We share good ideas and conversation here.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
rd95's profile

I don't even know what buttons I pushed to get here.

following: 37
followed tags: 74
followed domains: 2
badges given: 42 of 44
member for: 806 days
style: office

comments 79
rd95  ·  link  ·  parent  ·  post: Pubski: August 23, 2017

Last week's Pubski threw the whole solar system through a hole in the time/space continuum. Monday's solar eclipse was an astronomical anomaly directly related to the mis-timed Pubski post. The crazy thing is, for you, it might be Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017. For me though? I'm sitting here, staring at my computer, on Wednesday, August 22nd, 2018 and I have no idea what happened to my whole year. Though from the looks of things, not much has changed during that time.

Fight back. Force him to listen to Trip Hop 24/7.

I tried singing "Baby Beluga" to Dala yesterday. She looked at me like I'm an idiot. Apparently, her parents opted out of raising her on children's artists and instead started her at a young age with a steady diet of AC/DC, Led Zepplin, and Black Sabbath. No wonder she's cooler than me . . .

I'm very happy I discovered Tyler Childers. He's great.

Oh. Also, there's a huge list of things your dog should never eat. If you haven't looked them up yet, Google them. Xylitol, grapes, and onions were all a surprise to me.

That is a beautiful dog. Beautiful. I mean it. You got yourself a damn good looking dog.

Thing number one. A tired dog is a good dog. Keep your dog well exercised and mentally stimulated and he'll be much easier to handle.

Thing number two. See what you can do about obedience lessons. With your dog's history, I'd actually recommend seeing if you can hire someone to come to your place for private lessons. Your dog has a past with other dogs that means bringing it in proximity with other dogs is a bit of a risk. Especially this early in the game, having him around other dogs is very much ill advised.

Thing number three. Keep up with the leash training and try to socialize but be super careful about it and do it in a safe, controlled environment. Hopefully it all works out well for you, but if it does, keep in mind, you can control your dog, but you can never control your dog. It is an animal with a mind of its own and no matter how obedient it is, there's always a risk that it will misbehave on a whim. For example, let's say you had your dog for five plus years and all this time it's never stolen food off the counter when your back's been turned. Then one day, when you and your buddies had friends over for potluck, it got into food and you're all like "Wow. I'm surprised he did that. He's never done that before!" Don't be surprised. He's a dog. He's gonna do dog things, including running away, barking, rolling in dead shit, on and on. Part of dog ownership is risk mitigation and knowing that dogs are as unpredictable as they are predictable and it's your job to predict and prevent unpredictable behavior. In the case of your dog, this especially includes aggressive behavior. He's already had one strike and a second strike would be tragic.

Thing number four. Seriously. That's a good. looking. dog. I'm jealous as to how handsome your dog is.

Thing five. We have a dog that is randomly dog aggressive. When I say randomly, I mean we can take her for a walk at the park and she's perfectly fine with 90% of the dogs she passes and one day she's completely fine passing up a dog and the next time we go, she'll bark, snarl, and raise her hackles at the exact same dog. In those circumstances, we control her, apologize profusely for her behavior, and immediately remove her from the zone of conflict. Dogs are weird, they have their own signals to each other, and by the time they're 20 feet within another dog they've both already made up their minds as to whether or not they'll want to get along. We use this leash with a sturdy chest harness that for some reason I can't find online any more. See that second loop? That's for you to grab with your other hand whenever you need to control your dog.

Thing six. If you need to avoid taking your dog out in public because it just can't handle other people/dogs/kids, whatever, that's fine and there's no shame in it. When you do need to take your dog out in public, say, to go to the vet, and you've decided that you need a muzzle for your dog (and I'm not saying you do, we're just talking hypotheical here) there's no shame in that. It's for other people's protection, you're protection, and most importantly his protection. You might get some funny looks, don't fucking worry about it. You're doing the right thing. Just know, if you do need a muzzle, your dog is gonna feel EXTREMELY vulnerable and you need to modify your behavior to help mitigate that.

Thing seven. You've taken a dog that has had a trouble past, given it a third chance at life, and you're ready to celebrate everything that is amazing and beautiful about it. Pet your dog. Rub its belly. Kiss its forehead and tell it how much you love it. That picture, right there, is of a dog with good, friendly eyes. It deserves every ounce of love you can give it. Love the shit out of that dog. If everything goes right, shit's gonna be AWESOME.

Thing eight. Experiment the fuck out of toys with your dog. See which ones he likes, see which ones he dislikes, and try new things from time to time. Sometimes dogs will like only one or two kinds of toys, sometimes all of the sudden they like completely new things.

Thing nine. This is my best advice (and I'm sorry for focusing on the negative, I'm just trying to give some tips to help you with your underlying concerns). My best advice might not actually be the best advice. Consult your vet. Consult dog trainers. Maybe even pop over to reddit and make a duplicate post for this over in r/dogs. I've gotten good advice from all three places over the course of me owning my giant ball of fun.

Thing ten. Seriously. I can't get over how good looking of a dog you have. Good pick.

Edit: someguyfromcanada, you've worked with rescue dogs before, right? If so, your input would be much appreciated.

I heard someone talking on the radio yesterday that while what's going on at the moment makes sense, this whole scenario illustrates really well how much control tech companies actually have. Everything from companies like Visa, Paypal, and Amazon stopping transactions from going to certain websites to GoDaddy revoking services, to Facebook scrubbing hate speech to Google removing apps shows that it's very easy for companies to, in a way, scrub groups out. When, how, and why they do it or might be tempted to do it are all things worth pausing to consider.

Edit: Naturally, I don't have any answers.

Oh yeah. Totally agree. Sometimes with story telling, there's a lot of truth to the maxim "Less is more."

I think though, that in this one, the author is kind of cherry picking things he wants to point out (and that's totally okay) and injecting his own personal bias into things (which is also, totally okay). I think he just started to scratch the surface area of the subjects in his piece and I bet that if he was willing to go deeper with his analysis, there might be some pretty insightful things to be found.

I think if I had the time, I'd try to watch both films in the same week and see how I feel about each one, positive and negative. Honestly though? It takes a lot of effort for me to watch sci-fi and there's just something about it that really keeps me from enjoying about 90% of it and I'm not gonna put myself or Hubski through the pains of that experiment. If I was ambitious, I'd do a breakdown on The Seven Samurai and both Magnificent Seven films, but shit, that's like comparing a gem to a lump of wood and an overly violent bowel movement.

Eh. I feel like the author wasn't being completely fair about the visuals. He admitted himself that A) the live action film was based off of the comic and not the cartoon and B) there are pluses and minuses to both mediums. At the same time, there's a huge gap of time between when the two films were created, so medium gaps aside, there have been changes in creators' preferences for visual styles and techniques for conveying information visually.

I also find it a bit interesting that in one segment the author also readily admitted that the live action movie was trying to squeeze two stories in one and then in another segment, complains about how the live action movie had to trim down some scenes.

Now, I haven't seen the live action movie, only saw the cartoon once (and don't remember much of it), and chances are the live action movie is both objectively and subjectively a poorer product. That said, this video does a relatively decent job in showing how sometimes making compromises or changing things up can completely change the feel and quality of the film being produced.

As an aside, I like these kinds of videos johnnyFive, if from time to time you post one that catches your eye, I'd love to see it and hear your thoughts.

I'd like to point out that you didn't actually refute any of my points that gig work, for low skilled workers, is actually a step down. I'm not saying that to be a dick, but I would like to say that as of right now, we're having a conversation about the future employment of people in my socio-economic class, so I'm a bit emotionally invested here.

So, on to your new points.

    We have a current pool of low skill, low paying jobs. That pool is disappearing. That does not mean that there will not be other jobs of that type that will open up.

There is also no garuntee there will be new jobs opening up and since there are articles out there discussing how automation is going to erode jobs in white collar industries such as law, banking, health, and government (and that that's already happening, see internet banking and ATMS), there will still be even less jobs down the road. That's not even counting the fact that automation has already eroded the number of well paying, full time jobs in retail and warehouse work. Suffice to say, my confidence level in your theory couldn't be lower.

    Shit, any of those people could go pick the fruit that is rotting in farmer's fields across the US right now, because the migrant workers have been chased away. Now, that type of work isn't for everybody, but some people will do it.

Some people will do it. Those people are desperate, know the work is extremely temporary, is back breaking, and grueling. Let me ask you an honest question. Which would you rather have? A part time job, in an air conditioned building, where you're paid $9 an hour to work all year round scanning boxes and talking to customers feeling relatively secure in knowing that job is gonna be there one week after another with bosses and a company you're familiar with and can somewhat trust or a temporary two week, immediate hire job, in the grueling heat, with people you don't know or trust (that includes whether or not they'll pay you fairly or screw you) where after you're finished you're left where you started, jobless. There's a reason the second kind of jobs don't have a lot of takers, and it's not about work ethic or gumption.

    We need to preserve shitty jobs, because there are some people who need something to do that doesn't take any skill or mental capacity.

First of all. They're not shitty jobs. They're jobs that are viewed as shitty because people with college educations and six figure incomes feel better about looking down on as many people as they can. To a lot of people, they're just jobs, and while many hope for better and want more, many are quite content with what they got.

    Now are you going to champion legislation that prevents 7-11 from automating the cashier job? Or gas station attendants? Or grocery store clerks? Is your legislation going to penalize Amazon's new grocery store here in Seattle that has no employees? The penalties have to exceed the additional profits Amazon is making from not having to pay $15/hr plus bennies to cashiers.

Who said those people have to be tenured? Your theoretical legislation just says the jobs can't be automated. People can still get fired for being irresponsible and there will still be people lining up to take those spots. That said, some people argue any corporate fine is just a tax under a different name. Sometimes I think that statement is pretty compelling.

    Now the employees filling these jobs basically have tenure. They don't have to perform at even the most basic level, because their job is federally protected. Now the Amazon grocery store (and all others, as well) become the worst customer experience ever, full of employees who don't give a shit, and don't have to.

Dude. Every day there's statements on the internet that say low wage employees don't give a shit. How much worse could it get? Right? Besides. You're wrong. Retail, food, and warehouse employment is like employment anywhere else and there's a teamwork dynamic involved and there's pressure from above to perform. There are numbers to hit from turn around times to sales goals to customer satisfaction metrics. Companies still have to compete with each other, so they're going to implement programs to keep employees compliant.

    The reason why Walmart can pay $6.25/hour is because that employee is being supported by federal programs (welfare, food stamps, medicaid, etc) to the tune of $8.75/hr.

    If Walmart doesn't pay the living wage of (call it) $15/hour, someone else IS paying for it.

Except A) just earlier this year Wal-Mart committed to increasing wages for all their employees, part time and full time alike, and B) companies are willing to pay what they're able to get away with. In regards to part B, don't you think a big culprit here is the erosion of the values of collective bargaining (and this is coming from a guy who's actually quite wary of unions) and the government itself not ensuring that the minimum wage is a livable wage? Then, and I know I've said this before, but can you believe the way that Obamacare is implemented that it actually creates an incentive for companies to have LESS full time employees? Chances are, there's tons of legislations and regulations out there that serve as a double edge sword and I'm willing to bet my left shoe that more often than not, it's people on the bottom rungs of society that get cut deepest because really, lets face it, they're not respected.

    If Walmart doesn't pay the living wage of (call it) $15/hour, someone else IS paying for it.

Yeah. I mean, sure. I'd like Walmart to carry the whole ball, but if it's between them paying part of it or tax payers paying all of it . . .

    And I'm OK with supporting those who need help. I like the social safety net, and wish it was more comprehensive. (UBI)

DUDE! People are fucking fighting hard against universal health care and you think something like UBI is realistic? Seriously. I know we both don't live in the same America, but come on.

    It sucks that low-wage jobs are going away. I agree. But that pressure on the market, and that availability of low-skilled labor will generate other market opportunities that we can't imagine right now. Any time there is a surplus of something, the system will find a way to make money from that surplus. It always happens. We need to let it happen, and we need to ensure these people have a working social safety net to protect them from the down times, that isn't just a corporate giveaway.

There is zero garuntee that there are magical new jobs around the corner. And if they're gig jobs like you're proposing, once again, it's a step down. Honestly? It's all about supply and demand. If there's a large supply of workers and a low supply of jobs, workers will be worth much less, jobs will be worth much more, society is gonna put the hurt on a lot of people.

To put it another way, aluminum used to be more valuable than gold until someone found a way to quickly, easily, and cheaply process it. Now we use it to wrap our leftover hotdogs in.

posts and shares 33/23