Words form sentences form paragraphs. You need to be able to hold more than one thought in your head to be able to comprehend an argument. You should try it.

If your reading comprehension is really that bad, it might explain the low quality of your opinions. You should probably try working on it instead of embarrassing yourself in public.

The kinds of things that some parents bully, punish, disown and/or murder their children for should very much be hidden from them if the child chooses to hide it. It’s no one else’s business and, if the child has not yet told them themselves, breaking their confidence is an attempt to ruin their life and quite possibly end it.

This is stochastic terrorism from this fascist government, desperate for any distraction at all from their kleptocratic ways.

applied by centre left and liberals

It’s a term that originates with the left. Specifically, those who broke with the USSR over imperialist invasions, referring to those who did not. More broadly, it refers to the authoritarian left (as opposed to the anarchist left).

Fold, for sure. Actually pocketable, and secure once pocketed.

I have an e-ink tablet that runs Android. Copes with most apps and can deliver stuttery video.

E-Ink can’t be far off replacing glass screens (at least as an option) because the benefits for battery life are substantial. But I’d think it would replace them rather than be in addition to. A phone with screens on both sides would be so fragile.

You missing some context or something?

There is a really, really big difference between “we want to kill you” and “we do not want to be killed by you”.

Don’t tolerate fascists. However comfortable that centrist illusion is, you are signing your own death warrant and that of millions of others (most of whom will suffer the consequences of your actions long before they get around to the people who feel safe enough to argue that fascists must be tolerated).

No zoo does this. She was used for animal testing.

but maybe not something you want to put your life on the line over.

To be fair, their hubris usually only kills poor people so, progress?

I doubt he’s ignoring anything. And I know nothing but I think it’s a little unfair to bash him for this.

Meta does not need the Fediverse to create a ready-populated instance all of its own. It doesn’t need to federate with anyone, it can probably kill Twitter and Reddit with a single stone (if it pours enough resource into moderating and siloing). Just stick a fediwidget in every logged in account page with some thoughtful seeding of content and it’s done.

The danger of federating with Meta is much the same as not federating. It has such a massive userbase it will suck the lifeblood out of everywhere else whether or not it can see us.

The possible silver lining is that there are other very large corporates which can do the same (some of which have said they plan to). We could all end up with multiple logins on corporate instances simply because we have accounts with them for other reasons. And that means a lot of very large instances with name recognition, and easy access, making it much harder for any of them to stop federation and keep their users to themselves.

Being federated with one or more behemoths might well be hell. Some instances won’t do it. Moderation standards will be key for those that do. But multiple federated behemoths can hold each other hostage because their users can all jump ship to the competition so easily.

This is much, much more complicated than just boycott or not. They cannot be trusted one tiny fraction of an inch but this is coming whether we like it or not. We need to work out how to protect ourselves and I’m starting to think that encouraging every site with a user login to make the fediverse a widget on their account pages might be the very best way to do it.

The high rate of failure to replicate is not, in and of itself, evidence of fraud. It’s primarily a problem with low power to detect plausible effects (ie small sample sizes). That’s not to say there isn’t much deliberate fraud or p-hacking going on, there’s far too much. But the so-called replication crisis was entirely predictable without needing to assume any wrongdoing. It happened primarily because most researchers don’t fully understand the statistics they are using.

There was a good paper published on this recently: Understanding the Replication Crisis as a Base Rate Fallacy

And this is a nice simple explanation of the base rate fallacy for anyone who can’t access the paper: The p value and the base rate fallacy

tl;dr p<0.05 does not mean what most researchers think it means

It’s time we grow up and behave like an adult company

Uh huh.

That’s not true in the US. They have a tipped minimum wage; there, if you’re not tipping you’re stealing someone’s labour.

It is a sucky system, as the buried lede in that article shows:

However, data from the very checkout system that prompted tipping revealed disparities in pay. Neitzel noticed that Black employees were earning less tips than their White counterparts.

But, until it is burned to the ground, that is the system and (in the US) you should not use it to exploit people.

Your 1% figure comes from misrepresentation of a ‘study’, pushed by Purdue and others for criminal gain.

The One-Paragraph Letter From 1980 That Fueled the Opioid Crisis

Purdue Pharma, which makes OxyContin, starting using the letter’s data to say that less than one percent of patients treated with opioids became addicted. Pain specialists routinely cited it in their lectures. Porter and Jick’s letter is not the only study whose findings on opioid addiction became taken out of context, but it was one of the most prominent. Jick recently told the AP, “I’m essentially mortified that that letter to the editor was used as an excuse to do what these drug companies did.”

Don’t get me wrong, pain is miserable and treatment needs to be better. But around 80% of opioid addictions start with prescriptions for people in genuine pain. What percentage of prescriptees that is, I don’t know. But it’s not a trivial issue, and it is a very difficult problem to solve.