FishFace

Using jargon for “this has moved up” or “this thing is bad” is not specific to science in any way.

Well yeah, but that’s business bullshit speak, nothing to do with science!

Nobody is talking about all the stupid mistakes AI is making. It should have all stopped after LLM AIs thought blueberry has 3 Bs in it.

I never hear about anything else

The meme is about technical science jobs. There are absolutely technical science jobs where you cannot communicate key ideas and concepts without a) the person you’re describing it to needing more than “a bit of undergrad math/science” and b) if you try to explain it without using specialist terminology, you’ll spend an unnecessary hour for every quarter hour of content recalling the specialist definition of things because, for some reason, you refuse to use the precise word that the scientific community have agreed means exactly that.

That seems like a good reason not to go skiing there.

It’s instead of asking for age, not age verification. You can read about it in the ofcom press release on the matter

So if you focus on the greatness of Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King, is that ok?

It’s just missing a “the” before “ruined”. And “built over” is a weird phrasal verb to write together but it didn’t even cause me to pause on first read…

Mass market products are still culture.

You’re gonna do a lot more laundry if you wash that many towels.

It’s a little weird but not that weird.

You have to understand a) what Putin cares about and b) what the Russian people care about. Putin and Russia essentially believe that Ukraine, or at least the Donbas and Crimea, are and always were part of Russia. They think that the break-up of the Soviet Union was a national shame and in particular that the assignment of the Donbas and Crimea to Ukraine (because they were part of the Ukrainian SSR) in that break-up was wrong. Putin believes this fervently and has made several speeches about it. The Russian people likely feel similarly but less strongly about it.

So placing Western troops in Ukraine or fighting Russia with them is seen in that light - imagine if the US had a civil war again, Texas seceded, and then Russia put troops in Texas.

But this is not the same when a Russian submarine gets depth-charged off the coast of some European country. Putin, and Russia in general, don’t have historical, deeply-held revanchist claims about Sweden or the UK or Belgium or wherever.

From the public opinion point of view, this means that Putin can’t ignore it as easily if the West supports Ukraine directly by putting troops there. And for Putin himself, that direct intervention is a much more serious challenge to his designs on Ukraine than taking pot-shots at military assets that “accidentally” find themselves violating the borders in sea or air (or on land…) of other sovereign states.

Well I want this to be true

Well, they will if vibe coding takes off. But if not, it’s not that different from how it’s quite reasonable to choose python because of its massive community and archive of Stackoverflow answers.

Are you referring to this paragraph?

The Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR),[109] the European Commission , the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency , the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority [110] and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment [111] have concluded that there is no evidence that glyphosate poses a carcinogenic or genotoxic risk to humans. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified glyphosate as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”[112][113] One international scientific organization, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate in Group 2A, “probably carcinogenic to humans” in 2015.[15][13]

Because I count that as 6 saying “no evidence of a cancer link” and 1 saying “probably carcinogenic.”

At the very least, that suggests to me that if it is carcinogenic, it’s at such a low level that the effect is hard to measure, and so not worth worrying about.

I’m a committed Wikipedia reader, so if you’ve got a better source to read (or “parrot”) then go ahead. If you don’t reply I’ll know you’re on the pocket of big dandelion.

Yeah good point. I mean arguably they are still reputationally damaged, but that’s also not enough.

It’s important to understand that glyphosate has been the subject of a lot of studies. Naturally those studies require increased scrutiny now, in case the same dishonest tactics have been used on others, but the likelihood is that the overall conclusion that glyphosate is safe is still true.

Unfortunately the retraction of a paper by a journal only really harms the scientists who were involved, not the company that instigated the fraud. When there’s a financial incentive to subvert scientific transparency, that seems insufficient. But I dunno how you could resolve this legally (or legislatively).

Removed by mod

Then you haven’t been looking very hard. The airline industry in the US is a good example. Your internet search terms could be “deregulation case study” and would also find negative cases

EDIT: you can downvote, but can you type three words into a search engine and click on one link that doesn’t align with your current opinions? IMPOSSIBLE CHALLENGE!!

I have a C2 with LibreELEC but last time I checked there were zero os updates for years :( any suggestions?