I had an idea about getting rid of decorative packaging and logos. You'd have the name and information of the product in a selection of pre-approved fonts, colors, and layouts. No misleading photographs or cute characters or your founder's heartwarming life story.
stray
That reminds me of when we used to use the phone book.
It's interesting that God makes everyone's genitals perfectly, but he keeps messing up hearts, lips, chromosomes, spines... I guess pobody's nerfect. (Except for me, because God made me that way.)
You are having a purely emotional response to scientific jargon.
We're humans who have emotional responses to things, and we should be cognizant of that when choosing our words. We should also be aware of how bad actors may use our words to manipulate public opinion via those emotions.
We don't use things like mongoloid or crippled anymore even though they were once considered perfectly acceptable medical terms. Unskilled is inherently derogatory, and the thesaurus is offering alternatives such as fundamental, foundational, or generalized. I like generalized labor the best so far, because it contrasts perfectly with specialized.
There are a number of skills that go into working fast food, and your dismissal of them is part of the problem.
There's nothing special required to open a restaurant in Sweden, which I think most would agree is a developed country. You need a business license and a food license (unsure how to translate), neither of which requires an education or training, and you need a proper location for preparing and serving food. Employees can be literally anyone off the street. You have to pass health inspections, but the inspectors don't care much about details if nothing dangerous is going on.
I personally appreciate your example of chef and had to delete the rest of what I had to say because it got way too emotional. It's a frustrating situation when you're making people happy by providing a service and still not being rewarded because capitalism.
This is the best I could find on the specific topic: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7888369/
People with visual or hearing sensory impairments had twice the odds of past-year suicidal ideation (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.17 to 2.73; p<0.001), and over three times the odds of reporting past-year suicide attempt (OR 3.12; 95% CI 1.57 to 6.20; p=0.001) compared with people without these impairments. Similar results were found for hearing and visual impairments separately and co-occurring.
Oh, I see. I thought they communicated much more complex information than that, but it's very practical for simple directions with no further details.
I can see only in a limited area at any given time, but I can hear in a full sphere around me simultaneously. I don't think it's accurate to characterize such a large area as "the periphery". One sense is imprecise and covers pretty much everywhere while the other is detailed, but very limited. Both senses work in concert to build a full map of the world, and the loss of either is concerning. I'm more comfortable in a blindfold than isolating headphones though, because I can still echolocate while my vision is impaired, but my vision has no way of emulating hearing's function. I'd have to be constantly looking around all over the place.
"Spiders can detect danger coming their way with an early-warning system called eyes."
Really fantastic book. I did have some notes though. Firstly, if honeybees have such low dpi vision, how can they see each other dance? I assume it's because they're experiencing the dance some other way, but how? (Also it's hella dark in there, isn't it?)
He says many times that humanity's umwelt is dominated by sight, but I very much disagree. To lose my hearing or sense of touch would make me feel quite blind, as I use them to perceive things outside my cone of vision constantly. Being in deep water is unnerving for this reason, because I can't "see" what's around me, and I have this whole new area below that I can't hear either. So I have to wonder whether other people feel the way he does or whether my usage is more unique.
He really blew my mind when describing exafference and reafference because these things are reliant on a sense of self in the first place, which means that even the worm in his example must have some form of ego.
I've used it for conceptualizing what I want, because I do my own art and also have aphantasia.
I would like ads in the context of places where I'm looking for a good or service, or where volunteering such information would be potentially beneficial to me. Things like voluntarily signing up for specific advertising emails or related products on a store page. Ads should serve people, not manipulate them and clutter up the town.
Also as long as we're still doing capitalism, I really like being able to get things for free in exchange for viewing ads. It makes things much more available to us poors.