Loyalty Check

When I was in relationships, I found that something that I used to never understand would occur. The women would ask me to do non-logical or pointless actions. Then I would be like,k "Why would I do that", "What is the reason", or "That doesn't make any sense". Then they would get mad at me. That happened for years. Typically sensible people would get in situations then as me to do bizarre acts. Finally I realized what that is, that is a loyalty check. When a relationship is based on emotion then people who depend on that do loyalty checks to see if your emotional motivation will override your logical motivations. Once I realized that then I noticed that that occurs on lots of places in life. Loyalty checks not only help the controller understand how well the followers are following but can be used to build a habit in the follower.  Start out with small loyalty check then build to bigger ones. That can be used to build groups that have a common purpose. Anyway after I realized that then my logical mind was able to wrap illogical request in the logical interpretation that it was a loyalty check and whether the action made any sense did not matter, that value was in demonstrating loyal. So then instead of being bother by the illogical request, this interpretation made the request logical.

Why prostitution can never be legal like other jobs

Let's image a world where prostitution is legal in the way other jobs are legal. For example, it could be legal like being a secretary is legal or being a hair dresser. Once it it fully legal then companies can hire prostitutes as employees. They could job interview and advertise for employees and hire them with professionally written employment contracts and have yearly performance reviews. The employees could get good health care and benefits. What is the problem? Every dude in a small company that is going to hire a secretary is going to have the job description be answer phone, take dictation, arrange meetings, blow me on request, ensure office supplies are ordered, water the plants, and handle bill payment. Since prostitution in entirely legal then you can write jobs that require work performed while being a prostitute. Then if there were no people who wanted the job because it was disgusting they could apply for foreign workers to fill the position since no citizens wanted the jobs.

Fried Chicken is Evil and Delicious

How bad ass are humans. We kill chickens and eat their flesh. That is not good enough though so we coat it in a batter made of eggs and fry that and then eat it. We are so bad ass that eating the dead body of the chicken is not enough we have to coat it in a paste made of their dead babies and then eat that. And its delicious. From the chickens perspective it must be a horror show. Not only do they die but we kill their babies and coat them with it then eat that. Humans are bad ass. It would be funny to watch someone being politically correct while eating fried chicken. The contrast would be hilarious. Hey you, eat your dead baby coated fried flesh and talk about trivial bullshit. You are on point. Anyway friend chicken is delicious and humans are bad ass.

Transparent Attempts at Negative Publicity

I was wondering if the transparent attempts at negative publicity by established interested is effective. I keep seeing but when I see the effect on me is to be surprised that anyone would think that the motivation is not obvious and self serving. I recently saw a story about AirBnb. They described how some users had their home trashed or were murdered. I am sure that happened but problems like that happen without AirBnb. There was a story about Uber where an Uber driver raped someone. Uber does not cause people to rape other people. Why was the story not about the brand of car that the Uber drive was in linked to the rape. Why was the city not linked to the rape. Random association between things and events is not significant unless there is a statistical study about the probabilities of the events occuring in specific circumstances. Does this work on people? I become irritated because the story becomes uninteresting due to the underlying attempt at manipulation. My time was wasted.

Comminucation Channels

When people talk there are two communication channels present. One is emotional and one is practical. For example, what asking to take an item from a person the functional part would be communicating that you want to get the item; the emotional part could be added to the voice to communicate anger or friendliness. I like realizing this and decide whether I want to respond to the parts separately.

Computer Systems Vs Legal Systems

Computer systems are made up of computers which process algorithms in order to achieve a results. The legal system is made up of courts that intrepret laws in order to decide how to impose justice. Both are systems where a processer interprets rules and applies them to input to produce an output. For computer systems programmers write programs. For the legal system, laywers write laws.

Similar problems are experienced by both systems. For computer system once a program is shipped changing behaviour is very difficult because of backwards compatibility and user expectations. For the legal system, once a law is established change the law is difficult because expectations have already been set for standards of behaviour that might retroactively change an act from legal to illegal causing problem for society.

The legal system falls short of computer systems in a number of ways. For computer system the programmer can write the program and then test the program with expected input to see if the system behaves as expected. This is a very important part of the development cycle that helps ensure that the program works as expected. Without this kind of testing the program most likely will not work correctly. The legal system has no such process. This is a very big flaw. Based on experience with computer systems it should be expected that laws do not work as intended.

Programmer have access to debugged which can be used to see how programs process the input to produce the output. Not only do debuggers help make the program better they make the programmer better. Writing rules is a skill that is greatly enhanced by observation of the rules in action. Programmers that have never used a debugger would be very poor programmers. Lawyers in the legal system have no such ability to analyze the effect of their rules on real life cases. One would expect lawyers to be unskilled at writing rules compared to programmers that learned programming with debuggers.

The software development life cycle includes a workflow where customer can report problems with the expected behaviour of the computer programs. Bugs will be recorded and distributed to programmers so the algorithm can be updated to behave correctly. Without this feedback mechanism programs would over time become very difficult to use because of incorrect behaviour. The legal system has no such workflow to pass experience applying the legal system back to the lawyers designing it.

I wonder what the legal system would look like if it was designed and implemented like programs.