Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main'

This commit is contained in:
2026-03-16 08:29:33 -04:00
30 changed files with 1493 additions and 12 deletions
+54
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
---
id: 2026-03-14T08:24:04-04:00
aliases: []
title: 2026-03-14 08:24:04
tags:
- authorship/original
- destiny/permanent
- status/draft
- type/periodic/timestamped
dg-publish: true
date-created: 2026-03-14T08:24:04-04:00
daily: "[[2026-03-14]]"
weekly: "[[2026-W11]]"
monthly: "[[2026-03]]"
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
yearly: "[[2026]]"
---
# 2026-03-14 08:24:04
My dad frequently tells me how people (especially immigrants)
are taking undue advantage of welfare and other government programs.
His favorite example right now is the "Somali daycare fraud".
He tries to bait me into agreeing that these people are lazy or selfish.
It's a frustrating line of argument,
especially from a man I know is intelligent,
because the blame is so obviously misplaced.
It's not logical to criticize the abusers of government aid
that you already believed was inappropriate.
Despite benefiting from regulation in every aspect of his life,
he fancies himself a small government type.
For a libertarian like he claims to be,
abuse of government programs
is just a symptom of the real problem,
that the programs exist in the first place.
Complaining about something directly offensive to your personal sensibilities
is just whining,
and whining is a net negative for yourself and potential supporters,
since it negatively impacts perception of your cause.
Only the people responsible for the offense are unaffected,
they may even be benefited by your tantrum,
if (by pouting) you get the relief of catharsis,
and don't actually do anything about the real problem.
Turning whining into belief requires considering
* why the the thing you don't like happens,
* what could be done to stop it from happening,
* what the secondary impacts of the solution would be,
* if the result is even worth the cost.
These are the bare minimum for discussing societal,
or even just organizational issues.
Until you have done them all several times
and understand the problem from all sides,
keep that shit to yourself.
+46
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
---
id: 2026-03-14T23:17:58-04:00
aliases: []
title: 2026-03-14 23:17:58
tags:
- authorship/original
- destiny/permanent
- status/draft
- type/periodic/timestamped
daily: "[[2026-03-14]]"
date-created: 2026-03-14T23:17:58-04:00
dg-publish: true
monthly: "[[2026-03]]"
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
weekly: "[[2026-W11]]"
yearly: "[[2026]]"
---
# 2026-03-14 23:17:58
## Utility for Meal Planning
Would you take this offer?
> You can no longer eat or drink,
> but you no longer need to to survive.
I wouldn't, but I've known people who would.
I've also known people like the villain from _Ratatouille_
that would never eat something just for the calories.
I'd say I lean more towards the first,
certainly my interest in cooking
is one of cost optimization,
not expressing myself through the medium of food.
Taste does matter to me though,
I realized this recently while eating particularly bland [[stroganoff]].
Novelty of taste as well,
which is why I rotate through recipes
rather than just picking my favorite.[^1]
But the value of taste declines sharply above a certain point.
[^1]: Internalized social stigma probably deserves more credit there,
but the outcome is the same.
For me, a recipe with high [[utility]]
is tasty, cheap, _and_ convenient to prepare.
+47
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
---
id: 2026-03-15T12:38:20-04:00
aliases: []
title: 2026-03-15 12:38:20
tags:
- authorship/original
- destiny/permanent
- status/draft
- type/periodic/timestamped
dg-publish: true
date-created: 2026-03-15T12:38:20-04:00
daily: "[[2026-03-15]]"
weekly: "[[2026-W11]]"
monthly: "[[2026-03]]"
quarterly: "[[2026-Q1]]"
yearly: "[[2026]]"
---
# 2026-03-15 12:38:20
I have this idea that people generally respond better to a good analogy
than to a well-reasoned argument,
so I'm frequently disappointed in myself
for being unable to come up with one.
It ought to be easy for me.
When I'm sure of something,
my certainty invariably manifests in the form of an analogy,
only the parallel concepts are just that,
and they resist my attempts to define them.
I feel now that this judgement might be baseless anyway.
Without the pressure of organizational enforcement,
radical changes in thinking necessarily take years of incremental changes.
No matter how much better the new framework is,
a person must work up to the change,
otherwise their trust in it will be hollow.
At least that has been my experience in the past few years;
knowing that a shovel is better for digging ditches,
but still using a gardening trowel
because it's what I'm comfortable with.
It doesn't frustrate me when others use trowels,
only when they can't acknowledge the benefits of the shovel.
Like that one, most of the analogies I want to make
would be intended to demonstrate why an action would be foolish.
It would be fitting to write in [anapestic tetrameter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anapestic_tetrameter)
a la [[seuss_1937_mulberry-street]].