General > General Technical Chat

'Master' and 'slave': Tech terms face scrutiny amid anti-racism efforts

<< < (91/352) > >>

vodka:

--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 16, 2020, 04:10:21 pm --- so this money doesn't even help paying their imprisonment, or if it does, it's probably negligible.

--- End quote ---

There are a solution, It is turns the inmates in "Universal Donors". I have heard tht they pay well.

Nominal Animal:
Prison system is one of those where letting emotions and initial reactions and demands for retribution rule, leads to horrific results.

(I mean, if you treat all criminals like utter shit, no matter what the crime, what goes out of the other end will be dangerous as all hell.  People who feel they've been victimized may feel better for a few minutes or a day, but everyone else in the society will suffer.)

No, I am not going to tout how exemplary the Scandinavian and Finnish prisons are, because they aren't.

It looks like the "open prison" model works well for those who only need a bit of help (as in, reduces recidivism/further criminal activity, and a larger fraction returns as a contributing member of law-abiding society).  On the other hand, tribalization (as in religious and other gangs) is something Nordics seem to have a great struggle with.

In many ways police and prison reform reminds me of the enforced speech discussion: People are demanding specific action, without knowing whether that action will help or hinder.

These are not problems that can be solved with an emotional approach: the systems are too large and complex for naturally evolved human instincts/initial reactions to be applicable.  Fortunately, we're tool users, and here, rational scientific analysis provides the only tool (and statistical metrics) with which we can reliably compare different solutions.  For police and prisons and justice system in general, we'll want to compare different systems, and continuously make small changes, in an effort to find what works better and what does not work, discussing the results with those trying out other things.

The people who vehemently oppose this scientific approach are exactly those who make demands based on their emotional needs.  Those people, we need to teach how to manage their own emotions instead, and stop shitting all over other people and ruining their lives too. "Offended by proxy" is one thing we should eliminate and ridicule hard, as soon as it raises its ugly head.

The reason "the left" opposes this kind of an approach in principle, is that using critical theory or intersectionalism this makes no sense at all, because you cannot define the groups or relations between groups using this system.  When the core idea is to work at the levels of individuals, they get confused, because you cannot predefine the group(s) those people belong to beforehand; they see no way to define the rules in their own terms, and only see a looming chaos.  "The left" is, for good or bad, completely unable to fathom a system based on individuals and not groups.
It is like trying to explain to a lifelong blind person how and why reflectors work at night time, but not so well during the day.

tooki:

--- Quote from: Cerebus on June 16, 2020, 02:28:21 pm ---
--- Quote from: tooki on June 16, 2020, 12:42:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: tom66 on June 16, 2020, 10:52:50 am ---I'd like to see social media peeps complain about slavery when they use an Apple iPhone, whose supply chain almost certainly involves some form of modern slavery, given China's treatment of the Uyghur Muslims.

I think modern day slavery is more important than something that happened 100 years ago and therefore the terms master/slave, are just so inconsequential it makes me wonder whether people's priorities are centred on improving the real world or just feeling good about making a change.

--- End quote ---
At least Apple makes a sincere, concerted effort to eliminate any kind of slavery (as well as child labor and various other abuses, plus environmental friendliness) from its supply chain, which is more than can be said for the vast majority of companies.

--- End quote ---

There's been evidence that they are not yet fully successful, but yes they do seen to have been making a genuine effort to do the right thing. Do you know who isn't? A lot of US corporations including McDonalds, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics and many others all use prison labour which, being paid a princely 23 cents an hour isn't strictly technically slavery but once you examine all the other conditions of it, and the coercion applied to make people take these 'jobs' it is slavery in all but name. When you further consider the massive racial imbalances in the prison population then it takes on a whole new colour (pun intended). Anyone who has any doubt about the veracity of this, google "modern slavery US prisons".

--- End quote ---
Oh, I don’t think anyone is claiming Apple’s supplier compliance is perfect. (Including Apple, which publishes violation statistics in its annual supplier compliance report.) But I do believe they try very, very hard.

As for prison labor: I am 100% in agreement with you. It’s a disgrace. (Just one of many reasons I think law enforcement in USA needs radical reform.)

tooki:

--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 16, 2020, 06:32:43 pm ---Prison system is one of those where letting emotions and initial reactions and demands for retribution rule, leads to horrific results.

(I mean, if you treat all criminals like utter shit, no matter what the crime, what goes out of the other end will be dangerous as all hell.  People who feel they've been victimized may feel better for a few minutes or a day, but everyone else in the society will suffer.)

No, I am not going to tout how exemplary the Scandinavian and Finnish prisons are, because they aren't.

It looks like the "open prison" model works well for those who only need a bit of help (as in, reduces recidivism/further criminal activity, and a larger fraction returns as a contributing member of law-abiding society).  On the other hand, tribalization (as in religious and other gangs) is something Nordics seem to have a great struggle with.

In many ways police and prison reform reminds me of the enforced speech discussion: People are demanding specific action, without knowing whether that action will help or hinder.

These are not problems that can be solved with an emotional approach: the systems are too large and complex for naturally evolved human instincts/initial reactions to be applicable.  Fortunately, we're tool users, and here, rational scientific analysis provides the only tool (and statistical metrics) with which we can reliably compare different solutions.  For police and prisons and justice system in general, we'll want to compare different systems, and continuously make small changes, in an effort to find what works better and what does not work, discussing the results with those trying out other things.

The people who vehemently oppose this scientific approach are exactly those who make demands based on their emotional needs.  Those people, we need to teach how to manage their own emotions instead, and stop shitting all over other people and ruining their lives too. "Offended by proxy" is one thing we should eliminate and ridicule hard, as soon as it raises its ugly head.

The reason "the left" opposes this kind of an approach in principle, is that using critical theory or intersectionalism this makes no sense at all, because you cannot define the groups or relations between groups using this system.  When the core idea is to work at the levels of individuals, they get confused, because you cannot predefine the group(s) those people belong to beforehand; they see no way to define the rules in their own terms, and only see a looming chaos.  "The left" is, for good or bad, completely unable to fathom a system based on individuals and not groups.
It is like trying to explain to a lifelong blind person how and why reflectors work at night time, but not so well during the day.

--- End quote ---
The left doesn’t oppose data. It merely understands that numbers don’t tell the whole story, which shouldn’t be news to anyone who knows even the tiniest bit about statistics.

The left understands that individuals are NEVER independent. All of us live within societies, and thus benefit from them, but also owe some responsibility toward them. The right lives under the illusion that societal support doesn’t exist, as though opportunities arose in total isolation, which they don’t.

DimitriP:

--- Quote ---The left understands that individuals are NEVER independent. All of us live within societies, and thus benefit from them, but also owe some responsibility toward them. The right lives under the illusion that societal support doesn’t exist, as though opportunities arose in total isolation, which they don’t.
--- End quote ---

Considering everyting has a cost, everyone ows.
Some, pay for it themselves, other have it paid for them.

Or so it seems.
If you haven't wittnessed the lady at the market paying for groceris with an EBT (aka food stamps), the booze with cash ,  while talking on the late model i-phone and putting the groceries in a late model shiny Mercedes its hard to explain.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod