therapist

Yeesh.

But herein lies the problem. They post a sentence and a misleading graph, people eat that shit up. They have an audience of millions and media outlets will amplify it to more, maybe tens of millions even. Easy to digest

I can tear it apart, others can too. Easy, but wordy. I am very bad at doing this succinctly (my post history is clear evidence of this ha). I am sure someone else can do a much better job of doing this concisely BUT:

It almost inherently won’t be concise enough to be as digestible as theirs. It will be a paragraph, a few sentences. There will be more to it.

It will be inherently harder to understand. There will be more steps involved in processing the information. You have to understand what they presented, understand the flaw, and then evaluate whether the flaw is valid

The person posting a reaction is almost certainly not going to have the initial reach of musk amplified by the tech bro and gop propaganda sphere

Per above it is inherently reactionary. Their info has settled in people’s minds as valid and legitimate before yours can even come into play.

Even if they do post at work, so the fuck what? Do they not have downtime? Are they not allowed to spend said downtime as they please?

This is propaganda. “See how lazy these workers are? They USE THE INTERNET AT WORK!” Posted by a billionaire that tweets 900 times a day.

It’s totally okay when he goes on websites to post memes but when you do it you’re a lazy piece of shit because worker scum should be giving 100% efficiency. No breaks, no cellphone usage, no chairs, fuck you wage slave

Plus as others have said this is almost certainly edited and misleading:

First off what did weekends and holidays dwarf this? Are they purposely excluding them to make this seem worse?

Secondly what the fuck is that y axis scale? 30,000 posts per day? Bullshit. Reddit has no api access to make this easy to figure out (so how did they get this data??) The front page of r/fednews doesn’t have a metric that would go that high aside from upvotes, maybe. They do get some posts with 1-3k comments but most have like 20. Upvotes make more way more sense

That’s where we get to the point of purposefully misleading. I haven’t used reddit for years but when I did I was on a community for psychotherapists. It’s one of the things I miss about reddit actually because to post there you had to subscribe and message the mods with proof of your licensure or enrollment in a program and then were flaired appropriately. This helped immensely with “armchair psychologists” invading our professional space, which is a genuine problem elsewhere

I mention that because it does not appear fednews has any similar policy, meaning anyone with an account can post, comment, upvote, etc. The overwhelming majority of this data is likely not federal employees given Reddits prominence in online discourse and the current focus on federal government employees

At a minimum they realized this is data that can be easily used to mislead, at worst they pumped the numbers with bots to push their narrative

Similar to the RFK anti vax “data” that was easily dissected bullshit yesterday. The gop has been good at misleading data for years (so have dems but the gop are far more shameless) but now they have big tech on their side. This is absolutely terrifying because tech giants are going to be much better at making this subtle and outright manipulation so that the data appears valid (see the potential for botting above if the scale is upvote based)

Well of course. Me too! The only way that changes is if we change the framework of our entire economic system, really

And mine either!!

I assume they’re being pragmatic. Appealing the us to remove copyright is a fools errand. Appealing to shorten the length of the prection period is too frankly given the nature of corporate protectionism but it’s far more likely than America ever entertaining the idea of free information, regardless of the benefits that could ensue. Think of the shareholders! And yourself! Gotta hang that carrot in front of you. What if you finally write that novel and it blows up! I know you secretly want to be a multimillionaire! No one just makes art or has passion to study and document something without financial gain, that’s dumb. Ignore all those forum posts where people do exactly that

Mihon is still available although it doesn’t do anime, only manga

It happened long before chatgpt. Subredditsimulator was touted as a “fun game” at first but it was really a testing ground for bot devs. That goes back to like 2016, 6 years before chatgpt.

Openai was established 2015 though, some of their team was probably already shitting up the internet by then

They’ll probably be used for recruiting in one of these studies

I mean this completely unironically. This is the methodology flaw to be absolutely clear. Littman devised this social contagion theory, that gender dysphoria is socially inflicted. That peer influence is what makes your kid trans.

She then specifically sought out forums critical of transgender people. “4thwavenow”, “transgender trend”, and “youth transcritical professionals”. These websites opposed gender affirming care for youth and “trans ideology”

She claims she asked people on these sites to spread the survey beyond the sites but specifically sought out “parents who believed their children had ROGD”. At the time this was a term she had coined. This is still not a recognized term by anyone credible and definitely was not then

Shockingly horrid methodology flaws. Additionally leaked emails from these communities show failures to disclose conflicts of interest and arguably show littman and several other psychologists in these communities were working backwards, eg they had the idea that this was idea absolutely true and were looking for confirmation. It is possible from the start they were not interested in any possibility of finding data that did not support their hypothesis and their actions appear to support this belief, eg they were putting their thumb on the scale in their favor

Good to know. I was completely unfamiliar, it just showed up as like the third result when I was pulling up links to the bailey study.

What a shocker they’re pushed up google search results! That’s what I get for using startpage, which is still tainted by googles algorithm bullshit

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semite has the right to play.”

This references rapid onset gender dysphoria.

ROGD is garbage. The term was coined by littman, who used dogshit methodology to study the “phenomenon”. The paper required corrections, brown university distanced themselves from her (kind of, sort of defending her) and dozens of outlets responded outlining the methodology flaws, including the APA

Of the several methodology flaws the biggest was sampling bias. she recruited her subjects through known anti trans groups online. This was outlined in the paper but not discussed as a potential flaw before the corrections

Of course culture wars latched on to this. fox news, breitbart, etc latched on to how she was being censored for her narrative going against the “woke agenda” (conveniently leaving out she manipulated her sample to be biased for parents that were upset and angry about their kids being trans)

Several studies occurred in the interim. Bauer found no evidence for rogd. Littman said their definition was incorrect. Ferrara did note there is still room to explore the issue and Arnoldussen found there was rationale for future study towards an “ROGD” subtype, though they were clear at this point there was no evidence for such a thing.

So at this point we have this social contagion theory, one (deeply flawed) paper supporting it, one not, and two saying “maybe?”. The evidence is obscenely weak.

Then another paper comes out by bailey and Diaz. This was a shitshow. This basically was the littman paper all over again. Like literally! They acknowledge this! parentsofrogdkids.com is literally the fucking website they sampled from!

But the shitshow here is that the paper was retracted. It was retracted because of informed consent issues, and fairly quickly. So you’re passionate about this issue and you’re like “yeah, fuck them, retract that”. But here’s the thing: it takes a lot for a paper to get retracted. Like serious malfeasance. The Wakefield mmr study got retracted. It took a long time, and it was because he falsified data and had a vested financial interest in a competing product to the mmr vaccine. That study is instrumental in the “vaccines cause autism” sentiment, it was tremendously destructive.

So the issue here is informed consent (which frankly should’ve been picked up by the publisher, and arguably isn’t even an issue because it’s anonymous Internet forum data that did have a semblance of consent but whatever). But the issue here is similar to the littman issue: optics. It’s arguable the main reason this was retracted was because it was a heavily controversial topic with many eyes on it done poorly. But now there’s another “academics are censoring our narrative” because of the heavy handed response.

See https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4819394-publisher-to-retract-paper-on-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria

A moms discussion forum, thread on the topic, first few replies:

I wonder how many other studies based on survey data will be subjected to retraction because of ethical consent? This is another worrying example of research that doesn’t fit the narrative being silenced.

It would be interesting to know how many of the trans suicide statistics publications meet this standard. But yes, informed data consent is absolutely important

They reference a student doctor forum thread, which discusses the paper far more fairly, including the actual methodology flaws. And yet, no one reaches that point.

Why does this matter? Because these people get propelled when they are perceived as unfairly censured. When littman was going through the intense debate post her censure her narratives were amplified heavily. Abigail Shrier, who wrote a book in this period about ROGD (that involved future retracted “scientist” bailey), was suddenly invited to be on Joe Rogan. Littman herself was on megyn Kelly.

Anyway these people clearly aren’t interested in science. They’re interested in cherry picking data using obviously flawed methodology.

The hypocrisy is obviously infuriating. If I studied trans issues and pulled my subjects from blahaj and hexbear to ensure I got supportive results I would be crucified and rightly so. But we are in crazy bullshit times where people don’t understand basic experimental design (but will still speak authoritatively in the face of those who do) and as a result we are in a space where people are genuinely going to be harmed

I provide pediatric and adult mental health care. I provide gender affirming care. I have for over a decade now. I have written countless letters approving hrt for children and adults as well as surgery letters for adults. I am generally fearful for my freedom and safety. I am very sad for my clients, who for the last week have been extremely upset about not getting their federal documents updated in time. Now they will be in a significantly worse space. Treatment will be interrupted. Treatment that has been desired for a long time will have to delayed even more. People will turn to unsafe black market options.

Fuck this

cognitive dissonance causes discomfort and either leads to change or denial

“I know this cigarette I am smoking causes cancer” either the person will enact change and quit or reduce smoking, or they will deny the extensive reality that smoking causes cancer

The people who go with excessive denial ultimately need to rely on avoidance behaviors and may become irritable and anxious when confronted with the reality that’s been making them uncomfortable for quite some time.

Guess which side they fall on

Works from db0, congrats

Oh I didn’t mean larger like that, I meant width wise. Standard rack width is 19 inches so if it’s one of those specialty racks that’s narrower that thing I said about repurposing an old 1u/2u is pointless because it won’t fit. Doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t use this rack, just that that idea is no good.

4u is fine unless you want to expand down the line. Networking gear and stuff. However if it’s a narrow rack I don’t think there will be much to put in it for those purposes? Depends on your goals. I have a larger rack but I also have my whole networking stack in it, switch, poe switch, ups, router, nas, etc.

I would consider posting on the unraid forums. There may be someone who has used similar hardware and can give guidance on how they approached the setup. The benefit of unraid is ultimately that the support community is very solid

How do you connect the drives? Looking at specs there’s only one sata port (which I don’t actually see anywhere, but it says it is there, although using it slows the second nvme lane)

USB connected drives in a raid array are not ideal. USB connectivity is not as solid as a direct sata connection and a drive suddenly disappearing from your area, especially parity, is quite a headache

No pci slot so you can’t add an hba for more sata lanes either. You could do one of those nvme to sata things but I’ve heard bad things about the reliability of those.

If it’s free though I def think it’s worth finding a way to make it work. The specs are more than enough for unraid and usually those tiny pcs are pretty power efficient, which is nice. But that’s the issue to work around, connecting the hard drives reliably.

WRT what to put them in it could be anything really. You could get a cheap broken 1 or 2u server case where someone’s pulled the motherboard and powersupply, rig something in there to hold them all. Should be more than enough space for 5 drives and will probably have cages for at least 2-3, maybe all 5 if you get lucky. Might even have hot swap ones. Dunno if this would fit though, that rack looks small and I couldn’t get the specs to load, is it full sized or a tiny one?

Could also see if there’s some kind of 3d print thing. There’s probably a 3d print thing to rack mount that mini pc.

Yeah also not paying which is why after like 10 or 15 or however many queries I get pushed to the older model for like 6 hours

Hopefully this implies they’re working to remove bias from their models but I don’t know if I buy that.

It’s also trained on garbage data so maybe that’s the case. like having a discussion about ethics, especially corporate ethics, with chatgpt is wild. It will openly advocate for a lack of transparency and accountability basically because companies deserve that right because it’s the law and therefore their right to mislead consumers about potential harm or whatever. Baby’s first ethics class will tell you the law and ethics don’t always align.

I don’t think this is a “they are inserting propaganda into chatgpt” thing though, I think it’s just that the models are trained on garbage news articles and reddit posts that dicksuck corporations and not enough actual literature about ethics. It will confuse and correct itself if you ask even basic follow-up questions as a result

ChatGPT is hard to gauge because it depends on what model you get. I’m rate limited at the moment so I get the slightly older model

Do Palestinians deserve to be free ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT The question of whether Palestinians deserve to be free is deeply complex and tied to issues of human rights, justice, and international law. Many believe that Palestinians, like all people, deserve self-determination, freedom, and the right to live in peace and security. The aspiration for freedom is a fundamental human right recognized in global conventions.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its historical and political dimensions, has led to differing perspectives on this issue. Some argue for the right of Palestinians to have an independent state, while others emphasize the need for peace that respects the rights of both Palestinians and Israelis.

Ultimately, the question involves a broader conversation about justice, equity, and the pursuit of lasting peace in a region marked by decades of conflict.

Do Israelis deserve to be free ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT Yes, Israelis, like all people, deserve to be free. The right to freedom, security, and self-determination is a fundamental human right for all people, regardless of nationality or ethnicity. Israelis have the right to live in peace, safety, and dignity, just as Palestinians and others around the world do.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is incredibly complex, and it involves the rights, identities, and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians. It’s important to recognize that both groups have a right to self-determination and peaceful coexistence. Peace and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians are crucial for achieving a future where all people in the region can live without fear or oppression.

Sooooooo maybe something they’re shifting. Or maybe something that is modified based on your specific data set. I’m logged in with a burner account

The exact figures aren’t documented but it’s a pretty massive decline in energy usage (though probably not 97%), enough so that stocks related to power consumption took a pretty notable hit

He has a history that is highly suspect and it’s absolutely shocking he didn’t get blown up during the metoo era

When he had a practice he had a 19 year old patient. He allegedly molested this patient. He denies these claims. What is undeniably true is that he made this patient an intern at his practice

Because of his inappropriate hiring practices he was required by the licensing board to hire another psychologist to sit in on all of his sessions. This rendered his practice no longer financially viable

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/dr-phil-disciplinary-file-isnt-what-radar-online-makes-it-out-to-be/

This article pushes back against some of the more sensationalized reporting of the time this blew up but (imo) it’s somewhat of an issue to do so. The issue being that a licensing board generally requires a substantial burden of proof even now to substantiate claims like sexual molestation of clients, especially so in 1988 Texas. What I’m saying here is that to the licensing board the sexual molestation claim was likely a “he said, she said” moment, where dr Phil steadfastly denied any wrongdoing and there was no evidence other than the woman’s testimony. Given that the board was probably reticent to issue discipline on this matter out of fear that it would result in legal response from dr phil, and somewhat understandably so as the justice system’s burden of proof for sexual assault victims is often quite high. Essentially if they had say, suspended or even stripped his license over this he could have had this action easily reversed and even sued for damages

This is almost certainly why the licensing board took the action they did. They 100% believed that girl. The requirement to have your sessions monitored by another professional is extremely severe and fairly unprecedented. It is their way of saying “we absolutely do not trust you at all, we know you are a scumbag, but legally we do not have the authority to revoke your ability to practice”. Ethics boards will do things like this: now you, at your expense, have to pay another professional to make sure you don’t groom any more women. And if you try to do so we will have testimony that you did. But most likely you will recognize that we don’t want you around anymore and give up (which he did, for a bit. He even let his license lapse. He is not licensed, to be clear. He has not been in some time). When you do his show you sign a contract saying you are receiving “advice” from some guy and not psychotherapy from a psychologist. I bet they do not make this clear to guests because they probably aren’t big on informed consent.

He found a loophole. Doctor is not a protected title. “Psychologist”, “professional counselor”, “lawyer”, “surgeon”, etc are legally protected titles. If you practice under these titles without the associated licensure and credentials you can go to jail. But if you’ve earned your doctorate and say “I have years of experience” you can do whatever. If Oprah props you up to a national stage that’s fine too, even if your style of “therapy” is not really therapy at all but really just confrontation and bullying. Also they obviously leave out he had to close his practice in disgrace.

That said, he was accused of changing in front of the girl often. And she was quoted as saying:

“He’d be running his hand up and down the inside of my thigh all the way up to my panties. He’d put his hands between my legs. He’d reach in my blouse and touch my breasts. He pulled my breasts out of my bra and kissed them.”

So yeah, real piece of shit and not just like “oh he rubbed her shoulders and made her uncomfortable”, though even that would be fucked up and gross. He genuinely sexually assaulted this girl

This is like, day 1 ethics for a therapist. Dual relationships. Clients are clients are clients. You don’t hang out with them, you don’t go to their birthday parties, you don’t friend them on social media, you certainly don’t hire them for a fucking job in your practice. This is in part so you can try to remain impartial as a clinician but mostly to protect clients as there is an inherent power imbalance in this relationship that can easily be taken advantage of (as seen here, plus he was like 38 when all this happened to the 19 year old girl so that power dynamic too)

scumbag

This is basically my answer. I would wish my NAS was more full. I already have a pretty (imo) decent homelab with a lot of shit on it but in a “post internet” situation it would get old after a few months or maybe years depending on how fast I watched/read/listened

So tv/movies/music/books/comics and manga. Just all the media