• swlabr@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    ok so couple stub sneers I thought of when reading this:

    1. One way to look at EA is as an extension of the middle-manager’s syndrome of injecting metrics everywhere to allow them to spin up narratives of growth and improvement to justify their existence. I can’t decide who I hate more!
    2. following on from 1, it’s kind of funny that the EAs, who you could pattern match to a “high school nerd” stereotype, are intellectually beaten out by an analog of the “jock” stereotype of sports fans: fantasy league participants who understand the concept of “intangibles” that EAs apparently cannot grasp.
    3. it absolutely tracks that EAs, who see charities that spend money on administrating themselves as inefficient and incompetent, are dumbfounded and bereft of answers when any of their organisations implode
    • BlueMonday1984@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      1. following on from 1, it’s kind of funny that the EAs, who you could pattern match to a “high school nerd” stereotype, are intellectually beaten out by an analog of the “jock” stereotype of sports fans: fantasy league participants who understand the concept of “intangibles” that EAs apparently cannot grasp.

      On a wider note, it feels the “geek/nerd” moniker’s lost a whole lot of cultural cachet since its peak in the mid-'10s. It is a topic Sarah Z has touched on, but I could probably make a full goodpost about it.

      • ahopefullycuterrobot@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Haven’t watched Z’s video, but I’d also note I’m deeply sceptical that the nerd/jock distinction was ever real past maybe the 90s.

        In my own school (and those of all the people I’ve discussed it with), if you were in advanced classes, you almost always played a sport. Even geeky interests - like video games, some anime (Yu-Gi-Oh, Pokemon), and to a lesser extent comics - were incredibly popular. There were cliques, but those cliques were normally personality and friend based rather than academic vs. sport. If there were a divide, it was between those who were socially skilled and those who were not, but that didn’t neatly map onto whether you were smart or not.

        Even as a kid, I mostly thought of the nerd/jock stuff as being a marketing ploy, rather than reflecting my own experiences. Which isn’t to say you wouldn’t get people identifying as nerds or geeks, but to say that the actual social reality didn’t seem to match.

        • bitofhope@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah, as a kid I was kinda the archetypal nerd. Short, fat, airheaded, besserwisser, straight A’s,* into manga and video games. My best friend for most of primary school was the guy with even better grades, but tall, handsome and a national championship level athlete.

          Then puberty hit me pretty early and suddenly I was about median height for my age, I could do pull-ups while most of my classmates couldn’t, and even though I wasn’t that fond of gym class, I was mostly motivated enough to get a decent grade just for trying a little.

          The nerd/jock thing always felt like an American thing from an older generation that wasn’t taken seriously. Maybe it was acknowledged by an overthinker like me, but to even bring up the distinction was kinda nerdy itself. It definitely wasn’t the defining social divisor in my adolescent life.

          *Or rather, nines and tens on the weird 4 to 10 scale Finnish primary education uses.

          • froztbyte@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The nerd/jock thing always felt like an American thing

            similarly, I never got to see the “school bully” thing even nearly as much as it seems to be an issue US-side. not that we didn’t have (or that they didn’t try with me[0] on occasion), but it seems to be quite extreme in the US?

            • mirrorwitch@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              I got some very intense, frequent bullying in 90s Latin America for being perceived as queer, before even understanding myself that I was actually queer.

              I don’t think there was ever anything like the jocks from US movies. Bullies tended to be troubled kids from difficult backgrounds, the kind of kid who would be themself exposed to violence and abuse at home or in their neighbourhood. A handful were from religious fundamentalist families.

              There was some hostility towards children who took school too seriously or were perceived as teacher’s pets, but I don’t think that in itself would have inspired “slapped every day” levels of bullying. I don’t remember bullying due to what today are called fandoms or geeky interests; they were just much less known.

  • BigMuffin69@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    To grasp how disastrously an apparently altruistic movement has run off course, consider that the value of organizations that provide healthy vegan food within their underserved communities are ignored as an area of funding because EA metrics can’t measure their “effectiveness.” Or how covering the costs of caring for survivors of industrial animal farming in sanctuaries is seen as a bad use of funds. Or how funding an “effective” organization’s expansion into another country encourages colonialist interventions that impose elite institutional structures and sideline community groups whose local histories and situated knowledges are invaluable guides to meaningful action.

    Nice. Kind of reminds me of a segment in Ken Burns’ Vietnam documentary where to eradicate the Viet Kong, American military intelligence organizations became obsessed with body counts as a measure of ‘winning’ the war, so then the effect on the ground became shooting civs so we can count more bodies. The metric you use as a proxy for doing good (I’ve donated x dollars to combat homelessness while working for blackrock :)) isn’t aligned with your desired outcome.

    Hey, wait a minute, were EAs the misaligned entity all along??

    ⢀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠘⣿⣿⡟⠲⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠈⢿⡇⠀⠀⠈⠑⠦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢲⣾⣿⣿⠃ ⠀⠀⠈⢿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠓⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠚⠉⠀⠀⢸⣿⡿⠃⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠈⢧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⡟⠁⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠳⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠒⠒⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠑⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢦⡀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡴⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣶⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠰⣀⣀⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠁⠀⠀⠀⣠⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠃⠀⠀⠀⢸⣀⣽⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣧⣨⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡞⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⠛⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⢃⡤⠖⠒⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⢧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⢸⡀⠀⠀⢀⡗⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡁⠀⠀⠀⣹⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡀⠙⠒⠒⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢺⡀⠀⠀⠀⢹⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠲⠴⠚⠁⠀⠀⠸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⠤⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢳⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠾⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠦⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠼⠇⠀⠀⠀

    • BlueMonday1984@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago
      ⢀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠘⣿⣿⡟⠲⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠈⢿⡇⠀⠀⠈⠑⠦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢲⣾⣿⣿⠃ 
      ⠀⠀⠈⢿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠓⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠚⠉⠀⠀⢸⣿⡿⠃⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠈⢧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡤⠖⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⡟⠁⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠳⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠒⠒⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠑⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢦⡀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡴⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣶⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠰⣀⣀⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠁⠀⠀⠀⣠⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠃⠀⠀⠀⢸⣀⣽⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣧⣨⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡞⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⠛⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⢃⡤⠖⠒⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⢧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⢸⡀⠀⠀⢀⡗⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠤⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡁⠀⠀⠀⣹⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡀⠙⠒⠒⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢺⡀⠀⠀⠀⢹⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠲⠴⠚⠁⠀⠀⠸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠦⠤⠴⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢳⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ 
      ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠾⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠦⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠤⠼⠇⠀⠀⠀
      

      (your shocked Pikachu was borked, I ended up fixing it out of frustration. Took me a couple attempts - standard formatting fucks it up no matter what, but code’s kinder to it)

    • Soyweiser@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Remember how the book seeing like a state tried to warn people about this. If only it had bot been reviewed by Scott, EA could have been warned.

      • YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        On a related note, shout-out to the banner image of a neatly spaced rectangular grid of trees, the one part of the book that if I remember right Scooter did actually read and sort of understand, even if he was unable to generalize beyond early modern forestry.

        Ironically that review was where I first encountered the work of the late James Scott.