'll be more alert in general, or it may just be dumping fear and anger without thinking about long-term effects.

It's worth noting that I was living in a pretty safe environment and temperamentally cautious. I'm interested in discussion of good methods for teaching urgent rules.

I believe that shaming people, especially shaming them for breaking vague rules, tends to damage their initiative. Who knows what else will bring down another punishment? Better to not take risks.

One thing that took me a surprisingly long time to learn was that when my calligraphy was going badly, I should stop and think about whether there's a problem caused by ink, paper, penpoint, or temperature/humidity. Before I had that realization, I would just keep trying the same thing, hoping that somehow matters would get better. It was sort of a moral issue-- perhaps if I was a good enough person I could get things right.

From the outside and after I figured this out, it seems as though I had very little sense. However, it was the amount of sense I had.

I was a somewhat spacey and very angry child (I think a good bit of the anger wasn't shown), and being shamed about incompetence did a lot to get me to give up on connecting to the world outside my head. If you startle someone who's being inept, it doesn't make them more competent. The rules are probably different for emergencies and I'm interested in what anyone has to say about being effective about getting people's attention.

This only feels like half an essay, but I think I might as well post it and see what further thoughts show up.

Meanwhile, a case of being told the rules repeatedly and what it can take to believe a rule might be worth following.
nancylebov: (green leaves)

The LJ servers have been moved to Russia. 99 accounts and records have been blocked. This also means LJ is accessible to the Russian government.

Some of the people on my friends list have duplicated their LJ accounts to Dreamwidth, which has very similar code.

Here's how to make a Dreamwidth account that duplicates what you've posted to LJ, and the comments you've received. I think you'll need to duplicate your friendlist by hand for DW, and get individual permissions for non-public posts there.
nancylebov: (green leaves)
Wells Fargo's bad incentive plan also led to clients being forced or pushed into low quality insurance from Prudential.

A commenter mentioned Wells Fargo getting loads and scads of money in the bailout, so I found a reminder that WF was highly involved in mortgage fraud-- and, of course, it did get a big bailout.

There was an annoying bit near the beginning of the article shouldn't have been "Gold is a great thing to sew onto your garments if you're a Jewish family in Vienna in 1939 but civilized people don't buy gold", it should have been "people who trust that their countries are civilized don't buy gold".

So, there was that bit about people buying gold in the Rolling Stone article and my mind naturally went to India-- their government suddenly made their larger bills into not-money so that the government could collect more taxes.

Very cleverly, this deactivated 80% of the money. It hasn't been going well.
Indians tend to keep gold as a financial reserve. I don't know what history goes into this, though that might be the next thing to research.

Anyway, googling turned up that the Indian government is also targeting gold, but none of it is from sources that I'm familiar with-- not sketchy sources from my usual infosphere, just sources from parts of the world that I don't usually see.

June 2017

    1 23
18192021 222324


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 24th, 2017 12:04 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios