Senal

joined 2 years ago
[–] Senal@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's an interesting perspective.

You think they'd form on their own? or we shouldn't be getting to the point where they are needed or something else entirely ?

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not into any of the assistant ecosystems, they creep me out too much to have them listening in.

I've got my HA instance set up for independent VA integrations and I've had a few tries and using pi's with microphone and speaker hats as custom endpoints, they worked okay-ish but it fell by the wayside eventually and i've just been waiting on this kind of first party-promoted kind of announcement to get back in to it.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago

absolutely all of this

[–] Senal@programming.dev 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

IIRC the home assistant android app has VA functionality built in.

Not sure if it works in the same way as this box though.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

To clarify, I don’t believe in the creation of any deliberately biased system.

As in you don't believe it's possible for a biased system to exist or you don't think it's possible to do it deliberately, something else ?

but I believe the main societal issue is overwhelmingly one of wealth disparity.

I agree, and the idea of providing a baseline humanitarian standard of living isn't impossible it's just very unlikely without some hefty and painful foundational changes to how societies are currently working.

I’m not assigning a moral value when I use the phrase “disproportionate benefit”. I’m alluding to the disproportionate degree of poverty experienced by African-Americans. Poverty relief should therefore benefit them more. If there was no differential distribution of wealth with respect to race, the benefits of poverty relief would be neutral with respect to race.

Additionally, the person I responded to is very clearly describing a situation related to a student’s socioeconomic status. I absolutely believe some kind of “blind” application process is necessary to minimise the impact of a number of possible prejudices held by the admissions team.

Fair enough, it seems i entirely misunderstood what you meant, my apologies.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

In a system where inherent racism didn't exist that would work, are you assuming that the current system wouldn't disproportionately skew the beneficiaries to the existing racial bias for some reason ?

That just gives you the same problem, a step down in the chain.

Systemic racism doesn't start once you hit a threshold of income, targeting the poor will still skew towards whatever biases exist in the system.

disproportionately benefit African-Americans

Either you don't understand why African-Americans would need additional help or you are framing it that way on purpose.

By what metric are you getting "disproportionate" ?

continuing to perpetuate the idea that skin colour is somehow the most important thing about people

It sounds like systemic racism is over so we can all just go back to seeing everyone as equals. /s

Again, either you have a fundamental misunderstanding or are purposely framing it that way.

To be clear, these measures aren't "skin color is most important so let's base policy on that aspect"

they are closer to

"The system is actively using skin colour and ethnicity to detrimentally target people who should really be equal in standing, let's not pretend that that isn't happening and try to address it"

[–] Senal@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

It's an entirely efficient way to allocate resources if the goal is "shareholder enrichment".

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

I'm not disagreeing with most of what you said but throwing money at a problem would have significantly higher return on investment if that money wasn't being slurped up by the capitalist machine.

It also might work a bit better if the country as a whole hadn't been institutionalising profit driven medical sciences for the last 100 years.

Or to use an analogy.

It's like pointing out that "just throwing oil" at a car engine that hasn't been serviced in 150k is a failure of oil to fix the problem.

I mean, yes, technically you have a problem, you put oil in and the problem didn't go away, but is the problem really the oil ?

In this analogy capitalism is the oil thieves, draining your oil out of the bottom of the engine while you fill it up.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

Some A-Train shenanigans afoot

[–] Senal@programming.dev 7 points 6 months ago

A masterful retort.

Surely this shall be recorded in the annals of history alongside other such historical zingers as "I know you are but that am i ?" or the seminal classic "Your Mother".

[–] Senal@programming.dev 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"Essential" implies more than just a small part, but if you want to claim otherwise you are free to do so.

Do you also say “no, ALL lives matter?”

Because project management is comparable to civil rights? That's some weak sauce whattaboutism.

[–] Senal@programming.dev -2 points 6 months ago

Downvotes with no actual reasoning behind them?

I am shocked, shocked i tell you.

view more: ‹ prev next ›