I found myself a copy of Nineteen Eighty-Four printed by Harcourt, Brace and Company for $20. It didn’t have its dust jacket, but everything else about the book seemed quite fine. There isn’t really much on the inside indicating specifics, but everything I found about it online would suggest that it’s the first US hardcover edition from 1949. It has to be the oldest book in my collection so far and my favorite from a publishing standpoint.

Almost makes me think that we have a fighting chance to make tags on Lemmy work. Part of me would want to see tags get some unique formatting like post flairs, but even just inline tags would be a leg-up.

Or maybe both in-line and post tags. Neat stuff to daydream 🤔.

That’s wild to imagine! Any recollection of how high up those ceilings might have been? The gyms I remember in the US had ceilings that were something like 2 or 3 stories high, if I had to guess. That strikes me as quite the height to jump for a fitness test. Just for the height factor alone I can’t picture myself having the guts back then to do it. Dunno if I’d even have 'em now 😨.

No, not really. Graduated from high school in California in 2017. Both my middle and high school, however, had the equipment and stations on hand. It feels relevant to mention we also had what looked like climbing pegboard stations: boards on a wall that’d go something like 6 – 10 ft., 1.8 – 3m high that someone would climb with pegs. We didn’t use those, either.

There might’ve been one or a few times that my freshman PE teacher had us climb or swing on a rope as part of a circuit? He had the good graces, at least, to give the rope foot and hand knots to work with. That was definitely an exception, however, and wasn’t part of anything mandated by the district nor the state. Pretty wild, though. I kinda wish my schools did more to push that. I sure wasn’t the athletic type, but my arm strength could’ve benefitted from it.

What do you mean by that? 🤔

My take on it is that English doesn’t have enough variety in gendered words, whether that means binary, non-binary, or neutral options. In which case…yeah, come to mention it, you might be onto a perspective I didn’t think of.

People ought to be have range in how they express themselves, and I’d suppose there isn’t enough. I had been in favor of increasing the range and popularity of neutral and non-binary terms for a while now. I still am, but I don’t think that has to be mutually exclusive with increasing the range of gendered options, either. Perhaps part of resolving gendering issues in language isn’t just providing more neutral options, but more gendered options. If someone wishes to identify with masculine or feminine labeling, I think they ought to be able to.

Or maybe another lens to this is that there are “gender neutral” terms that, through context and history, have come to carry a sort of implicit gendering to them. I’m not sure if that’s a challenge in linguistics or a challenge in how some people may think.

All an interesting way to frame this kind of thing that I hadn’t considered before. If you have your own details to this you’d like to mention, I’m sure it’d be insightful to read. My language experience outside of English only extends to Spanish and some beginning bits of Dutch, and I’m in dire need of brushing up on both 🫠.

Bikes! I’m thinking about getting a new bike in the next several months, and a step-through bike seems to have some features in practicality that I value compared to a step-over bike. Not Just Bikes, ironically, has a pretty good video talking about Dutch step-through bikes that introduced me to the concept and advantages of a step-through. It might be on topic to mention that Not Just Bikes gives mention to one of the Dutch names for this kind of bike: “omafiets”, or Grandma Bicycle.

I’d suppose it’s getting better, but I still encounter a fair chunk of people who see a step-over bike as a men’s bike and a step-through as a women’s bike. And I’ll think C’mon, that’s a fair chunk of potential storage space you could have over the rear wheel if you put a rack on top. I’ve tried making it work before with my step-over bike, but in my experience, that space becomes much less meaningful when you have to swing a leg over and end up knocking your shin on something as you get on.

I’d love to see bikes just sold by their step type more often. Give all of them a wide color palette, keep the labeling at Step-Over or Step-Through, and let people ride what they wanna ride. I’m making progress with changing minds, but it’s taking a fair chunk of time to reach Pops at least, bless his heart 😒.

Not Just Bikes gave an iconic point: step-over/men’s bikes are the only kind you can hit your nuts on.

Edit: Proofreading: “one of the names,” not the name.

Yes 😉.

I’d say “whichever one has the more chunky/varied texture,” which I’m pretty sure puts me in the Jam Camp, but my local groceries never seem to be consistent with whether that should be called a jelly or a jam. I’ll take whatever’s put in front of me, but I personally enjoy having some texture variety in there with the seeds and fruit bits.

Except for marmalades. I definitely enjoy an orange marmalade on toast, but something about the idea of rinds feels icky in my PB sandwiches 😖.

'Used to smoke weed on something like a weekly to monthly basis to help unwind. I stopped after I got on an Adderall prescription to help tend to my ADHD.

Adderall has some pretty restrictive control measures in the US, and weed still has some more substantial restrictions federally. My medical provider says they might test me for weed and other drug usage randomly, and that if I’m caught with something federally inexcusable in my system, I’ll be booted from my prescription.

Is it something I could finesse my way around so I could keep up with my weed unwinding days? Probably. It definitely helps to live in a weed legal state, and if I end up dropping my Adderall for something less controlled, I could see myself getting back into weed. But my work and education have benefited from my prescription though, and even if the risk could be made slim, I’m personally not that comfortable with putting that on the line.

Besides, there’s other vices they don’t test for that fit in just fine 🥴.

Talking about it in a proper conversation? The former. In my mind or in bant? Absolutely the latter.

In banter with polite and gentler audiences?

Bee,
(and I cannot stress this enough,)
Haw.

I love Tech Connections. Unnecessarily long deep dives, but that’s the kind of content I absolutely appreciate. His stuff is a treat that helps to highlight the rabbit holes that can be found in the mundane.

I don’t know about a rifle, but there was at least one video of his recently where he draws a pistol to help drive a point home. Maybe it’s only because I’m from California, but even as an American that bit was jarring. I said it elsewhere in a comment for this post, but in sum I know to give his work a skeptical lens before I decide to take it in.

Ironically his videos ultimately helped me to become less paranoid about government and corporate data collection. His work help shows that no countermeasures taken will be absolutely bulletproof in protecting from data collection, and that the kind of work and changes needed to get somewhere closer to absolute feels like a mountain. Personally I have my respect for people with the resolve to see that through, but for the kind of experiences and tech I want in my life, there’s no way I could get close to that kind of dedication to privacy.

I really miss that brief moment around the start when it seemed thought of as an alternate currency with its own benefits and drawbacks rather than an outright investment. I’d like to think that with crypto gradually exiting the light as popular grifting vehicle of the time, we’ll gradually return to that more grounded outlook of it.

Hopefully at least, but admittedly I’m not holding my breath 🫠.

There was another comment somewhere in this thread that did a pretty good job at summarizing where I think it comes from. From what I can tell of the videos I hunt and peck from him, his general outlook can be summed up to be libertarian in the traditional sense of the term. On one end of that, he consistently criticizes the reach and practices of US intelligence agencies, which is something I’d think a lot of the country’s politically left would agree with. On the other end, he’s a passionate advocate for firearms, something more in line with the country’s right leaning libertarians. The consistent trend seems to be a view that government ought to have less authority. I don’t think that’s inherently a politically right or left attitude, but in the US at least, I think that it’s more embraced by the country’s right rather than the left, so that’s the kind of audience that builds up a sizable chunk of his own.

There’s also the aesthetic. I think it’s reasonable to say that his demeanor styling appeals to that kind of bend, so that’s another pull for people who get into that kind of culture. I wouldn’t have any examples that come to mind, so take it as hearsay, but I’d wager it would be in theme of him to throw in the likes of a 4chan derived slur if it were relevant to the content. Which is a shame, because I like the kind of internet grit that comes with the vibe, I hate the discrimination it tends to attract and even have baked in it if you’re not careful.

-

It’s all to say I can see him leaning libertarian. Not necessarily in the politically right sense, but in the general “let people govern themselves” sense. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t mean to have an intolerant fan base, but his political stances end up letting him have that intolerant fan base. Goes back to that paradox of tolerance, I suppose. I keep my distance from his comments.

Still, the man and the content itself seems textbook and divisive, at least around here. I’ll keep future material of his to myself and continue having him in the kinda arms-length distance I have. He has occasional takes that strike me as informative and balanced, but he also has occasional takes that I plainly don’t care for. Seems like a creator to look at critically and not to take their word as gospel, which come to mention it, is likely a kinda perspective to have of creators by default.

I certainly wouldn’t have an informed idea on how that could be handled, either. What I have to offer toward particulars amounts to spit balling 🤷‍♂️.

If I had to guess though, I’d bet you and @patchymoose@rammy.site are getting at it. A UN treaty could play a part in establishing a baseline to build up on. Perhaps the key could be to indirectly govern it rather than trying to directly govern happenings in international waters? Operations that depart from signing countries could guarantee that their vessels meet basic standards, even if those offshore operations are ultimately conducted in international waters.

I’d imagine that it may shift a noteworthy amount of operation departures to non-signing countries, but I’d also think that increasing the barrier of entry and making such standards highly visible would make a noteworthy difference regardless.

I forgot to mention in my earlier reply that this was a reminder that also helped change my perspective. Putting your own life in danger unfortunate, but ultimately your own decision. Making a negligent decision that affects a wider industry is unfortunate, but seems like a risk in business in general.

Willful negligence that costs the lives of others demands consideration for how things can be done differently. The first best time to have defined and enforced those standards would’ve been before we lost these lives. The second best time to do so is now.

Did paying customers fully understand the risks, though?

You know what, that’s a good question and getting to a perspective I somehow found hard to explore on my own 🤔.

Generally I’m quite strongly in favor of regulations precisely because of this kind of question. The lay customers likely didn’t fully understand the risk they were taking—fully and throughly understand as an expert would. Achieving that kind of understanding takes expertise in a field, and expertise takes years, if not a lifetime to build. I don’t it’s reasonable to expect everyone to have an expert and informed opinion on everything, so I think a society ought to have the responsibility of establishing regulation to protect people from that kind of valid and inevitable ignorance. Sure, the five on board were billed as brave adventurers, but can I confidently say they were informed? Save for the negligent CEO, I’m not so sure I can.

-

I think my hesitation to extend that mindset to this is because the idea of underwater tourism, let alone deep sea tourism felt like uncharted territory to me. Not “against” mind you, more “hesitant.” I think we ought to make progress safely and responsibly, especially if we’re doing so with lay people tagging along, but part of me worries that putting up too many guard rails and too much red tape can stymy legitimate, good faith progress. A regrettable part of regulations is that a fair amount of them are written in blood. Sacrifice, in a way, is sometimes necessary to know just where those guard rails ought to be.

But I’m starting to realize that this is likely not as uncharted as I thought. I can’t believe it didn’t occur to me on my first impressions, but of course we have the potential to make informed safety decisions here—submarines have been around a hot minute, we have the precedent to build an informed understanding of what’s safe and what isn’t. It’s starting to settle more in now, too, that we have more expert individuals and groups in this area than I thought that can help define informed standards.

-

For the sake of those that were on board and their families, I still hope that this was indeed a risk that at least some of them legitimately wanted to take. I wouldn’t be surprised, however, if you’re right in that most of them didn’t fully grasp the risk they were taking.

As for my stance on how this should be approached going forward, I dunno if it was your intention or just a side question, but I suppose I can say I changed my mind! I think we’re at a point where we can make informed decisions on how to regulate this, and we ought to do so sooner rather than later 🤝.

I still can’t get over how janky that tin can felt to me when I was looking into it. Not even getting into the safety cuts, the whole picture felt cheap. The Poop-Bucket a foot away and audibly masked with turning up the music; five people sitting cross-cross applesauce on basically an exercise mat in cramped real estate; working with two desktop monitors and a Logitech controller; the CEO explicitly bragging about cutting corners and breaking rules.

I think that even if the sub more closely resembled expectations and even if the CEO was on top of safety, the story would’ve still been a quick sell on mass media. A sub exploring the Titanic going missing invokes the kind of visuals and what-ifs that start to depart reality and arrive to movie territory. Add the schadenfreude to it and the minivan as described above and that movie becomes a sort of dark humor comedy blended with horror.

I think that this story makes for a good sideshow to gawk at. It’s also a good vehicle to laugh at the rich. The shipwreck in the Mediterranean, as much as it demands our attention in contrast, is much more grounded in reality—hard and painful realities—that I think a sizable chunk of society gets squeamish about. It demands we answer questions and take actions that certain someones would rather we don’t.

I’d say you’re right about all you said. It’s a shame and a bad look on our society that’s how it works out more often than not. I’d like to try and do my small part to leave things a bit better than how I found them, whether that’s in cultural values or in political action. But as you alluded to about the United States: that is much easier said than done.

You sound like you have a vital and focused framing to what I said, and admittedly more relevant to, well, This. I’m inclined to extend the sum of my takeaway to a broader scope, however. To try and extend generosity when we are in the circumstances to do so, in both large and small incidents and in large and small ways. It’s the kind of reminder that personally comes to mind whenever I hear about these kinds of rescue efforts.

It’s also admittedly getting outside of what this incident was and starting to get into more trivial manners, but I seem to get inclined to try and find something positive and/or productive to get from tragedy. Lamenting about the likes of capitalism and the US has definitely been a crucible that helped shaped my perspective for the better, but as crucibles go, it drains and exhausts me.

-

All that said, I can’t deny what you said. It’s the state of affairs, and it’s a sorry one. Let’s see what we can do within our means to help change that 🤝.

I ought to concede I have plenty of disappointment around this. I feel like there were well established means to do this kind of thing safely, and I think because Seagate failed to meet that, five lives were needlessly lost. I wouldn’t be surprised if this story lives on for a while as a sort of fable in hubris. That’s not even getting to, say, the sense of injustice invoked in comparing how this was handled to the recent shipwreck in the Mediterranean. I think all of those thoughts distill down to the Eat The Rich flavored fan faire, and I think there’s already plenty of that here.

Still, the Rich and Foolish nature of this trip all said, I find it commendable that the likes of the US Coast Guard, the Navy, and international groups came together and put up a sizeable and respectable search and rescue effort. I think it would’ve been well in their right (and in fact realistic) for them to wave it off and say something like “they made the wine, they drink the cup.” But they didn’t. I can respect that the collective weight of the wallets on board likely played a big part in it to say the least, but I’d also wager that it also takes a mighty large amount of forgiveness in people being foolish to go through that kind of effort to try and save them. Similar can probably be said for rescue missions helping out others in equally foolish incidents.

There’s a lot directly and indirectly connected to this disaster that doesn’t reflect well on the bulk of society, but the effort to try and help others even if they don’t necessarily deserve it? I’ll admit it feels naive to say, but I’d rather live in that kind of society than one that errs toward extending a callous hand. I hope we’ll hear more often about us extending a hand to those who indeed deserve it, like those in the Mediterranean, but I’m also in the camp of continuing to extend that kind of forgiveness to The Foolish we’ll continue to stumble upon. I hope to have the will to do that, at least.

We’re all going to be foolish from time to time in life, and I sure know I’d sincerely appreciate a kind hand when it’s my turn.

I’m inclined to characterize this loss as reckless and needless, but I find myself agreeing with likewise here. Some opportunities are the once-or-so in a lifetime sort. There’s likely such opportunities out there that I’d love to take if I had the means, even if the risks were great.

I can completely understand people wishing ill on those lost here. As I said, I think there’s an element of hubris and needlessness in this disaster that makes it upsetting, and that doesn’t even get to the likes of the discrepancy in coverage between this incident and the greater loss near Greece this week.

Still, I suppose I hope this risk was worth it to at least a few of the souls on board.

-

The people going down would have known the risks and accepted them for an opportunity for a once in a lifetime opportunity to go to the titanic.