Tootfinder

Private market investments, while not technically barred from 401(k) plans, are riskier than publicly traded stocks and bonds.
They have traditionally been seen as unfit for defined contribution plans.
Consumer groups, lawmakers and some investment advisers have raised alarm about the potential harm to everyday investors.
Those concerns have been front and center.
But observers say the private asset industry, which has lobbied hard for the opening, could also expose…

Private Equity in Your 401(k). What Could Go Wrong?
Critics say an executive order that clears the way for alternative assets to enter retirement accounts poses risks to everyday investors. It could also pose some for private fund managers.

B02 - Shadow
BEK: What's in it for you?
BLAKE: You can help me with one of my crew. His name's Vila and he's suffering from a bad attack of alcoholic remorse. [Into bracelet] All right, Cally. [To them] He wants to make a necklace of his teeth.
https://blake.torpidity.net/m/202/321

"At 6 months in, I think it’s time for food and nutrition advocates, scientists and professionals to call out the MAHA agenda for what it is - it’s a movement with the right vibes, the wrong priorities and solutions, headed up by someone with dangerous thoughts on public health who is not going to improve the health of Americans, nutritional or otherwise."
6 Months of MAHA

6 Months of MAHA
A Reflection and Call to Action

An #infosec drama, in two screenshots.

Wouldn't it be cool it around the USA, and around the world, at 7pm Eastern US time, on this coming June 14, that everyone everywhere does a synchronized mass Braveheart mooning of FFOTUS while wearing underwear emblazoned with "TA" on the left side and "CO" on the right?
Hey, if Improve Anywhere can organize pant-less subway events around the world, we ought to be able to do this.
Example:

How popular media gets love wrong
Okay, so what exactly are the details of the "engineered" model of love from my previous post? I'll try to summarize my thoughts and the experiences they're built on.
1. "Love" can be be thought of like a mechanism that's built by two (or more) people. In this case, no single person can build the thing alone, to work it needs contributions from multiple people (I suppose self-love might be an exception to that). In any case, the builders can intentionally choose how they build (and maintain) the mechanism, they can build it differently to suit their particular needs/wants, and they will need to maintain and repair it over time to keep it running. It may need winding, or fuel, or charging plus oil changes and bolt-tightening, etc.
2. Any two (or more) people can choose to start building love between them at any time. No need to "find your soulmate" or "wait for the right person." Now the caveat is that the mechanism is difficult to build and requires lots of cooperation, so there might indeed be "wrong people" to try to build love with. People in general might experience more failures than successes. The key component is slowly-escalating shared commitment to the project, which is negotiated between the partners so that neither one feels like they've been left to do all the work themselves. Since it's a big scary project though, it's very easy to decide it's too hard and give up, and so the builders need to encourage each other and pace themselves. The project can only succeed if there's mutual commitment, and that will certainly require compromise (sometimes even sacrifice, though not always). If the mechanism works well, the benefits (companionship; encouragement; praise; loving sex; hugs; etc.) will be well worth the compromises you make to build it, but this isn't always the case.
3. The mechanism is prone to falling apart if not maintained. In my view, the "fire" and "appeal" models of love don't adequately convey the need for this maintenance and lead to a lot of under-maintained relationships many of which fall apart. You'll need to do things together that make you happy, do things that make your partner happy (in some cases even if they annoy you, but never in a transactional or box-checking way), spend time with shared attention, spend time alone and/or apart, reassure each other through words (or deeds) of mutual beliefs (especially your continued commitment to the relationship), do things that comfort and/or excite each other physically (anywhere from hugs to hand-holding to sex) and probably other things I'm not thinking of. Not *every* relationship needs *all* of these maintenance techniques, but I think most will need most. Note especially that patriarchy teaches men that they don't need to bother with any of this, which harms primarily their romantic partners but secondarily them as their relationships fail due to their own (cultivated-by-patriarchy) incompetence. If a relationship evolves to a point where one person is doing all the maintenance (& improvement) work, it's been bent into a shape that no longer really qualifies as "love" in my book, and that's super unhealthy.
4. The key things to negotiate when trying to build a new love are first, how to work together in the first place, and how to be comfortable around each others' habits (or how to change those habits). Second, what level of commitment you have right now, and what how/when you want to increase that commitment. Additionally, I think it's worth checking in about what you're each putting into and getting out of the relationship, to ensure that it continues to be positive for all participants. To build a successful relationship, you need to be able to incrementally increase the level of commitment to one that you're both comfortable staying at long-term, while ensuring that for both partners, the relationship is both a net benefit and has manageable costs (those two things are not the same). Obviously it's not easy to actually have conversations about these things (congratulations if you can just talk about this stuff) because there's a huge fear of hearing an answer that you don't want to hear. I think the range of discouraging answers which actually spell doom for a relationship is smaller than people think and there's usually a reasonable "shoulder" you can fall into where things aren't on a good trajectory but could be brought back into one, but even so these conversations are scary. Still, I think only having honest conversations about these things when you're angry at each other is not a good plan. You can also try to communicate some of these things via non-conversational means, if that feels safer, and at least being aware that these are the objectives you're pursuing is probably helpful.
I'll post two more replies here about my own experiences that led me to this mental model and trying to distill this into advice, although it will take me a moment to get to those.
#relationships #love

We had some sun before the rain moved in #dogsofmastodon

"GenAI art has already reached polyester status, and this is just the beginning. Despite all the techno-utopian promises, our brains see it as ersatz."
(Original title: GenAI is Our Polyester)
https://culture.ghost.io/genai-is-our-polyester/

GenAI is Our Polyester
The best way to understand generative AI art and aesthetics is to consider how previous "synthetics" lost value in the long-run For the first half of the 20th century, white-collar workers wore business shirts made from cotton or linen that wrinkled in the wash. Ironing them into a presentable shape

My son Elliot when we were visiting Gettysburg, PA this spring
#gettysburg #history #photo #photography

#Blakes7 Series B, Episode 09 - Countdown
CAUDER: But it's four thousand miles away. It can't be done.
AVON: It can if we use the teleport.
BLAKE: We can teleport right down to the location.
AVON: We'll need special equipment, thermal clothing.

Blakes7Bot | Search
Companion site to the Blakes7Bot Twitter, Mastodon, and Bluesky accounts. Automated lines of Blakes 7 dialog. Includes a script search facility.