Malle_Yeno

Right target, wrong reason: Testing for HAM makes complete sense. It’s government imposed to get licensed, and that’s because the equipment required for HAM could be easily modified to interfere with other electronics or run up against communications laws. HAM being self-regulated (in that everyone is a snitch if they find out you’re operating without a license) is only going to be possible if everyone is a snitch. Also, everyone has to share the radio spectrum, so you should know how to be a good actor before you get the chance to go on air.

But there is gatekeeping in HAM in how few beginners focused resources there are. At least in Canada, I found only one set of books that taught the latest HAM exam and one series of YouTube videos (thanks Ylabs!)

I have found very few “your first radio” resources. Hunting for that sort of thing is an intimidating experience, full of jargon and acronyms (not stuff like “VHF” and stuff you need for the exam, but model descriptions and stuff). Lots of sites and radio club web pages aren’t kept up to date, and it’s a lot to ask of new people that they come out to field day for in person meetups when it’s just a bunch of strangers.

Yes exactly, that’s how I think of my standing desk too (and I thought that was the whole point of them). You’re not actually standing at them, you’re supposed to move around. Standing for too long is uncomfy, so a standing desk makes you move around more as you start to feel less comfortable standing in one position.

Oh for real? I just got one and I never thought to get these types of things. I’ve heard of anti-fatigue mats, but what are these things called (just so I can look them up)?

I never “stand” at my standing desk, I’m always moving. Ngl, I thought the whole point of these desks was that standing for too long is uncomfortable, so you naturally move around more, take more breaks, and go for stretches.

I’m sorry that you’ve been mobbed for sharing this view. That’s shitty.

I feel like ableism, especially against people with intellectual and personality disability, is the one sphere where nobody seems to take the objections of the targeted group seriously, and simultaneously dismiss people speaking up for the targeted group for being “virtue signalers” or as whiners. So it’s like the only solution is to just not say anything.

(Tangential but I have similar feelings about people calling others narcissists and attacking them for it, though I don’t feel like that is going to change anytime soon. Still, if the person targeted is actually a narcissist, then I feel like it’s bad to attack them for a diagnosis and symptoms they have no control over. And if they aren’t actually a narcissist, then why further stigmatize people with narcissism? It’s more complicated than the r-slur since abuse by narcissists happens and victims shouldn’t feel restricted from sharing their experiences accurately, but similar in how it’s disproportionately used to disparage and nobody takes objections to that usage seriously.)

I thought thats what’s you’re supposed to do. Wrap the blade in the wax wrap it came in, then break it up by bending it in the wax before throwing it away in the trash (still in the wax).

I like Dr. K and think the content he puts out is important and useful, but there are a few items with his approach that I don’t appreciate. In a few of his earlier videos, he uses an example of a farmer vs. a hunter (or something thereabouts) to explain why certain unproductive thoughts can be reoccurring in people. I find that this has a lot of overlap with evolutionary psychology, which has an evidence problem and is often employed by “mindset grifters” to move product. I’m not saying that Dr. K is one of those grifters, but I’m concerned that his employment of it might “soften up” viewers to that kind of logic. So that when an actual grifter employs it, the person would be more receptive to being scammed.

But even so, I still want to stress that I think there’s a lot of good in his content and I think offering as much free content as he does is a public service.

Edit: sorry, i forgot to tie this back to your comment. He often in his earlier videos tied back those evolutionary psychology examples to concepts in Vedic philosophy and meditation. I think that could be dangerous for the reasons above, with the added issue of tying evidence-based science to things that can’t be evidenced (like someone having a certain tendency present in Vedic thought). I have the same objections to that as I would astrology. But of course if people find either of those things helpful to their mental health journey, more power to them.

Generally speaking, you will be asked to swear or affirm that you are going to tell the truth, and that you understand the consequences of not telling the truth. Whether you do a whole ceremony about it or not, it doesn’t really matter – but the court will want to know that you are competent to testify truthfully and that you know that you’re not allowed to testify to things you know aren’t true.

If you’re asking “can you be forced to testify?”, the answer is “Yes but it depends.” If you’re competent to testify and the officers of the court deem your testimony important, they can subpoena your testimony. If you have a reason to contest it, you can – but “I don’t want to” isn’t good enough.