#data literacy

[startrekvsfaceapp]

A conversation I had today

[settlercolonialismisbad]

Thinking about Mastodon? Peertube? here’s a primer.

[barbara-lampl]

Warum deine ausgefeilten AI-Personas deine Ergebnisse verschlechtern

Schlechte Nachrichten und für manche wohl Breaking News:  Diese "Experten"-Prompts, auf die du so stolz bist? Die machen deine KI wahrscheinlich nur dümmer. - Ups

Und bevor mir hier jetzt alle im Quadrat hüpfen, dass ist nicht wirklich überraschend aus der profeesionellen Sicht und ja damals mit GPT 3.5 war das auch etwas anders, aber ist es heute eben nicht mehr.

Mir ist klar, dass solche Infos nicht immer auf “freundliche Ohren” stoßen, erlebe ich es in den Advanced Prompting Kursen und im Unternehmen live, aber XY hat doch gesagt… Ja, aber die Qualifikation von KI oder besser GenAI Experten ist ein anderes Fass, was wir nicht heute aufmachen. Daher bezieht sich dieser Artikel auch auf eine saubere Studie und nicht nur meine 20 Jahre Berufserfahrung. 

Die Situation kennen wir alle. Wir versuchen die perfekte Antwort von ChatGPT oder Claude zu bekommen und entwickeln, was wir für den ultimativen Prompt halten:

"You are a brilliant Stanford professor with 30 years of experience in quantum physics, multiple Nobel prizes, and a deep understanding of..."  / "Du bist ein brillanter Stanford-Professor mit 30 Jahren Erfahrung in Quantenphysik, mehreren Nobelpreisen und einem tiefen Verständnis für..." 

Full Stop! Wir schauen uns das jetzt mal in Ruhe an

Die unbequeme Wahrheit

Eine neue Studie hat gerade eine der grundlegendsten Annahmen im Prompt Engineering zertrümmert: Die Annahme, dass AI-Modelle bessere Ergebnisse liefern, wenn wir ihnen spezifische Personas oder Rollen zuweisen. Spoiler: Tun sie nicht.

Forscher haben 162 verschiedene Personas auf mehreren führenden KI-Modellen mit über 2.400 Fragen getestet. Das Ergebnis? Das Hinzufügen von Personas machte entweder keinen Unterschied oder – hier wird es interessant – verschlechterte die ie KI-Leistung sogar.

Lassen wir das einen Moment sacken: All diese sorgfältig ausgearbeiteten "du bist ein Experte für..."--Prompts? Sie könnten aktiv unsere Ergebnisse sabotieren.

Es wird noch besser (oder schlimmer?), lassen wir die  Daten sprechen

Die Studie zeigt:

Dein "Experten-Arzt"-Prompt für medizinische Fragen? Kaum besser als gar keine Persona. Praktisch gleichwertig mit einem Basis-Prompt

Geschlechtsspezifische Rollen schnitten schlechter ab als neutrale (tut mir leid, "weiser atzer Mann")

Selbst wenn Personas in Einzelfällen halfen, war es nahezu unmöglich vorherzusagen, welche

Der simpelste Prompt schlug oft die ausgefeiltesten Rollenspiel-Setups

Der Plot Twist mit dem Domain Knowledge

Hier wird's interessant und bestätigt, was ich in meinen "Advanced Prompting Workshops" schon immer sage: Während Personas selbst nicht helfen, macht domänenspezifische Sprache und Vokabular einen echten Unterschied. Bei komplexen fachlichen Problemen beispielsweise lenkt die Verwendung präziser fachlicher Terminologie die Attention der AI auf die relevanten Knowledge Clusters in ihren Training Data.

Es geht nicht darum, der AI zu sagen "du bist Mathematiker" - es geht darum, die Sprache der Mathematik zu sprechen. Oder die des Marketing, der Pädagogik oder in welchen Bereich auch immer dein Wissensschatz liegt! 

Die eigentliche Innovation: Domain Expertise im Prompting

Okay, ich nenn das jetzt mal Innovation oder auch Magie, soviel Marketing sprech muss sein! 

Das führt uns zu einer entscheidenden Erkenntnis: Fortgeschrittene Prompting-Techniken müssen in Domänen-Expertise verwurzelt sein, aber nicht durch Rollenspiel. Stattdessen:

Nutze Fachvokabular: Statt "du bist Statistiker" verwende direkt statistische Begriffe und Konzepte

Wende Fach-Frameworks an: Strukturiere deine Prompts nach den Denkmustern deines Fachgebiets

Nutze Fachkontext: Beziehe dich auf relevante Konzepte und Zusammenhänge, ohne Personas zuzuweisen ( wenn es beim denken hilft da einen Job hinzuschreiben, feel free) 

Beispiel: Statt: "Du bist ein Experten-Statistiker. Was ist falsch an dieser Analyse?" Besser: "Analysiere dies unter Berücksichtigung von Stichprobenverzerrung, Konfidenzintervallen und möglichen Verletzungen der Normalverteilungsannahmen."

Ja, sorry musste ja jetzt was aus der Mathe sein! 

Die überraschende Erkenntnis

Besonders bemerkenswert: Selbst der Einsatz von Machine Learning zur Vorhersage optimaler Personas für spezifische Queries erreichte keine besseren Resultate als Random Selection. Lass wie das ma auf unsl wirken. Eine hochentwickelte KI, die versucht, die beste Persona für eine andere KI auszuwählen, war nicht besser als Würfeln. Und ja, melden das vielleicht auch mal den Abteilungen… 

Und genau deshalb schauen wir uns als nächstes die "Memory-Funktion" von ChatGPT an und warum es vermutlich eine wirklich, und ich meine wirklich schlechte Idee ist, sie zu nutzen! ( auf englisch ist schon da, deutsch flogt) 

Was solltest du stattdessen tun?

Keep it simple: Vergiss das ausgefeilte Rollenspiel. Ein klarer, direkter Prompt funktioniert oft besser ( der kann und wird immer noch sehr lang sein) 

Fokussiere dich auf Fachsprache: Nutze präzise, fachspezifische Terminologie

Struktur ist wichtig: Organisiere deine Prompts nach den Denkmustern deines Fachgebiets

Teste alles: Deine Ergebnisse können variieren - was für eine Aufgabe funktioniert, kann bei einer anderen versagen

Die strategische Dimension

Das wirft einige unangenehme Fragen für die KI-Industrie und all diese Prompt-Kurse von "den Experten" auf. Warum verwenden große KI-Unternehmen immer noch Standard-Personas in ihren System-Prompts? (Ja, genau dich meine ich liebe CS Abteilung, "hilfreicher Assistent.") Basieren unsere AI-Interaktionen auf oberflächlichen Konstrukten statt auf präziser, domain-spezifischer Kommunikation? Und haben wir die KI Bildung wirklich beim richtigen Anbieter eingekauft? 

Fazit

Wenn dir das nächste Mal jemand seinen "perfekten Prompt" schickt, der mit einer ausgefeilten Persona beginnt, schick ihm diesen Artikel und dir selbst wenn du schon wieder ein “Prompt Sheet” runterladen willst!Die Evidenz ist eindeutig: Erfolgreiche AI-Interaktion 

Dein sorgfältig gestalteter KI-Experte ist vielleicht nicht nur unnötig – er macht die Sache möglicherweise sogar schlimmer. Konzentriere dich stattdessen darauf, deine tatsächliche Domänen-Expertise in der Strukturierung und Formulierung deiner Prompts einzusetzen.

Wie sind eure Erfahrungen? Habt ihr bessere Resultate mit domain-spezifischer Language statt Personas erzielt? Teilt eure Insights in denKommentaren

Quelle: "When 'A Helpful Assistant' Is Not Really Helpful: Personas in System Prompts Do Not Improve Performances of Large Language Models" von Zheng et al., 2024

[abearinthewoods]

So many harmful stereotypes about dating the other gender would be solved if people understood adverse selection bias

Ok, look, I know all/most/some/an annoying percentage of the guys, girls, whatevs you've dated have had some common annoying/abusive/predatory/manipulative trends, but you have to understand, the massive majority of the normal-not-shit ones (who would be willing to be in a relationship) are already in a relationship.

The massive majority of the normal-not-shit ones are already in a relationship.

Like its that simple. Shitty people tend to get dumped, not shitty people tend to not get dumped.

If you are building views of a gende- hey, guys, i'm talking to you too here. listen up, this isn't just for the radfems - If you are building a mental model for how you view men or how you view women (including what you think their intentions or reasonings might be for doing some action), based on how the people you've dated have acted, you are very likely getting a very distorted, bigoted, and bitter picture.

Worse yet, men and women alike tend to find it distasteful when you are bitter toward their gender, so this tends to isolate you to just the assholes, further distorting the picture.

Worse worse yet, for some people they respond to all of this by building up tests and red/green flags that somebody might be "one of the bad ones" or "one of the good ones", which abusive people know how to game or avoid. Sometimes these red flags can include normal behavior that was just commonly seen by abusive people but is unrelated to their abusiveness (or suspicious behavior that *could* have abusive intent behind it but also legitimately could be nothing) that non-abusive people aren't always going to know to avoid accidentally stepping near, further isolating the dating pool to just manipulative people. Maybe you expect them to do you some courtesy to show they are generally a nice person but all you end up doing is exclude people who fail a knowledge check while giving predators a script on how to get past your emotional walls.

The culture war ends the moment bitter men and bitter women figure this out and start viewing the individuals they are trying to date as, well, individuals, and not in the context of the last person who shared the same gender. (queer people who think this doesn't apply them somehow forget that hearing what the men or women in their life say about the other gender they've dated does absolutely impact how they view the other gender)

[m-a-salter]

You all are killing me with your endless "reblog for sample size." Your curiosity is to be commended. As is your urge to do science. I, too, love science.

BUT. You cannot manufacture statistical significance by increasing the sample size if the sampling method is biased in unknown ways, as a convenience sample of an unknown population is bound to be. If your question is, "What do my mutuals and their mutuals think about X?", then a Tumblr poll can perhaps give you an approximate sense. But if your question is "What does the entire population of Tumblr think about X?", no amount of reblogging of that poll is going to get you meaningful, interpretable information, unless you can get all 135 million of us to answer.

[maharghaideovate]

Data Literacy and Analytical Skills in Dy Patil Online MBA Program

This image features a pie chart and bar graphs, symbolizing the importance of data literacy in business. It reflects the analytical skills and data-driven decision-making emphasized in the Dy Patil Online MBA program. The program is designed to equip students with the necessary tools to excel in a data-centric business environment, offering flexibility and a comprehensive curriculum tailored for working professionals.

[jcmarchi]

Faculty receive promotions in the School of Architecture and Planning

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/faculty-receive-promotions-in-the-school-of-architecture-and-planning/

Faculty receive promotions in the School of Architecture and Planning

Eleven faculty in the MIT School of Architecture and Planning have been recognized with promotions for their significant contributions to the school, effective July 1. Five faculty promotions are in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning; four are in the Department of Architecture; and two are in the program in Media Arts and Sciences.

“Whether architects, urbanists, historians, artists, economists, or aero-astro engineers, they represent our school at its best, in its breadth of inquiry and in its persistence to improve, by design, the relationship between human beings and their environment,” says Hashim Sarkis, dean of the School of Architecture and Planning. “Collectively, they add considerable strength to our faculty.”

Department of Architecture

Azra Akšamija has been promoted to full professor. An artist and architectural historian, she is the director of the Art, Culture, and Technology program. She also directs the Future Heritage Lab. Akšamija is the author of two books, and her artistic work has been exhibited at leading international venues, including the Generali Foundation and Secession in Vienna; Biennials in Venice, Liverpool, Valencia, and Manila; Manifesta 7; museums of contemporary art in Zagreb, Belgrade, and Ljubljana; Sculpture Center and Queens Museum of Art in New York; the Royal Academy of Arts London; and Design Festivals in Milan, Istanbul, Eindhoven, and Amman.

Brandon Clifford has been promoted to associate professor with tenure. Clifford is the director and co-founder of Matter Design, which leverages ancient construction techniques to shape transformative architectural visions. Known for animating megalithic sculptures, he pioneers “projective archaeology,” merging historical events with imaginary futures. Clifford’s speculative works redefine architectural practice, paving the way for new constructive opportunities.

Timothy Hyde has been promoted to full professor. Hyde is an historian of architecture whose research has expanded the understanding of the ways in which entanglements of architecture and law have shaped buildings and cities from the 18th century to the present. In numerous articles, and in books such as “Constitutional Modernism and Ugliness and Judgment,” he has explored buildings — and more recently building sites — in the Americas and in Europe to reveal the participation of architectural discourse in the legal formulation of social techniques of the modern city.  

Lawrence “Larry” Sass has been promoted to full professor. Sass is a designer and researcher in the Department of Architecture at MIT. He is a pioneer within the field of design and digital fabrication for low-cost housing. He discovered a low-cost method of single-family home construction using computation and digital fabrication. The impact of his research has been knowledge construction related to the idea that digital fabrication can automate construction. His methods reduce the number of steps in the production of a home. He was the first to publish the idea of digitally fabricated wooden housing in 2006 and exhibited his idea at the Museum of Modern Art in 2008.

Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP)

devin michelle bunten has been promoted to associate professor. Bunten is a teacher, writer, and urban economic theorist. Her research uses economic theory and empirical tools to study a range of urban topics, including gentrification and neighborhood change, restrictive zoning, and the white supremacy at the root of American housing.

Catherine D’Ignazio has been promoted to associate professor. D’Ignazio is a scholar, artist/designer, and “hacker momma” who focuses on feminist technology, data literacy, and civic engagement. She is the director of the Data + Feminism Lab, which uses data and computational methods to work toward gender and racial justice, particularly as they relate to space and place.

Jeffrey Levine has been promoted to associate professor of the practice. Involved in land-use planning on the local and regional level for 25 years, Levine is interested in how to apply best practices in theory and research in local and municipal settings. His research interests are in the areas where public finance, private equity, and land-use planning intersect, as well as how transportation, housing, and sustainability interact in small- to mid-sized cities and regions.

Elisabeth Reynolds has been promoted to professor of the practice. Reynolds’s research is focused on systems of innovation, manufacturing and industrial competitiveness, and regional economic development. Her recent academic and applied work has focused on growing innovative companies to scale, digital technology adoption, and inclusive growth.

Andres Sevtsuk has been promoted to associate professor with tenure. Sevtsuk is the head of the City Design and Development Group in DUSP and director of the City Form Lab. His research focuses on public qualities of cities, and on making urban environments more walkable, sustainable, and equitable, bridging the fields of urban design, spatial analytics, and mobility research. He is the author of the Urban Network Analysis framework and software tools, used by researchers and practitioners around the world to model pedestrian activity in cities and to study coordinated land use and transportation development in ways that reduce transportation carbon emissions.

Program in Media Arts and Sciences

Kent Larson has been promoted to professor of the practice. Larson is an architect, director of City Science at the MIT Media Lab, and co-director of the Norman Foster Institute on Sustainable Cities based in Madrid. His research is focused on urban and architectural design, urban modeling and simulation, transformable micro-housing, living laboratories, ultralight autonomous mobility, and algorithmic dynamic zoning.

Danielle Wood has been promoted to associate professor. Wood is the founding director of the Space Enabled Research group, which seeks to advance justice in Earth’s complex systems using designs enabled by space. Prior to serving on the faculty at MIT, Wood held positions at NASA Headquarters, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Aerospace Corp., Johns Hopkins University, and the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs.

[datainnovation]

Data Innovation at Richmond Events: Transforming Business Networking

Introduction

Business environment, making meaningful connections and leveraging data for strategic decisions are crucial for success. Richmond Events stands at the forefront of this transformation, revolutionizing how businesses network and thrive through data innovation. This article delves into how Richmond Events uses cutting-edge data-driven strategies to enhance business networking and drive growth.

Introduction to Richmond Events

Richmond Events is a trailblazer in the business events industry, specializing in one-to-one, pre-scheduled business forums. These forums are meticulously designed to match delegates and suppliers, creating a platform where meaningful business connections are forged. By integrating data innovation into their processes, Richmond Events has set new standards in how networking and business development are approached.

Power of Data-Driven Networking

Richmond Events leverages sophisticated data analytics to personalize and optimize networking opportunities. By analyzing participant profiles, preferences, and past interactions, the company can tailor forums to ensure that delegates and suppliers are matched with the most relevant partners. This data-driven approach not only enhances the efficiency of networking but also maximizes the potential for successful business relationships.

Enhancing Efficiency with Pre-Scheduled Meetings

One of the key innovations introduced by Richmond Events is the concept of pre-scheduled meetings. This approach allows participants to plan their interactions in advance, reducing the time spent on unproductive networking and increasing the likelihood of valuable connections. The use of data analytics to schedule these meetings ensures that each interaction is as relevant and impactful as possible.

Strategic Insights through Data Analytics

Events uses data analytics to provide strategic insights into the networking process. By collecting and analyzing data on attendee engagement, meeting outcomes, and overall event performance, the company can continuously refine and improve their approach. These insights enable Richmond Events to offer actionable recommendations to clients, helping them optimize their networking strategies and achieve their business goals.

The Role of Technology in Facilitating Connections

Technology plays a crucial role in Richmond Events’ data innovation strategy. The company employs advanced software and platforms to manage and analyze data, facilitate meeting scheduling, and enhance communication between participants. This technological infrastructure not only supports the seamless execution of events but also provides valuable data that drives continuous improvement.

Future Trends in Data-Driven Business Networking

As business networking continues to evolve, Richmond Events is at the cutting edge of data innovation. The company is constantly exploring new technologies and methodologies to further enhance their networking platforms. Emerging trends such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced analytics are expected to play a significant role in shaping the future of business networking.

About Richmond Events

Richmondevents Events is the pioneer of one-to-one, pre-scheduled business forums, designed to match delegates and suppliers to generate new business opportunities and foster valuable connections. With a focus on data innovation, Richmond Events transforms the networking experience, ensuring that every interaction is strategic and impactful.

Contact us:

Location: Bishopsgate Road Englefield Green Windsor TW20 0YL United Kingdom

Call: +44 1784 535 555

[garymdm]

Finding Your Way Through the Data Deluge: Trusting Your Information Assets

Just one-third of organizations trust the analytics generated from their business operations, despite the critical role these insights play in decision-making KPMG – Building Trust in Analytics For large, modern businesses, data is king. Every click, swipe, and purchase generates a wealth of information. But with this abundance comes a challenge: how do you find, understand, and trust your…

[jcsocialmarketing]

Data Literacy for Small Nonprofits with Sarah Epting

This episode is sponsored by my friends at Keela, a comprehensive fundraising and donor management software that will help you expand your reach, increase fundraising revenue, and foster a dedicated community of supporters. Keela is hosting a webinar, led by me, on June 6 – How to Drive Donations and Get Engagement Using Social Media. It’s totally free, and you can get all the details and sign up…

[salsa-and-light]

"You could have looked it up and been sure,"

I could have, but most of these sorts of claims are fundamentally unprovable in any meaningful sense.

And besides, titles exist for a reason, the title gave one piece of data disconnected from anything that might explain it. So either there was no data to explain the finding(there wasn't) or it was a bad title, Which is unlikely when we're talking about clicks.

I also gave three to five different factors which probably weren't accounted for(as indeed they weren't) which would have invalidated the implied claims of the title(s).

"survey of 1,300 managers is going to be tough to refute if you don't bother to even try to look it up."

I have no vested interest in changing people's opinions or proving them wrong.

The opinion are what they are, the question is if those opinions are valid indicators of reality.

Opinions are not fact and bias must be accounted for

But accounting for bias isn't fun and blaming the Youths™ is a time honored pastime, which is the New York Post has been publishing some version of this narrative for the past four years

Remember what I said about clicks?

Plus I really didn't care either way, but I do care about research methods so let's look at it.

"In April, ResumeBuilder.com surveyed 1,344 managers and business leaders and found 74% believe GenZ is more difficult to work with than other generations."

Okay, fine, so what does this mean. It tells us that this is a wide spread opinion.

It also does not account for age differences between the generations, nor does it divide managers into categories based on years in leadership positions. Did any of these people have experience working with similarly aged Millennials twenty years ago? Is there any objective point of reference?

Do we have similar surveys from previous decades to accurately compare the generations?

"49% say it’s difficult to work with GenZ all or most of the time"

The same, situation, the same problems.

Of course, both of these results could be an admission that older people don't know how to communicate effectively or work with young people.

But no one ever mentions that as a possibility because it's not as flattering to the ego.

But it's no less baseless than assuming that the young are always to blame.

Even if there is a genuine problem, which is by no means certain, we have no data to suggest only one party is responsible, let alone which one.

"The plurality of these business leaders and managers prefer to work with Millennials"

This is interesting.

"Top reasons they feel GenZ is difficult to work with is they lack of technological skills, effort, and motivation"

This tells us a bit more, the technological skills point could be a reason why Millennials are preferred to their older counterparts. Or it could be a overall preference for peers of the same age.

But who knows, there's no data, at least not here.

The technological curve at least makes sense in theory, there was a massive uptick in tech-literacy for Millennials and now some people are reporting tech illiteracy in younger people

But then again, there's not much technological knowledge that you need to know to work most jobs. What jobs do have specific skills or programs usually train all employees for those regardless of age(or else require licenses or other documentation prior to hiring) and given the pandemic most Gen Z people can pick up new technology relatively quickly with proper training.

Lack of effort or motivation make sense as problem points, but there's still no check on this opinion to make it a valid comparison for other generations.

There's also no documentation as to what that means or whether or not these are real or perceived deficits. And there's no assurance that people don't have ulterior motives

Nor does it account for pay disparity. If you're struggling to buy groceries then it's going to a lot hard to muster a chipper corporate spirit.

But then again, are today's young people really any less motivated than those of past decades?

From this information alone we don't know.

It's not a bad survey, it's just that the results of the survey do not match the conclusions that people are taking away from the survey.

"65% say they more commonly need to fire GenZers than employees of other generations"

This is just an extension of the negative opinion.

It doesn't actually give us much new information.

"12% have fired a GenZer less than one week after their start date"

This also doesn't tell me much, except to maybe suggest that these companies have no problem firing people. That could be because the actions of the employee were just that heinous, or it could be that the company just has nothing to lose from firing people.

Some companies put to little or too much time into interviewing where bad employees slip through or else every mistake is reason enough to fire because the business survives on rapid hiring.

It could also be that young people interview really well but have some other highly objectiable trait.

But those are just possibilities. Who actually knows.

Though I'd guess that it's probably a variety of factors instead of just one particular problem.

But this poll doesn't define its terms very well so there's nothing to draw from.

"Being too easily offended is a top reason GenZers get fired"

Now what does this even mean?

Did they bring up politics in the work place and then get angry, did they not laugh at a risqué joke, did they correct misgendering, did they try to lecture people..

Did they burst out into tears during a meeting?

It could have been any of those things and more, without strict definitions we don't know.

And also, as a matter of common courtesy, if someone is sensitive to something I usually try to avoid it.

I don't usually meet a combat veteran and then shoot of fireworks in their face.

When I'm in the company of a Muslim I usually don't eat pork, when I'm with a Hindu I don't eat beef.

Not because I think that there's anything wrong with fireworks or beef, but just because I don't want to put other people in an uncomfortable position.

Call me crazy but I think that's polite.

Maybe there are some positions which are just inherently too tough to sensitive people and that's fine, I just don't believe that accounts payable should be one of them if it's being run correctly, and frankly if a position is actually too tough for a sensitive person, then(barring rare cases of self harm) those sensitive people will leave on their own.

And I'll admit my bias here, because the last time suggested that I wasn't cut out for a position they put me in a worse position with more work, less pay and hostile and uncommunicative coworkers. So I tend to think that this is just a ploy to seem charitable.

"No mention of how long the other people have been there so all of that is a assumption on your part there"

Not really, I wasn't talking about people being in the same job for a long time I was talking about people with decades more work experience -in general.

A GenXer and a GenZer can start a job the same day, but it's undeniable that the older person is going to have more experience. Even if you account for changing entire industries later in life, the transferable skills can not be ignored.

And even if it turns out that the older person is just as bad or worse than the younger person.. that's going to be attributed to them personally not to their entire demographic.

Generally I was under the impression that judging people by their demographic was gauche, but when it's presented with a veneer of scientific substantiation people forget that.

"That would be the easily offended bit"

Well the article doesn't ever define what that means.

But let's suppose that you're right and it is about labor rights, if that is the case, the problem is not that the young people are lazy or oversensitive, it's that their employers are breaking the law and firing them to cover their tracks(which is also illegal).

And as I said, people who get fired for bringing up labor violations skew younger and inexperienced, because those of us with a modicum of experience know how quickly and how easily unethical businesses can screw you over. So we are a bit more judicious about when or if we bring them up.

..

As a side note, it's worth calling corporate or the labor board for other people or for past jobs, I knew a girl, teenager, no family, no money who was held in a dangerously hot building(malfunctioning oven) with no water as she broke out in hives while being threatened with firing if she went outside.

I called corporate immediately, the situation was resolved and the manager was gone within a week. That poor girl had enough problems without worrying about dying on the floor of a Drive-in floor.

..

"many don't know their rights they know what they think they are but not what they are"

Well, there could be confusion, that's true. I doubt that people are inventing fake labor rights in mass, but I'm sure it does occur on occasion. But that has never once been the case in all of my experience. Most of the time labor violations are very real, and most of the time when people say "that's not one of your labor rights" they're lying through their teeth.

And what's more, firing people for labor complaints is still retaliation even if those complaints aren't based on actual crimes.

And if the company were actually even remotely interested in keeping their young employees, addressing concerns and correcting misinformation about how the business is run is hardly some excessive burden. In fact, in many cases, informing employees of their labor rights is required by law.

If an employee comes to their superior with a labor complaint, and is fired as a result, regardless of the legality of the initial concern, that business just violated labor law and clearly isn't that invested in their employees anyway.

"your employment rights vary from state to state CA has some pretty good stuff when it comes to hourly worker and mandatory breaks and how overtime is paid out, Iowa does not"

True, but even in places where certain things are supposedly guaranteed that doesn't actually mean they will be. I've had office jobs where breaks for example were legally required but either never mentioned or heavily restricted.

Labor laws are not well enforced.

"your rights are going to be prominently listed on a poster in a conspicuous place wherever you work."

Well that's just not true.

Out of the last ~8 jobs or so I had in America, only one has ever had any listing of rights, and even then the list was highly limited and only recommended calls to corporate..

That was a fairly decent job all things considered so I never had any reason to make a call, but all the same it wasn't exactly clear, honest and disinterested disclosure of my rights.

"Your boss will know the labor laws, most likely, or HR if you're in a large enough company to have a HR department."

Oh yes, which is why I knew when people asked me to clock out and keep working or when they decided to rescind my pay that knew that they were breaking the law.

But what was I supposed to do about it.

"This is also linked in the original article that you didn't bother to look at."

I don't care for the tone, I think I've made it clear that the survey isn't very informative and the opinion title made that clear from the start.

Also this is a post on tumblr.com.

I type a lot, but I've not going to give a fully academic breakdown of every bad article on the site.

It's not some breach of moral duty.

"Lack of technological skills pops up again, which kind of messes up the "more educated" bit you're pulling out there in your response."

No it really doesn't.

"A look at older members of Generation Z suggests they are on a somewhat different educational trajectory than the generations that came before them. They are less likely to drop out of high school and more likely to be enrolled in college. Among 18- to 21-year-olds no longer in high school in 2018, 57% were enrolled in a two-year or four-year college. This compares with 52% among Millennials in 2003 and 43% among members of Gen X in 1987." - Pew Research Center

I still don't know what "technical skills" they're referring to(and neither do you for that matter) but lacking a certain technical skill is not the same thing as being uneducated.

"Here's a bit of a olive branch, that can be taken as you like but I think it would be wise to take it to heart."

I'm not sure what you mean.

Yes, the pandemic put an upset in the system but I don't think that framing it as an explanation for why young people are bad is a fair framing.

Especially when they alleged faults are not making eye contact(especially irrelevant during video conferences) and an unusual relationship to hierarchy. Both of those are popularly known traits of autism by the by(eye contact is neither a moral nor a labor necessity) and an "atypical" relationship to hierarchy and authority is completely normal and in fact should be expected.

Americans usually change careers multiple time in their lives, that's been the case for decades and the pandemic has only accelerated it. Especially when so many of these hierarchys have been proven to be fake.

For years disabled people were told that it would be impossible to accommodate them, and then a quarantine happens and then all of a sudden everything's possible.

No one- is going to maintain credibility after so much charlatanry is exposed.

"Just don't complain about not having any friends at work if you never join the conversation."

I don't find that to be a common complaint.

Especially given that the initial post was about "personality hires".

Personally I've always gotten along well with my coworkers, which is nice, but at the same time, having your primary social circle be your coworkers is actually not a good idea.

"Maybe show some respect to people at the get go, that's a very good idea even at McDonald's."

I agree, but that does not seem like a correct assessment of the situation.

Employment is a voluntary contract, it is not immoral let alone rude to want to set your own hours or to control your working conditions, especially when these things you have been promised.

I've also never worked in a job where I didn't refer to my boss by their first name, in any country, in fact I often did not even know their surname.

I'd say that maybe it's different in the medical field, but I have family who works in that field and they only use surnames for doctors they don't personally work with. And even then primarily with the doctors they don't like.

"Housing crisis bit, gen-z isn't in that age range just yet so don't give up hope there."

Incorrect.

This is not a matter of savings or of age.

And that misconception is partly why people are coming up with all these wild ideas to blame young people.

In the last three years alone(since the pandemic) the average price of a home has jumped ~20%. Needless to say that wages haven't.

I do think that things will acclimate.. eventually. But for people like me, that mean years living in an abusive household which I couldn't afford to leave.

I had to leave the country entirely, because it was cheaper to plan an international move than it was to rent an apartment and honestly I don't see a financially viable future for myself in America any time soon.

Things were bad before the pandemic, now they're wrecked.

I'm not surprised that there are Millennials buying property, obviously the housing market hasn't shut down entirely, but like all luxury goods, high sales does not mean that everyone has access.

I'm from Arkansas, it's one of the cheapest places to live in America, but that doesn't change the fact that every person I know who's my age who's not living with their parents is either an engineer or living with a partner.

"Then there's this, which will not do you any favors."

Do me favors?

Why are you writing like this is has any sort of weight on my character. It's quite presumptuous, dare I say.. rude..

..

In any case, avoiding student debt payments is not disproving anything I said. People who are financially well off typically pay debts if for no other reason than because it's easier than avoiding them.

"The fatalistic attitude you've displayed in the last bit of your response is being shown here in spades"

Gen Z workers are more educated they are finding worse jobs the value of wages is at best stagnating because the cost of living is rising.

And as you so pertinently brought up, they also have record amounts of student debt, which they probably needed to get those poorly paying jobs in the first place.

I'm not being fatalistic; these are just realities.

Living in denial is not some sign of a healthy attitude and it's not an improvement.

I get that you're trying to be helpful here, but all you're really doing is ignoring the nature of the problem and blaming young people for it.

It's already not a great situation, there's no need for you or anyone to go and make it worse by being condescending and unempathetic.

Things will probably get better, that's not really my or anyone's major concern, but just because a forest will grow back after a fire doesn't mean that we shouldn't care about the people choking on smoke right now. It definitely doesn't mean that we should fan the flames.

"the people not paying back their student loans because they don't care about their credit score because they don't think they'll ever buy a home anyhow forgetting that that score determines car loans, any credit cards, rental issues can be created just all kinds of bad things can follow you around if you don't pay your debts."

So you've decided to believe that an entire demographic, millions of people, are just stupid.. instead of thinking that they're doing the best they can under the circumstances.

You're very quickly running past understandable norms of uninformed. It's not endearing.

"So like I said don't give up hope, learn to take criticism, remember to ask for help if you need it at work because your boss was new at one point too and can help you get the experience you need."

I know how to take criticism, I'm an abuse survivor, any time I'm more than a doormat it's a feat.

I just don't normally take criticism from people who are unkind and unwilling to see past their own perspective.

I'm trying to be charitable here, but you were the one so invested in the implied(but unproven) claims of a collection of articles that you wanted to respond in detail with all the ways that young people are to blame.

Clearly, this is something personal for you. I could guess why, but I'd rather not.

"They want you to do well because it makes them look good too,"

Some people do, others don't. I've had good bosses and bosses that cheated me, I've had bosses actively hated me. Fortunately I learned to read people as a survival skill so it's rare that I'm blindsided.

But the harsh reality is that most Bosses are politely neutral, there is little to no inherent motivation to help your employees succeed it has to be a personal internal motivation.

Some of the worst employers I ever had, had years long records of incompetency, if not outright crime, which never caught up to them.

But how stupid do you honestly think I am. That's not a rhetorical question, I'm generally curious who you think is this comment is addressing. What do you think, that I'm some teenybopper who's too prideful to tell someone when they're confused?

I didn't exactly learn a foreign language or move across continents without asking for help.

"Even then it's better to catalogue your issues and take it over your bosses head to their boss."

Thanks I have an e-mail address for precisely that.

But also, that can get you fired, which is why those situations are such balancing acts.

"And please before writing out a long as response again, read the article instead of assuming you know what it says"

Which article? I think you cited four of them.

But I've read several of them and they're all exactly what I thought.

A contentious conclusion based on very poor data interpretation with a bent on blaming young people, even for things that aren't negatives.

It's practically textbook at this point, people said the same thing about the Milennials and even Gen X and the Baby Boomers.

"because that's going to be another red flag that can get you fired, making assumptions without actually checking the facts."

Speaking of making assumptions.

Darling I have a whole research degree, I can smell a bad study a mile away on a normal day. Let alone when the titles are opinion poll data with no obvious applicability. It also means that I research everything anyways, often too much.

But even if I were the average internet denizen with no special skills or education You don't seem to have realize that you're being very condescending by waltzing in here and trying to correct presumed behavior problems, as if I were some delinquent teenager. It would be funny if it weren't so rude.

As far as I can tell I was actually more right than even I suspected about this article, but even if I was dead wrong what kind of entitlement complex do you have where you're expecting me to blog like it's a job interview. This is a fun pastime if anything.

It's not endearing behavior, which I've already said, so you ought to credit me with restraint.

And because of how you've acted so far I'm going to have to ask you to take your own advice and take this criticism with some grace and not make it all about you.

Because no matter your intentions you've not garnered much in the way of sympathy from me.

However, if you want to avoid falling into this exact type of "blaming the youths" stereotypes I'd recommend this video the presenter is obviously not the best at public speaking but he has a lot of good points, and in fact he addresses several of your concerns.

Except of course this video is seven years old and all these stereotypes were attributed to Millennials at the time.

Because this is one of the many parts of our culture which is recycled without end.

One of favorite parts of that video is when it talks about the entitled young who don't want to work, from a magazine in the '60s describing baby boomers, and then the 1990 article talking about how Generation X was unemployed, delayed and lazy, and then the 2013 article calling Milennials narcissistic.

And now here we are again.

Someone needs a vibe check up the side of her head.

[hephaestusshield]

don't kiss me if you're afraid of thunder. my life is a storm. - anitta krizzan

[miles-edgewords]

I’ve been thinking a lot recently about how much I wish we were taught in school how to interact with people online (and just how to use the internet in general) and then I remembered that I can type.

So, without further ado, I present…

How to Argue with People on the Internet

A (sort of) comprehensive guide on discussing everything from world peace to your blorbos

Forewordwarning: This is a long (but hopefully useful and entertaining) post. You have been warned.

SECTION I: The Decision

I have read SO many posts that essentially say “want to stop getting annoyed and fighting strangers? Just don’t! Simply do not!” and if that works for you? Fantastic! That is commendable and I salute you for it and I’m only a little bit jealous. (Okay, maybe more than a little bit jealous.) But if you’re like me—an absolute yapper, that is— you will likely find yourself in quite a few situations where you simply must yap. The urge is too strong. The stupidity of this collection of pixels on your screen that may or may not be the vessel for another human somewhere in the world is too much and you just have to tell them so. I understand. I will not tell you to hold back. I will, however, advise that before engaging with any individuals, you follow a few simple steps that I like to call “RAT”— otherwise known as Rest, Analyze, and Type.

Let’s say, for a moment, that you’ve just run into a comment hating on your favorite character in your favorite TV show. Yes, that one. You want to reply—but wait—you’ve just remembered to use RAT first! You intelligent human, you.

First, you REST. You take a moment to bookmark the comment (whether mentally or literally is up to you) and you step away from your phone (or you do what I do and look at that one youtube video of a parrot asking Alexa to fart 939472 times, you know the one) and you wait. Is this comment something you’re willing to take time out of your day to handle? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with deciding that it is, in fact, worth it— but it’s important to consider it first. You won’t ever have time to talk about the things you’re actually passionate about if you reply to every comment that bothers you. (Trust me— I’ve been there.)

Now, if you’ve decided to continue, reopen the comment and ANALYZE. This can mean many different things depending on the situation: is this comment generated by an AI? Is this person expressing a genuine opinion, or are they a troll? Have other people argued with them? If so, how did they respond? These are all important questions to ask, but it’s okay if you don’t know the answers to all of them. Just get the best information you can; you can always come back to this step later.

Finally, it’s time to TYPE. Let those words fly, friend! You tell ‘em!

SECTION II: Debating vs Fighting

So, you’ve RATted it up, and now you’ve decided it’s time to yap. But how to go about this? Should you be aggressive? Appeal to the enemy? What to do? Don’t worry, I’ve got another acronym for you! It’s time to take MOUSE into account: Motive, Openness, Understanding, Success, and Education.

First, think about your own MOTIVE. What do you want to accomplish? Do you want to change the other person’s mind? Are you unconcerned with changing their mind, instead going in with the intention to change the minds of others who might be reading through the conversation? Do you not care about changing anyone’s mind and simply want to discuss the topic at hand? All of these are valid, but they’re all very different. Deciding what your goal is prior to replying is one of the most important things about debating, whether it’s over the internet or face-to-face.

Once you’ve got that cleared up, it’s time to consider your OPENNESS and UNDERSTANDING. How open are you to potentially having your mind changed? Can you see a piece of truth in the other side of the argument? Do you understand where the commenter is coming from, or are they just being ridiculous? It’s okay to have opinions you aren’t open to changing on a whim— everyone has core beliefs that shape who they are as people. But sometimes looking at the other side through a lens of open-mindedness and a desire to understand is the most effective thing you can do. Give it a try— the worst thing that happens is the other person being just as bad as you thought they were.

Next, it’s time to address SUCCESS. What would succeeding look like here? This is similar to MOTIVE, but now we’re looking at the potential completion of the debate. What is the outcome you’re striving for?

Finally, EDUCATION. Is this a fact-based topic you want to educate people about, or is it purely opinion-driven? Either is fine, but if it’s fact-based, you should brush up on the facts of the situation— you don’t want to be caught in a lie and potentially humiliated, I hope. Also, misinformation on the internet is a huge issue. But mostly the humiliation thing.

Section III: Tips and Tricks

My last acronym contains an assortment of tips and tricks for internet usage and communication: Consent, Anonymity, Privacy, Yapping, Blocking, Apps, Reason, and Ability (CAPYBARA).

One of the most important things in life and on the internet is CONSENT. Now, this doesn’t mean you have to ask permission to voice your opinions— just that you should take into consideration the actual, living person on the other side of the screen. (Unless you’re arguing with an AI, in which case I suppose it probably doesn’t care much one way or the other). Ask before you DM people unless they state that their DMs are open. If someone blocks you, DO NOT make another account to harass them (yes, even if they’re really terrible). Consent online may look different than it does in real life, but it still follows the same ground rule: when in doubt, ASK.

ANONYMITY is another important thing to consider when you’re surfing among the virtual tides. Remember that even if someone displays their real name and picture on a website, you still don’t know them. They could be someone entirely different from the persona they’ve put up on the internet, and that’s okay. We all act differently depending on the situations and settings we’re in, and that’s dialed waaaay up when social media allows us to literally customize ourselves into what we want other people to see. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t treat people as if they’re real, but it does mean that you should take everything with a grain of salt— especially if someone is being an absolute jerk.

Okay, PRIVACY is the one section in here that anyone under a certain age probably did learn in class— along with its annoying younger cousin, PIRACY (you wouldn’t steal a CAR, would you?) You probably know by now that you shouldn’t share personal data online, so I won’t go into this one too much in this post. There are a billion textbooks about it, and as important as it is, it’s not something I’m really qualified to cover. Just don’t do anything stupid and you should be fine.

YAPPING— everyone’s favorite thing to do on the internet! For the most part, this is a reminder that you should have fun. If you feel like you can’t yap about your interests in the space you’re in, maybe you should relocate— whether that’s to a different app, a different blog, or even just to a different comment section is up to you. You should feel free to voice your opinions and talk about the things you love (within reason—don’t get yourself on an FBI watchlist—but you get the idea).

BLOCKING is one of the most underrated features on many social media apps. There is absolutely nothing wrong with blocking someone and moving on. It doesn’t make you a coward; it makes you someone who values your own time and safety. You are never obligated to argue with someone just because they said so. And—this is one of my favorite internet secrets—you can block people you agree with. If someone’s posts are well-meaning and useful, but they upset you or make you uncomfortable? You can still block them, or mute/restrict them if the app you’re using allows it. You are not a bad person for not wanting to see things that upset you in your day-to-day life. You can support good causes without reading about tragedies every morning. Digging yourself into a depressive hole isn’t going to help anything. Please, please use the block button. It’s there for a reason.

APPS are another variable you should consider when catering your online experience. For instance, you can make a nuanced post on Tumblr and more realistically expect reasonable replies because you aren’t confined to a tiny amount of characters. Trying to express the same point on Twitter, however, likely risks people getting extremely angry at you due to the nature of the app not allowing nuanced conversations. That’s not to say Tumblr is necessarily superior— just that they’re different areas with different setups. The reason Twitter is so no-nuance a lot of the time isn’t just due to the people— the app is deliberately set up so that users can’t make multiple points in one post. This also attracts people who don’t want to have nuanced conversations, which feeds the cycle. This is an (extremely oversimplified) explanation of why most social media apps feel so separate from each other, even if you follow all the same people. You should know your audience—but you should also know your stage.

It’s important to have a certain amount of REASON and common sense when you’re talking to someone about the skrunkly little guys in your favorite movie. It’s not that you can’t be passionate—I once essentially made an entire powerpoint presentation about why I think my opinion about a fictional cat person is the correct one—but you need to remember that not everything is the same level of seriousness. Expressing an opinion about whether Team Rocket are actually villains is not the same thing as expressing an opinion about the upcoming US election. (Though I think Team Rocket could potentially do an okay job, to be honest. Meowth 2024?) You can 100% have intense, long discussions about fictional characters, but it’s never worth genuinely harming your own mental health or attacking someone else because of an opinion that ultimately doesn’t hurt anyone. It’s okay to agree to disagree.

Lastly, remember that a lot of this is not intuitive. Your ABILITY to make smart decisions online is a skill that takes time to develop (as is evidenced by 99% of past me’s Twitter posts) and it’s important to give yourself grace. As much as the internet hates to admit it, we all make mistakes. Just own up to those mistakes and move on. It’s okay to delete a post you made because you don’t agree with it anymore. It’s okay to come back to an argument and apologize for going too far. It’s okay to not be perfect. Accept the consequences of your own actions and move forward.

[boyswanna-be-her]

Hmm a fresh cup of coffee will certainly fix this and, if not, bourbon

[bazpitch]

logically speaking do the two not go hand and hand???