I feel for the teacher if they don’t have a continuing contract, yet. You’re completely dependent on staying in the good graces of your principal to have a job for the next year, and you will only be recommended for a continuing contract with the support of a principal.

But if the teacher had a continuing contract, then they probably should have told the principal to censor the student’s work themselves if they wanted it done. Or that you want the instructions to do so in writing.

This could be huge, but we’ll need to wait and see. The economic and ecological footprint of LLMs is problematic.

That said, will this actually help, or will they just use 3T parameter models to outcompete competitors 1T parameter models using GPUs? Really, this is more about small-scale models competing with midsize models. Like, this could bring a model as big as GPT 3.5 down to be something you could run on affordable hardware, right?

That would be really compelling for my sector (education) where there’s a lot of concern about student data privacy. I could definitely pitch building a local $5K-cost LLM server that could handle a dozen or so simultaneous users. That would be enough for a small school district.

Indeed. As a silly example, I had a Pacman clone game that ran based on CPU cycle speed. I needed to turn the in-game speed setting way down and toggle turbo off to make it slow enough to be playable.

Sad but not surprising that governments failing to fund maintenance costs are leading to service failures. Even less surprising that a conservative government is using the problem they created to privatise profits.

I’m having a hard time having sympathy for someone who was supporting anti-trans bigots, who were accusing teachers of being pedophiles, and (I suppose) attempting a coup. (Hard to take the last one seriously.)

Like… Of course this ended poorly. I’m surprised they paid any of the hydro bill from their camp, tbh.

Sentencing hasn’t happened yet; 48 years is the maximum, according to the article.

Whatever the sentence is will be ridiculous since it’s just copyright infringement, but hopefully the sentencing goes to a small fraction of the maximum.

I dunno. I think there are enough things named after men.

Maybe a nice neutral woman’s name… Like, Anna?

And it’s more about preservation and archival, so I think it should be called an Archive, not a library.

Yeah, Anna’s Archive. Great name. Let’s go with that one.

I don’t follow. The Internet Archive only allows 1 copy of each physical book to be loaned at a time. If someone has the book you want already, then you need to wait until their loan expires. It’s not like shadow libraries that allow unrestricted DRM-free downloading.

And publishers’ profits are rising and don’t seem to be at all correlated to library access, so of course nobody is suggesting they should close.

What am I not understanding?

That’s… Hilariously bad. Canned meats vs. fresh. Fancy ice cream vs. cheap ice cream. Everywhere you look things are shittier for the Aboriginal People’s food guide. What the fuck were they thinking? Why did they even put out a different version?

Vitamin D supplementation is recommended for all Canadians, not just vegans. And Omega 3, D, and B12 are common supplement recommendations (actually backed by strong evidence) for the general population. (Although the benefits of Omega 3 supplementation for heart health has come under scrutiny, I think its anti-inflammatory effects are still pretty widely supported.)

Anyway, no need for the vitriol. Nobody is forcing you to go vegan. If it works for them, then great! It’s definitely better for the planet to eat less meat, so power to them. (I eat way too many eggs to ever consider going vegan, personally.)

Yeah, the new Canada’s Food Guide is actually really good. (The one below is modeled after it, but changed to vegan foods).

Like, it seems like a reasonable, evidence-based, practical guide to healthy eating habits. (Unlike every single previous version going back to the 50s that might as well have been propaganda from the Canadian Wheat Board.) The latest revision is from 2019, iirc, and it’s the first time I’ve felt comfortable using it as the basis of classroom instruction.

Thoroughly explained and well supported. I want to save this in case this topic ever comes up again so I can copy-pasta this.

Yeah, fair. It’s frustrating when prices fluctuate; I’m lucky that we don’t have many “must have” items on our shipping lists, and I’m very price sensitive, so I just don’t buy things that are expensive. And I only used to go to Superstore at most weekly, so I’d never have noticed daily fluctuations.

Beehaw never defederated with lemmy.ml. Most notably, Beehaw defederated from Lemmy.world which is one of the main reasons I’m happy to stay here. If Beehaw moves away from Lemmy, I’ll definitely need to find another instance that’s defederated with Lemmy.world.

To be fair to Loblaws, I’ve never seen them change prices with these mid-day, so they’re not engaged in “surge pricing” that I’ve heard of. (I haven’t been to Loblaws since the start of the boycott, but I don’t expect it’s changed.)

But I do wonder about the legality of that; right now, if the price at the till doesn’t match the item price, you get the first one free and the rest at the marked price (up to $10 items; above that it’s $10 off the marked price for the first item). But my impression is that policy is from Loblaws signing some sort of grocery code ages ago when scanners came in, essentially to assure consumers that they wouldn’t be scammed by scanners ringing up items at higher prices than advertised. I don’t think that is legally mandated.

So, then, what happens if the price changes between when you put it in your cart and when you arrive at the till? Anyone engaging in surge pricing where the timing isn’t clearly marked in advance is going to get into a lot of trouble with consumer backlash, at the very least, but I hope it’s illegal, too.

This seems like it might work really well. We’ve evolved to be social creatures, and internalizing the emotions of others is literally baked into our DNA (mirror neurons), so filtering out the emotional “noise” from customers seems, to me, like a brilliant way to improve the working conditions for call centre workers.

It’s not like you can’t also tell the emotional tone of the caller based on the words they’re saying, and the call centre employees will know that voices are being changed.

Also, I’m not so sure about reporting on anonymous Redditor comments as the basis for journalism. I know why it’s done, but I’d rather hear what a trained psychologist has to say about this, y’know?

Good for them. I’d take my kids out to watch if we were local, too. The naked body is nothing to be ashamed of and hidden away, and sexualizing nudity is cultural, not natural.

If everyone’s children got to experience body positivity events like this, that would be a good thing for the world.

Also, no smart phones until age 16+ would help a lot, too. (Social media is the opposite of body positivity.)

That’s terrible, but so are the treatments this article is suggesting. ABA is abuse.

Behaviorism, in general, has lots of research supporting its efficacy in changing behavior, but completely ignores the mental health effects of the trauma from the behaviorist interventions.

This might be made more clear with a thought experiment from Dr Becky Kennedy’s mostly-unrelated parenting book, The Good Inside. (Great book, btw. Highly recommended for all parents.) I know a 100% effective treatment for any childhood behavior: when the child engages in the behaviour, lock them outside in a cage overnight. It will take at most 3 treatments and they’ll never exhibit that behavior again, guaranteed!

Aside from the hypothetical example obviously not passing ethics review, that’s literally how behaviorism research is conducted: the only thing they measure is efficacy in altering behaviour. That’s a really low bar.

ABA is “effective” because children are being conditioned to avoid being abused.

I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit, and I’m still not sure why a 100% inclusion rate is a problem. (With various exemptions for primary residence sales and small business sales, maybe with a $1MM lifetime maximum? idk, just making up a number.)

Are they concerned that people just… aren’t going to invest their capital to earn more money if they’ll be taxed on the profits? Or is this just a global “race to the bottom” that they won’t invest in Canada because they can earn more if they invest elsewhere?

Maybe something like: 50% inclusion up to $100K, 75% inclusion up to $1MM, then 100% inclusion thereafter, and add a mechanism to spread capital gains over several years so people making single-lifetime large capital gains aren’t treated the same as people earning millions every year.

That would still incentivize small-business creation and startups without letting multimillionaires off the hook.

Very good video overall, except I don’t think he made it clear initially that there’s a primary residence exception on capital gains tax, so people might be confused that this tax will affect them when it won’t. Similarly, the 1¼ million lifetime small business sale exemption should have been introduced earlier, imho.

Like, the example could have been a $2.6 million small business sale instead, then it would actually compare the old $1 million exemption with the new $1.25 exemption, and the old 50% incision rate with the new 50->66% inclusion rate to get a more accurate “apples-to-apples” comparison.

Napkin math:

Old capital gains tax: about 1 million is exempt, so paying 50% capital gains on remaining 1.6 million is 800K income, at 53% is about 424K tax.

New capital gains tax: 1.25M is exempt, so include 50% capital gains on next 250K, then 66% on the remaining 1.1M. Total capital gains income is 851K. 53% tax on 851K is only $27K more, for $452K, which is a 6.6% increase.

Vs. getting increased services over your entire lifetime from the ultra wealthy paying closer to their fair share? Even a small business owner selling a $2.6MM business comes out way ahead.

Also, do we really want to give doctors a pass for incorporating to shelter their income against income tax for their entire lives then say that’s a problem when they’re asked to pay closer to their actual fair share income tax when they retire? Really?

And we’re worried about people selling their multimillion dollar vacation properties paying more tax?

Anyway, I get the video is trying to be “balanced”, and it’s close, but it’s still biased toward the ultra wealthy.