5 ms·

Humans can consent.

by FartyMcFarter 2y ago

Humans can consent.

jimnotgym 2y ago
Consent or starve
- cooljacob204 2y ago
  We can choose what jobs we work and find new ones unlike these pigeons.
  - scp3125 2y ago
    I think you're missing the point about needing to work in order to survive.
    - Pyxl101 2y ago
      Yes, but a person can still choose which job to work in order to optimize their happiness, trading off compensation with the work's enjoyment. A person can also invest in themselves and develop new skills to unlock additional types of jobs, etc.
      - quantified 2y ago
        This is geographically variable: the more rural you are, the less choice you have. And between comparable geography, there's a lot of variation. It's not just job, it's profession. To get an OK nursing or teaching job, you may need to move across counties or even states. You can invest in yourself if you have capital.
        _boffin_ 2y ago
        You can invest in yourself if you have a library card. You can invest in yourself if you have internet. Yes, some people might have to move to get a job, but living somewhere isn’t a right, at least in my mind. There’s emotional and sentimental reasons to live where one currently does and it would be “painful” to live somewhere else, but is doable.
        quantified 2y ago
        Sure. Optimizing for happiness doesn't mean you end up happy.
        jimnotgym 2y ago
        Are you suggesting that everybody has the choice to study through library books and get a more fulfilling job? Everyone has the aptitude for book learning? So all those people stuck in dead end jobs in a factory (that could be done by a pigeon) are choosing not to learn CS and earn $mega at FAANG? That rather undermines the meritocracy cult of SV doesn't it, if anyone could do it?
        noduerme 2y ago
        The merit concept - true or not - is that it takes extra work to both survive and study enough to earn $mega at FAANG. The work is what earns the merit. You're arguing that it's not hard work that gets people good jobs; that the people stuck in dead end factory jobs could never work hard enough to earn $mega. Right? I usually hear this argument being presented as one where factory worker was not given equal opportunities and/or that FAANG worker didn't earn their position. I'm not sure if you're saying that, or that the people doing pigeon jobs are naturally incapable of doing anything else, but both of those ideas sure take all the agency away from individuals. It rings especially hollow to me as someone who didn't go to college, and taught myself to code, and makes $x per hour, and knows a lot of people (including my partner and her friends) who did go to college, who work in a factory and make 0.2*$x. While the sour grapes element and the jealousy (or covetousness mixed with some bafflement) is always there under the surface, I find it so petty. I have a hard time understanding it. If you want my job, go download a free IDE and start spending all night making stuff for 10 years while doing your day job. I did it while driving a taxi and waiting tables for minimum wage. I think a lot of people could do it. The fact that they could, and don't, is exactly the basis for the sense of earned merit for those who do. Hot tip: Skip the marriage and kids till you get where you want to be financially. But if you do want to prioritize having a family, don't then be jealous of those who prioritized their career.
    - hiatus 2y ago
      Don't pigeons have to work to eat also? Unless food is just dropped into their nest each day there is no escaping the rat race, no creature is excluded.
      - mnky9800n 2y ago
        People don’t always seem to be happy that humans created money to facilitate this process
        noduerme 2y ago
        There's an alternative to making money, which is stealing it. Just like some birds steal other birds' nests (presumably because they're unhappy that someone has amassed a larger collection of twigs).
        mnky9800n 2y ago
        Let’s rob a bank together
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  +1 I find many in the tech space and especially in the business space struggle (with disturbing difficulty) with the idea of meaningful truely freely given consent. GDPR uses a mostly adequate definition[0]; with examples added: 1. Freely-given without penalty: Services cannot force you to accept by refusing or degrading service. Consent must be truly voluntary, a streaming platform that won’t let you sign up or only allows you to watch up to 1080p unless you share your data with ad partners, is illegal. 2. Allowed to change your mind after you've previously consented: Withdrawing consent must be as easy as giving it. If one click gave consent, a single click must remove it. Bullying by requiring you to mail a letter, call a phone number, or navigate endless menus is illegal under GDPR. 3. The company must show clear evidence that you were informed and knowingly agreed: For example, they can’t rely on a tiny pre-checked box hidden under layers of ToS or on vague "by using this service, you agree" language. Doing so is illegal. Even pre-ticking the agree box is illegal, the user must make an active choice. 4. Consent requests must use plain language and stand apart from the rest of the text: A single, prominent and clearly labeled statement "Do you agree to share your data with these marketing partners?" suffices. Burying it in 5 pages of legalese does not and is illegal. 5. Any part of a consent request that violates GDPR is itself automatically void: If part of the contract claims the company can ignore any future withdrawal, that part is invalid and illegal. [0] https://gdpr.eu/article-7-how-to-get-consent-to-collect-personal-data/ https://gdpr.eu/article-7-how-to-get-consent-to-collect-pers...
- dennis_jeeves2 2y ago
  Thank you.

Humans can consent.

jimnotgym 2y ago

Consent or starve

cooljacob204 2y ago
We can choose what jobs we work and find new ones unlike these pigeons.
- scp3125 2y ago
  I think you're missing the point about needing to work in order to survive.
  - Pyxl101 2y ago
    Yes, but a person can still choose which job to work in order to optimize their happiness, trading off compensation with the work's enjoyment. A person can also invest in themselves and develop new skills to unlock additional types of jobs, etc.
    - quantified 2y ago
      This is geographically variable: the more rural you are, the less choice you have. And between comparable geography, there's a lot of variation. It's not just job, it's profession. To get an OK nursing or teaching job, you may need to move across counties or even states. You can invest in yourself if you have capital.
      - _boffin_ 2y ago
        You can invest in yourself if you have a library card. You can invest in yourself if you have internet. Yes, some people might have to move to get a job, but living somewhere isn’t a right, at least in my mind. There’s emotional and sentimental reasons to live where one currently does and it would be “painful” to live somewhere else, but is doable.
        quantified 2y ago
        Sure. Optimizing for happiness doesn't mean you end up happy.
        jimnotgym 2y ago
        Are you suggesting that everybody has the choice to study through library books and get a more fulfilling job? Everyone has the aptitude for book learning? So all those people stuck in dead end jobs in a factory (that could be done by a pigeon) are choosing not to learn CS and earn $mega at FAANG? That rather undermines the meritocracy cult of SV doesn't it, if anyone could do it?
        noduerme 2y ago
        The merit concept - true or not - is that it takes extra work to both survive and study enough to earn $mega at FAANG. The work is what earns the merit. You're arguing that it's not hard work that gets people good jobs; that the people stuck in dead end factory jobs could never work hard enough to earn $mega. Right? I usually hear this argument being presented as one where factory worker was not given equal opportunities and/or that FAANG worker didn't earn their position. I'm not sure if you're saying that, or that the people doing pigeon jobs are naturally incapable of doing anything else, but both of those ideas sure take all the agency away from individuals. It rings especially hollow to me as someone who didn't go to college, and taught myself to code, and makes $x per hour, and knows a lot of people (including my partner and her friends) who did go to college, who work in a factory and make 0.2*$x. While the sour grapes element and the jealousy (or covetousness mixed with some bafflement) is always there under the surface, I find it so petty. I have a hard time understanding it. If you want my job, go download a free IDE and start spending all night making stuff for 10 years while doing your day job. I did it while driving a taxi and waiting tables for minimum wage. I think a lot of people could do it. The fact that they could, and don't, is exactly the basis for the sense of earned merit for those who do. Hot tip: Skip the marriage and kids till you get where you want to be financially. But if you do want to prioritize having a family, don't then be jealous of those who prioritized their career.
  - hiatus 2y ago
    Don't pigeons have to work to eat also? Unless food is just dropped into their nest each day there is no escaping the rat race, no creature is excluded.
    - mnky9800n 2y ago
      People don’t always seem to be happy that humans created money to facilitate this process
      - noduerme 2y ago
        There's an alternative to making money, which is stealing it. Just like some birds steal other birds' nests (presumably because they're unhappy that someone has amassed a larger collection of twigs).
        mnky9800n 2y ago
        Let’s rob a bank together
HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
+1 I find many in the tech space and especially in the business space struggle (with disturbing difficulty) with the idea of meaningful truely freely given consent. GDPR uses a mostly adequate definition[0]; with examples added: 1. Freely-given without penalty: Services cannot force you to accept by refusing or degrading service. Consent must be truly voluntary, a streaming platform that won’t let you sign up or only allows you to watch up to 1080p unless you share your data with ad partners, is illegal. 2. Allowed to change your mind after you've previously consented: Withdrawing consent must be as easy as giving it. If one click gave consent, a single click must remove it. Bullying by requiring you to mail a letter, call a phone number, or navigate endless menus is illegal under GDPR. 3. The company must show clear evidence that you were informed and knowingly agreed: For example, they can’t rely on a tiny pre-checked box hidden under layers of ToS or on vague "by using this service, you agree" language. Doing so is illegal. Even pre-ticking the agree box is illegal, the user must make an active choice. 4. Consent requests must use plain language and stand apart from the rest of the text: A single, prominent and clearly labeled statement "Do you agree to share your data with these marketing partners?" suffices. Burying it in 5 pages of legalese does not and is illegal. 5. Any part of a consent request that violates GDPR is itself automatically void: If part of the contract claims the company can ignore any future withdrawal, that part is invalid and illegal. [0] https://gdpr.eu/article-7-how-to-get-consent-to-collect-personal-data/ https://gdpr.eu/article-7-how-to-get-consent-to-collect-pers...
dennis_jeeves2 2y ago
Thank you.