I think one factor is that Democrats and Republicans actually hardly differ in many fundamental positions. I think the fact that an unscrupulous business man like Trump, who was once a member of the Democratic Party, can switch party affiliation just like that illustrates what I mean: there are no real alternatives, which is why election campaigns in the US need to be emotional rather than rational. That favors baseless fear mongering and empty finger-pointing that misses the real problems. I supect that many US citizens have become so accustomed to these empty election campaigns that they lost the ability to identify the lesser evil in this charade of mutual accusations far away from rational discourse. So in short I think Trump was just the better demagogue which is pretty much all that matters when reason or actual arguments are not part of the “election show”.

The PACs. I think this practice should be considered blatant corruption in any democratic system as it enables large corporations and wealthy individuals to predetermine which candidate or party has even the slightest chance in elections. In my home country, of course, there are private political funds as well but those are not nearly as important in our system as there is solid public funding for political parties based on past election results. I might be wrong but I always thought that the insane amount of private money that fuels US elections boils down to the US being a plutocracy rather than a democracy.

I know that I know nothing, said Socrates thousands of years ago. So I’d say it’s beyond clever to teach yourself things and learn from your experiences. That is very smart in my book.

It could easily have been the same for me, as my father is a Protestant pastor. Fortunately, my family has always been very tolerant and open-minded. That’s how my parents brought me up, for which I’m still very grateful to them today. It’s good to hear that you’ve found your own path, which certainly wasn’t easy. Respect, my friend.

I’m sorry. I hope you are alright.

Again: Til

Til

I think the so-called KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) are a major problem of our time, because they are often defined incorrectly or misunderstood. All too often, decision-makers seem to think that the pure number of followers, for example, or engagement metrics such as likes would indicate that an account or post is successful. However, this is often not the case when other important metrics are taken into account. In e-commerce, for example, a large number of followers or high engagement figures in themselves mean nothing at all: it is not uncommon for e-commerce companies to invest a lot of money in social media management and for the KPIs of their accounts to rise accordingly - but still not sell anything via this channel (that means that the investment is not worth it, of course, because the costs are disproportionate to the sales generated; the ROI is often not good at all). I think a similar situation can be assumed for many science accounts on Mastodon, for example. Although the number of followers maybe not very high here because there are less active useres, the quality of comments can still be a lot higher. But unfortunately this cannot be quantified, or at least not easily. I therefore think that everyone should first think about what they want to achieve with their social media accounts. It then makes sense to define suitable KPIs instead of being impressed by what can be considered an indicator of success elsewhere and in a completely different context.

That’s right, it’s certainly not a good idea to leave the head of department out of the loop - this position should definitely be informed about every relevant process. I just think that it’s in everyone’s interest if senior management can be seen by the “common people” from time to time. It shows appreciation for the work and opinions of all employees and is also a good opportunity to make sure that no important aspects or overly technical details may have been lost on the way from the head of department to the executive floor. Just as you say.

Thx

Why not consult the people who actually know their stuff? It doesn’t have to be a meeting with presentations, expectations and all that. Don’t you think that management could use your help and advice to make good strategic decisions in the long term?

That sounds like a good employer with some reasonable management. What industry was that, if you don’t mind me asking?

I think you’re confusing smart asses with wafflers.

I commented this earlier: I have no particular dislike for any country. I just don’t like some people I know personally or whose actions are known to me.

And I mean just that. I don’t see how it would be helpful to anyone to hate on people you actually know nothing about. This simple concept of nations might be alright at the Olympics and such but it is not when it comes to judging a whole nation, meaning hundreds of thousands if not millons of people.

Edit: I did mean to comment on your reply.

What I mean is that the people of a country are not the same as their government. Never was like that, never will be.

Edit: I did mean to comment on your reply.

What I mean is that the people of a country are not the same as their government. Never was like that, never will be.

Why not think of “them” as “people from another country”? That is what they actually are - just people but from another country.

I have no particular dislike for any country. I just don’t like some people I know personally or whose actions are known to me.

I’m fine. I hope you are too.

You can find a lot of stuff over at hugging face - open source stuff as well. This for example for background removal.