I love the corruption of the saying to give us the name. Reminds me of “Goodbye” being a corruption of “God be with ye”.

Ultra Violette’s Lean Screen SPF 50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen, a facial product that Rach says she used exclusively, was the “most significant failure” identified. It returned a result of SPF 4, something that shocked Choice so much it commissioned a second test that produced a similar reading.

Other products that did not meet their SPF claims included those from Neutrogena, Banana Boat, Bondi Sands and the Cancer Council - but they all rejected Choice’s findings and said their own independent testing showed their sunscreens worked as advertised.

An investigation by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation found that a single US-based laboratory had certified at least half of the products that had failed Choice’s testing, and that this facility routinely recorded high test results.

Everyone’s skin responds differently to the product, she adds, and it’s one that is almost always being stress-tested - by sweat, water, or makeup.

It is very difficult to rate effectively for the same reasons. Historically, it has been done by spreading the sunscreen on 10 people at the same thickness, then timing how long it takes for their skin to start burning both with and without the product applied.

While there are clear guidelines as to what you are looking for, Dr Wong says there is still a lot of variability. That is down to skin texture or tone, or even the colour of the walls, and “different labs get different results”.

But she says results are also quite easy to fake, pointing to a 2019 probe by US authorities into a sunscreen testing laboratory which resulted in the owner being jailed for fraud.

Many sunscreen brands from all over the world use the same manufacturers and testing labs - and so this issue is unlikely to be isolated to Australia, she adds.

One day, I hope people can have a nuanced discussion of the porn industry. Sentiments like this are true (emphasis mine):

Kytsya frequently promotes the advantages of going into the adult content creation industry, promising TikTok followers that it can prove a lucrative career choice. “The thing about my job is if you go full out you can make enough money to start your own thing whether that’s buying houses or doing Airbnbs and investing,” she says.

And she properly hedges with:

She also offers practical advice to followers who are considering working in this world, encouraging them to make sure they get tested regularly for sexually transmitted infections. She acknowledges that there are “dangers” involved in the work, and recommends that girls “who have just turned 18” should not rush into the adult industry. “Take time to think about it before you do it.”

More than taking time, the industry needs protection against exploration. Hell, success often means becoming the exploiter. You may be kinder and more empathic doing so, but that’s not garunteed.

Most young women aren’t going to make the money she made and hard work may not be enough. Unionization is unlikely happen industry wide since there’s a so many new women showing up all the time.

Finally, it’s important to see that many women in the sex work industry are being traffic. Smart legislation and enforcement can and should be used.

facts are always backed by numbers*

9/10 bolded statements are true.

* this fact isn’t backed by numbers

It looks like you can self host Navidrome.

How is this article about the Lebanese community gaining “white” status in the Jim Crow south relevant in order to become a naturalized citizen relevant to our discussion.

It is infinitely infuriating when some middling engagement with the material presents a loose keyword match of the topic at hand masquerading it as something relevant worthy of a “gotcha ya” moment. Citing this article in this context is a waste of everyone’s time when the whole of your argument is “Lebanese people are white”. It didn’t matter to to racists then and it doesn’t now.

Nou’la had immigrated with his wife Fannie from Zahleh to Valdosta, Georgia around 1906. They decided to move to Lake City, Florida in 1926 after N’oula was flogged by the local KKK chapter, and after several run-ins with the law in Valdosta. Unfortunately for the family, problems with the law persisted in Lake City, and came to a head when the Sheriff and his deputies shot Fannie to death over an altercation at the Lebanese couple’s store. They then placed N’oula in jail where later that night a mob dragged him out and killed him.

This happened in 1929. They were declared “free white men” in 1913.

Afeef Nessouli

“I’m a Lebanese-American Muslim who is gay.

“From that, I have a lot of experience going to Lebanon and experiencing war. “In 1998, I was there when one of the sonic booms was above the sports stadium.

“I remember that just because it was so traumatising as a child to hear bombs, even though in 2006 there were way more experiences and it was way more horrifying, for some reason, the 1998 experience when I was 11 was really, really traumatising.

“I think these experiences set me up for always really being interested in the Middle East as just a place of complexity and competing interests, narratives that feel different than my experiences.”

Source

Somehow you made this about you and how you’re a better person than them. Good job.

The dad-of-four told MailOnline: “I’m ripped to pieces, one of my babies is gone. I had four children and now I have three.”

deleted by creator

That’s how it was designed. That’s how everyone uses it.

The legitimacy of the ROC’s claim hinges on Taiwan being part of China. The ROC was the legitimate governing body of China from 1912 to 1949.The ROC took control of Taiwan from Japan at the end of WW2. After losing the civil war, they retreat to the only place they continued to govern, the island of Taiwan.

My group recently switched to Matrix and so this would be a tough sell, but it seems interesting. I haven’t been a fan of Matrix and miss the ease of UI in discord, but was happy to leave with it’s direction. How would you sell it with a small group that has small, but mounting usability issues with Matrix?

I’m going to stick with the meat of your point. To summarize,

1. Some materialist views create a black box in which consciousness is a passive activity
   brain -> black box -> mind
2. CPMs extract consciousness from the black box
3. Consciousness plays a function role by providing feedback
   brain -> black box -> CPM-> consciousness -> black box -> mind

But to go further, stimuli -> brain -> black box -> CPM-> consciousness update CPM -> black box -> mind -> response to stimuli

The CPM as far as I can tell is the following:
representation of stimuli -> model (of the world with a modeled self) -> consciousness making predictions (of how the world changes if the self acts upon it) -> updating model -> updated prediction -> suspected desired result

I feel like I’ve mis-represented something of your position with the self. I think you’re saying that the self is the prediction maker. And that free will exists in the making of predictions. But presentation of the CPM places the self in the model. Furthermore, I think you’re saying that consciousness is a process of the brain and I think it’s of the mind. Can you remedy my representation of your position?

Quickly reading the review, I went to see if they posited role for the mind. I was disappointed to see that they, not only ignored it (unsurprising), but collapsed functions normally attributed to the mind to the brain. Ascribing predictions, fantasies, and hypotheses to the brain or calling it a statistical organ sidesteps the hard problem and collapses it into a physicalist view. They don’t posit a mind-body relationship, they speak about body and never acknowledge the mind. I find this frustrating.

Sorry for the long delay. I think engaging with the material and what you wrote requires some reflection time and, unfortunately, my time for that is limited these days. And so while I was hoping to offer a more robust response after having read the links you provided, I think engagement was more necessary to keep the conversation fresh even if I’ve only had a glance at the material.

The brain in the dish study seems to be interesting and raised new questions for me. “What is a brain?” comes to mind. For me, I have a novice level understanding of the structures of the brain and the role in neurotransmitters, hormones, neuron structures, etc. But I’ve never really examined what a brain is and how it is something more than or other than it’s component parts and their operations.

Some other questions would be:

• What is the relationship between brain and mind?
• What do we mean by mind? Do all brains create a mind?
• Or, in context of this conversation, do all brains have a CPM?
• Does adaptive environmental behavior by species without a brain indicate a CPM?

So those are some of the initial thoughts I had and would read the paper to see if the authors are even raising that question in their paper.

But more fundamentally, we still have to examine the mind-body problem. Recontextualizing it to a CPM, “what is the relationship between a CPM and either the brain or the mind?” I am unclear if the CPM is a mental or physical phenomena. There seems to be a certainty that the CPM is part of the brain, but the entirety of it’s output is non-physical. I imagine that we assume a narrative where the brain in the dish is creating a CPM because it demonstrates learning, adaptive behavior based upon external stimuli.

Ultimately, I bring it back to a framing question. Why choose weak emergence prematurely? It limits our investigation and imagination.

Well… that’s my set of issues. I’ll try to find time to read those articles in the next few days!

Cheers!

Is the emergent phenomena, consciousness, weak or strong? I think the former, which I think you support, posits a panpsychism and the latter is indistinguishable from magic.

I’m a little confused about the relationship between the causal prediction machine (CPM) and the self. to reiterate, the brain has a causal prediction engine. It’s inputs are immediate sensory experience. I assume the causal prediction engines’ output is predictions. These predictions are limited to the what the next sensory stimuli might be in response to the recent sensory input. These predictions lead to choices. Or maybe the same as choices.

So these outputs are experienced. And that experience of making predictions is me. Am I the one experiencing the predictions as well?

So this sentence confuses me: “This prediction machine is me making predictions and choices.” Am I making the predictions or is it the CPM?

The queue can be sorted by date. If you hit date again it reverse the order.

Hasok Chang, Professor of History and Philosophy of Science at Cambridge University, wrote a wonderful book Is Water H2O? In it he traces the historical and philosophical twists and turns to get from water to H2O. Along the way, he reckons with and treats seriously competing theories other than what emerged as the winner.

In the end, he doesn’t disagree with the role of H2O in water. Rather, he shows how the process of scientific theory making is benefited from a pluralistic view through s repetitive process of challenge and theory adjustment.

I mainly made the comment because we shouldn’t always assume what we were shown in high school captures the deeper process of insight creation.

He deals with the weekly emergent qualities like surface tension. We might be able to say that surface tension is one property of wetness even.

But I also think that water is one of the few phenomena that seems to actually have a strongly emergent qualities. Which is to say, there’s qualities that are in water that are not explainable by the properties of its component parts.

Ultimately, one of Chang’s goals it to contextualize and not reduce these scientific concepts for greater insights.

To be more accurate, I don’t think it’s wrong to say that water is more than just H2O. To get gestalt, we should say water is something other than the sum of its parts, H2O.

H2O is not water

Textorcist

Get gud

A little box you can put your app.

If the app does bad, it doesn’t sink your ship. Just throw the box over board and repackage the app.

I’m not sure most people need it, but it could be fun to use a new app inside a container. Also makes updating that needs a restarting without shutting down your other services.