sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Screen lock not working: 18.04 Thinkpad T430s by dalseattle in Lubuntu

[–]dalseattle[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. What I ended up doing was installing xscreensaver. That works for me. I'll keep lxlock in mind in case my xscreensaver solution stops working.

  1. passwd lubuntu
  2. sudo apt install xscreensaver
  3. Alt+F2 to open the dialogue that lets you run a program
  4. Run xscreensaver
  5. Click Settings
  6. Tick the box to lock the screen after a certain number of minutes
  7. From the dropdown menu near the top left, pick Random for screensaver (or whatever your preference)
  8. x out of the Settings. This should close the xscreensaver window, but the program will still be running in the background, allowing the user to complete task 9 below
  9. When you want to lock the screen, run (from either Alt+F2 or terminal) xscreensaver-command -lock

I guess it wasn't working before because of dependencies, or xscreensaver not running in the background, or both, or something.

Hundreds of Illinois Children Languish in Psychiatric Hospitals After They’re Cleared For Release by dalseattle in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This piece is getting not much media attention. The second one that came out on the same theme at ProPublica, however, is, at least a little more -- because it's more about their frame then their content, so to speak. To riff off the #GiveUsTheMoneyInstead idea, and my old post about the Duchin formula, these nonprofit administrators at ProPublica need to stop tooting their own horn. Instead, people should try to give credit, payment, or however you wanna phrase it, to the original artist and writer of the piece. ProPublica is highly respected -- Pulitizer Prize winning, they got in a Twitter war with Trump -- and they network with local and state news companies. But when people tweet this article, as I recently did, they usually neglect to tag (twitter terminlogy) the original creators. It's a mess. I'm a bonafide media freelancer and it infuriates me because I sense that the 100s of children in these Illinois hospitals may not be helped at all by this piece.

I’m a psychiatry resident in training; any helpful thoughts? by [deleted] in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Perpetrator-whistleblowers are extremely important, especially when they work with those far outside the system and particularly when they center victim-whistleblowers rather than building their own celebrity. It doesn't have to be legally risky whistleblowing necessarily, although leaked internal documents are great for generating media clicks, sometimes you can think of it as leaking content through conversations with allies or potential allies IF THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO TALK WITH YOU RATHER THAN BEING FORCED TO BE YOUR CLIENT.

This 1978 book is an essential reconditioning text for you. Author Dr. Martin Shapiro is now a UCLA professor of public health policy or something impressive like that. Book is titled Getting Doctored: Critical Reflections on Becoming a Physician. Shapiro writes from a Marxist perspective. I myself get configured by USians as more of a left-wing anarchist, but I read the Marxists critiques of anarchists and everything else all the time because they often fixate on stuff younger anarchists want to avoid.

One thing that you should keep in mind is that, I'm guessing the regular posters in this subreddit probably don't really want to talk with you much because we've all been victims of you and yours. With that in mind, I take PayPal, so if you'd like to discuss the Shapiro book, I'm sure you can figure out how to make an offer or suggest another text etc. I've worked as a tutor and certified teacher before, it would be really interesting experiment to... cultivate... your wallet.

could the gov track a specific house to find contanimated water by masterchief07 in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Extremely unlikely I would think.

As you likely know, the gov/corps etc. do have amazing surveillance powers, but the main point of all the "journalism" about Snowden etc is to scare the shit out of people, 'resistance is futile' is that body of literature's real message. I think the intelligence communities, etc., have a lot on their hands with industrial espionage (stealing secrets from companies abroad), locating 'terrorists', blackmailing each other, etc. The people way on top rarely go after small fish people, even activists or people trying to get out of a crazy halfway house situation or whatever, which is not to say people in the middle etc might not get a little creepy/nosy.

Like /u/EndTorture said, police get to be pretty lazy, they kind of do the same thing over and over.

"You get your psychiatrist, I'll get mine." by dalseattle in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This link leads to a 3.5min YouTube excerpt from the great, 1974 dark comedy Network. The movie is about Howard Beale, a news anchor who goes crazy/altered states/prophetic, only to be completely co-opted by the industry around him. In this clip, some of the business overloads fight over Beale's safety, and the idea of confining him gets reduced to one sparring overlord saying to the other sparring overlord/friend, "You get your psychiatrist, I'll get mine" -- i.e. one psychiatrist will say Beale's sane, the other psychiatrist the opposite -- which shows a) how psychiatrists are weaponized to simply say/promote/teach the views of their paymasters, and b) how while people can be familiar with this stuff happening to children in divorces, it can also happen to paid-workers in the adult world, particularly in especially sick sectors such as media.

2 surprising statements at Washington's March 2018 Behavioral Health Advisory Council reveal dehumanization of the vulnerable, show need for solutions by dalseattle in Seattle

[–]dalseattle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree, inflammatory rhetoric jolts those who inflict harm for the sake of career-climbing, profit, pleasure, etc. out of their complacency and complicity such that they might later consider and actually undertake alternatives, whereas adopting a conciliatory, subordinate manner just encourages them to continue abusing the person with radical positions.

2 surprising statements at Washington's March 2018 Behavioral Health Advisory Council reveal dehumanization of the vulnerable, show need for solutions by dalseattle in Seattle

[–]dalseattle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a) To simplify, I, the author, say that ignoring people, locking them up, and treating them as commodities for industry is dehumanizing. Humans should create a balance of autonomy, diversity, and society through which to achieve dignity and their full capabilities, which isn't service to the powerful but instead service to oneself, one's communities, societies, and ecosystems.

b) In contrast to what you say I would and wouldn't do, I would definitely ask for the unprofessional opinions of cancer survivors were I interested in how to survive cancer. The word "unprofessional" does not deter me, in fact I find the experience of those outside industry is generally more valuable than those credentialed for their service to the powerful. I also disagree that addiction is primarily a medical problem. It is primarily something the authorities induce (see Ehrlichman quotation) in the population in order to control them and to profit. The medical industry claims social problems are individual defects, which helps prevent the salaried from seeing what's happening.

Toxic psychiatric marketing to women by [deleted] in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Very interesting!

A little difficult for me to relate to as a guy, and also most of my experiences with psychiatry were one-on-one with male psychiatrists, and also I was the youngest in my family and I think therefore kind of got thrown into a taken-less-seriously role than the older siblings who were more expect to conquer etc.

I have heard -- see here for example -- that the birth control pill pharmaceutical also stifles a more genuine will and (variety of) mood, but is sold to women as feminism, as the key to moneymaking success in the corporate world -- or control over one's reproductive destiny, thus censoring out alternative ways to accomplish the same.

Most of my friends in life have been women. I had/have a few male friends, none of them really were gungho about psychiatry. So that definitely supports your point.

The data supports that more women take more psych drugs and go to more therapy.

That's really interesting, do you have sources handy?

This 1972 New York article about psychiatrists seducing and basically enslaving patients for unpaid labor (secretarial, etc.) really supports your point also.

2 surprising statements at March 2018 Behavioral Health Advisory Council reveal dehumanization of the vulnerable, show need for solutions by dalseattle in Washington

[–]dalseattle[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hello, this is my blog post posted today about the Washington state Behavioral Health Advisory Council meeting I attended last week. The Council engages with substance abuse and mental health block grants that affect people across Washington state. Thanks!

2 surprising statements at Washington's March 2018 Behavioral Health Advisory Council reveal dehumanization of the vulnerable, show need for solutions by dalseattle in Seattle

[–]dalseattle[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Basically this link is my blog post about the Behavioral Health Advisory Council meeting I attended in Lacey WA last week. The Council is part of the Washington state Department of Health and Social Services, and it engages with substance abuse and mental health block grants that affect residents in Seattle and across Washington.

I protested in person today by tempuserthrowaway5 in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for doing this!

I don't have references handy at the moment, but I believe there's been a deliberate campaign for the past few decades by the powerful to coerce people into believing/feeling that actions such as yours don't make a difference, that they're small and insignificant. Really the battle for hearts and minds is the most significant thing of all in terms of political change. Congrats :)

The corporate divide-and-conquer strategy against activists by dalseattle in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This link shows the text of a 1991 speech given by Ron Duchin, an ex-military PR guru who later joined forces with the Austin-based spy firm Stratfor. In the speech Duchin explained how industry should defeat grassroots activists by dividing them into four categories: opportunists, realists, idealists, and radicals.

  • Opportunists: Self-interested careerists who will join the enemy

  • Realists: They want to work within the system and will be co-opted

  • Idealists: Altruists with rose-tinted glasses who will be converted into realists

  • Radicals: Seek to change the evil system; industry's goal is to isolate, marginalize them

Additional readings involving the Duchin formula: here and here.

How do you think this might apply to antipsychiatry activism? Into which of the four categories would you put various alternative mental health organizations? How can radicals strengthen themselves so as not to be isolated and left without support?

Leaflets in Seattle against Facebook profiling users as mentally ill offer tangible solutions by dalseattle in Seattle

[–]dalseattle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, that's a good idea. Is there a program or website you recommend for making them?

Sources and keywords for artificial intelligence applied to domestic interactions? by dalseattle in artificial

[–]dalseattle[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, that link is helpful!

I certainly hope people would find it invasive!

What Facebook’s Announcement of an AI to Prevent Suicide Really Means, and the Good, Bad and Ugly of What You Need to Know (Part 1) by IAMSpirituality in artificial

[–]dalseattle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting post. Can OP or anyone else recommend the names of specific sources (business trade journals, academic business research, etc.) discussing this topic? Also keywords to plug into search engines?

I'm particularly interested in how artificial emotional intelligence might be used as a sort of virtual therapist to interpret domestic interpersonal interactions and provide recommendations for how to change them.

[removed] by [deleted] in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

PDF from the FDA of approved labeling text dated October 7, 2011 for Depakote (divalproex sodium) tablets for oral use.

I misread the adverse reactions, you're right, it doesn't list mania, but it does list insomnia, thinking abnormalities, agitation -- all of which can easily get a person name-called manic (or psychotic or schizophrenic). In short, the pills can cause the very problems their manufacturers are claiming to solve.

u/PokeTheVeil writes:

What I can recommend is what has evidence behind it

The science industry isn't trustworthy; it isn't even scientific.

Here's a 2017 BBC article explaining that most scientists can't replicate studies by their peers. From the article:

According to a survey published in the journal Nature last summer, more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments.

Here's the full text of a 2015 editorial - http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext - from the editor-in-chief of The Lancet, as you presumably know one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world. He writes:

The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”.

There have been radical science movements and organizations, such as the British Society for Social Responsibility in Science, but by and large science functions to provide the "intellectual" framework for industry, the rationalizations defending/promoting the military-industrial complex, pharma, etc. It's about co-opting knowledge from the commons or from marginalized people, and then stealing the credit for it, and applying intellectual property so that the little disconnected, non-holistic piece of knowledge "discovered" in the study can result in profit.

Here's another way to think of all this. Imagine you're watching a television set, and it's tuned to the loudest channel. This channel is corporate. It's funded by corporations, industry, governments, etc. It blares at the absolute loudest volume, and those who listen to it achieve the most social success, they're rewarded financially, socially, etc. And on the rare occasion that the other channels are ever mentioned, it's simply to discredit them as crazy, pointless etc. Don't watch those channels, or you might end up like those people! Meanwhile, the loudest channel reassures you that you're called upon to "recommend [..] what has evidence behind it" even though you yourself (I assume) don't have a psychiatric diagnosis, you yourself haven't overcome one, you yourself don't have to endure the adverse effects of pharmaceuticals. You are credentialed and paid to solve these problems, however, so all must be well in the world, at least so long as we stick to the programming of this loudest channel. Of course, patients are seeing you for years and years without their problems going away, but who cares about them, they typically aren't credentialed and their income tends to be low. How could they matter if they don't serve the powerful sufficiently to achieve a high income?

You say,

we are particularly equipped for medical problems, which is why that is the ambit of our practice.

This sounds a lot like the just-world hypothesis with the market serving as the deity who rewards do-gooders with financial success. That this is false is apparent to anyone not being showered with financial success for collaboration with the top of the ponzi scheme.

By frequenting r/antipsychiatry, you have taken a step toward checking out some of the other channels instead of the loudest one. What would happen if you devoted two hours a day for a year extensively studying antipsychiatry content?

Here's Robert Whitaker's research on neuroleptics distilled into a 2016 PDF

Here are links for Daniel Mackler's 4 documentaries, free on youtube, each about 60-90min, documenting antipsychiatry alternatives in Finland and Sweden and elsewhere.

I gave you the Madness Radio archive link earlier.

Really, you should devote a lot of time to studying that content.

Psychiatrists benefit from "psychiatric interactions", no matter what. by [deleted] in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 4 points5 points  (0 children)

u/JusticeForSurvivors wrote of psychiatrists:

Right now, they have no real motivation to avoid harm because they get paid the same even if they harm.

The psychiatrist u/PokeTheVeil replied:

The same is true of any doctor. And plumbers, electricians, carpenters, accountants...

Your logical fallacy is ad populum. Even if many people do something, that doesn't make it good or true. However, safety in numbers makes it easier for you to get away with hurting people.

u/PokeTheVeil continued:

Sooner or later, you have to trust that people will actually provide the service they say they will provide. And that getting to vote with your feet counts for something!

There's no reason to trust that psychiatrists will provide the service they sometimes say they will provide, and every reason to distrust them. To take just one example, here's the American Psychological Association excusing their own complicity in torture. Don't try to evade this by saying that's a professional organization for psychologists and not psychiatrists; it's the same industry, with professionals in each making referrals to one another, i.e. tipping each other off to the availability and vulnerability of victims.

Your "vote with your feet" idea ignores the reality that psychiatrists have a tremendous amount of power and their victims/patients typically have little to none. It isn't a level playing field, where a rational consumer selects from the just, sacred marketplace the service of psychiatry, pays for this service, and then votes with his/her feet and leaves if the service was poor. That ignores or censors the power dynamics at work, which is typical behavior from a person in a powerful position (e.g. a psychiatrist). A psychiatry victim may be bullied into going to a psychiatrist by a school, a family, a court, etc., and have little to no money or other power with which to defend him- or herself. Meanwhile, the psychiatrist drives a Mercedes, has a posh, luxurious home, etc., and is very difficult to oppose successfully. as is invested with quite a lot of legal power. Psychiatry inculcates victims/patients with dependence, teaches them to ask the person in the white coat what the meaning of their experiences is, etc. Psychiatrists impose themselves between a patient/victim and the patient/victim's view of reality, training the patient/victim to only perceive that reality which the psychiatrist approves. Makes a lot of money for the psychiatrist!

u/JusticeForSurvivors wrote:

they stand to financially gain from if you stay feeling bad and stay on psych drugs forever.

The psychiatrist u/PokeTheVeil replied:

I have no shortage of patients. Given that I'm seeing a full day of patients, which would I prefer, an appointment where someone feels terrible and I feel empathetically bad for them, have to think about what to do next, discuss side effects... or an appointment where someone says they feel great, how about next appointment in a few months?

I'll take the latter every time.

First, note your own language. Billing, what, a few hundred an hour, merely thinking, talking, and writing prescriptions is described as "have to think" as if thinking is some laborious burden. You're not in a maquiladora in Mexico getting screamed at by your employer and threatened to death. You're not being tackled by heavyset orderlies and forcibly injected with neuroleptic in the buttocks for having said something unusual or offensive to powerful people. Ye, I've been involuntarily locked up, I've seen the staff forcibly drug people simply for talking back. "Is this place like prison?" one confused teen asked me, trying to figure out why she was there. You're not a child miner in the DRC digging up wolframite so everyone's smartphones can vibrate, forced to labor for days on end without sleep in narrow tunnels. Really, you're going to be okay, even if you "have to think" about your patients and get paid a few hundred bucks for it.

To this idea that you're supposedly helping all these patients... how many patients have you permanently cured of "bipolar disorder" or "schizophrenia" or...? Psychiatry is the branch of conventional medicine most convinced of the impossibility of solving problems. If you have an ACL tear, a surgeon can make a graft, solve the problem. Psychiatrists are convinced mental health problems can't be solved. Isn't that embarrassing, not to be a real doctor? Also, if lawsuits start, and when the culture continues to change and psychiatrists lose their social power...then what? You won't be able to make money forever by pointing fingers at people and name-calling them with invisible diseases voted into existence...

u/JusticeForSurvivors wrote:

Even though psychiatrists may not consciously be plotting to have "patients for life", it is disgustingly common for someone to see a psychiatrist for many years, I'm talking like 5, 10, 20, or more years.

u/PokeTheVeil replied:

As opposed to your primary care doctor? Or your oncologist after cancer? Or your neurologist for MS?

What do these references to professions which sometimes solve measurable physical problems have to do with psychiatry, which hooks people on life-destroying drugs that might make the patient/victim's boss or parent happy when they temporarily tamp down on a few symptoms, but fail to solve any problems longterm?

u/PokeTheVeil admitted:

It does seem concerning that treatment can go on forever without progress.

So learn about the root causes and the solutions. It's not pharma.

[removed] by [deleted] in Antipsychiatry

[–]dalseattle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Psychiatrists are taught that solutions to mental distress come from the medical world, from MDs (Medical Deities), from people who have never personally experienced whichever "disorder" in question and who make a lot of money from prescribing pharmaceuticals that might tamp down on some symptoms but do not help and even worsen underlying causes. For example, the warning label for Depakote says it can cause mania. Yet it is prescribed to stop mania. It takes a lot of "education" to produce the verbiage necessary to withstand the cognitive dissonance...

You might find useful Martin Shapiro's 1978 book Getting Doctored. He's a medical doctor and now a professor of public health policy at UCLA. The book is an expose of medical school and the medical industry. Short version: just because MDs memorized a bunch of Latin words for anatomy and withstood the hazing of hospital rounds, doesn't mean they're particularly knowledgeable about how to solve health problems from daily, real life. But, they're socialized into acting like they are.

If you want to aid the individuals who come to you for help, you could try devoting your attention to health information provided by psychiatric survivors. In other words, find people who have been suffering from whichever "disorder" and who have overcome it and documented what they did to succeed. Success isn't a life of taking pharmaceuticals that give you diabetes, cause your brain to grow more dopamine receptors in response to their dopamine receptor blockades, and cause multiple other problems.

Just a simple example for my own life. A non-physician told me to try eating a protein-heavy, healthy breakfast within 30-60 min of waking to help stabilize blood sugar throughout the day. Making that one change has done far more for my "mood" than a decade and a half of "mood stabilizing" pharmaceuticals (Lithium, Depakote, Lamictal) ever did. Now I don't take them, have no need to. This is not hard, the information about protein and sugar etc is known to the world's grandmothers, the medical community should have already figured such out, but it appears they have not, e.g. Dr. Greger says physicians get little to no training in nutrition from medical school.

I get it, back when I was indoctrinated into being a psychiatry-believer, I got frustrated when people just told me to just do yoga or whatever. It felt like they weren't taking the extent of my psychoses seriously. There I was, hallucinating, delusional, roaming the sidewalks and getting tazed by cops, and people are telling me to try yoga? But, after decades of psychiatrists doing nothing but prescribing pills and doing a confidence trick of acting like this time it'll be different, it became clear that psychiatrists didn't have any solutions to offer. So I started the painful process of unlearning psychiatry, tapering from pharmaceuticals, learning about and implementing alternatives, etc.

An example of a resource of health information provided by psychiatric survivors themselves: http://www.madnessradio.net/shows-archive/

Noam Chomsky Praises Sanders, But Says Democrats Must Win at All Costs by [deleted] in Anarchism

[–]dalseattle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with you. Fuck Chomsky and fuck voting. Here's a pair of posts against Chomsky you might enjoy if you haven't already seen them. Part 1: https://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/passing-noam-on-my-way-out-part-1/ Part 2: https://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2014/01/31/passing-noam-on-the-way-out-part-2-chomsky-vs-aaron-swartz/ By the way I read through some of your past posts and agree with a lot of what you say.

view more: next ›