Saturday, 9 December 2023

From this week’s news on: society generally, and broader issues

Note: in my “from the news” posts, quotes are shown italicised and blue, my comments are in a different shade of blue, and “good items are shown in green. I have loosely grouped the posts where such seemed reasonable, but that is subjective (i.e., my opinion - others are free to disagree), and challenging, as some posts belong in multiple groups.

From this weeks news on society generally, and broader issues (note: I may continue to add links for a few days, possibly up to a week, after these are published):



  • “We've Got The Mental Health Crisis All Wrong”   https://www.okdoomer.io/weve-got-mental-health-all-wrong/   “Most people don't really know what the phrase "mental health" even means. They think they do. They think it boils down to smiling around everyone and keeping your negative thoughts to yourself. ...   Psychologists have a name for that.   It's called surface acting.   Our jobs place enormous demands on us to fake attitudes and emotions that align with social norms, no matter what we're actually feeling on the inside. It's bad for everyone. The lower your place in the hierarchy, the worse it gets.”   I agree whole heartedly with this article - some of my personal experience of this and the consequences can be found at https://gnwmythr.blogspot.com/p/recovering-from-corporate-life.html  
  • “Early findings from the world’s largest UBI study”   https://www.givedirectly.org/2023-ubi-results/   The two year results included:   “a monthly universal basic income (UBI) empowered recipients and did not create idleness (that has to be a classic US/neoliberal way of thinking)   ...   both a large lump sum and a long-term UBI proved highly effective   ...   a short-term UBI was the least impactful of the designs but still effective   ...   governments should consider changing how they deliver cash aid.”    The summary includes insightful explanations, and the article includes a reasonable overview of what was done. My only criticism of this work is that it doesn’t include assessment of the value of long term low amounts - such as enabling children to pay for report cards (attending the school may be free, but to get a report card may be a cost that poorer people cannot afford, thus limiting future employment opportunities);  

  • “Sexual orientation and earnings appear to be linked – but patterns differ for NZ men and women”   https://theconversation.com/sexual-orientation-and-earnings-appear-to-be-linked-but-patterns-differ-for-nz-men-and-women-218507   “Most studies from overseas show varying income patterns, with gay men generally earning less than heterosexual men, and lesbian women paid more than heterosexual women”   The article points out some shortcomings with data. My opinion is that this shows - preliminarily - the need for less discrimination, including assumptions about stereotypes, against a wide of people - including LGBTQIASB+ people and ciswomen  
  • “Your first interview at Bunnings may be with an AI chatbot”   https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/life/tech/2023/12/04/bunnings-ai-chatbot   “Dr Dana Mckay, senior lecturer in Innovative Interactive Technologies at RMIT University, told The New Daily that the problem with using AI models is that people believe computers aren’t biased like people.   “There is a lack of understanding about the underlying data sets that populate these AI models,” she said.   “People believe there is no bias because the computer made the decision.””   This has LONG been a concern with machine learning - aka AI, just as it has also been the basis of concerns with claims of merit-based decision making. The more recent AI, however, has been given an unregulated power that nothing else has had, and there have been multiple reports of concerns (including in my previous news summations)   
  • Nobody reads T&Cs – but the High Court’s Ruby Princess decision shows consumer law may protect us anyway”   https://theconversation.com/nobody-reads-tandcs-but-the-high-courts-ruby-princess-decision-shows-consumer-law-may-protect-us-anyway-219229   “... the High Court unanimously ruled in favour of the passengers. In so doing, it put companies doing business in Australia on notice that Australia’s consumer protection laws apply both inside and outside the country’s borders”   I beg to differ on one point: Im one of those PITAs who does read the Ts & Cs - and I will continue to do so, as I dont want to have to fight cases all the way up to the High Court to get my rights, but this decision will likely ultimately make it far less like that anyone else has to - and it is good for business to get a bit of a wake up call on such issues from time to time  

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

  • this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.