vatlark

@ vatlark @lemmy.world

Posts

23
Comments

484
Joined

3 yr. ago

Moderating

Showerthoughts lemmy.world

2d ago

Transit mode: no labels, details or other options?
Jump
1

vatlark @lemmy.world 2d ago

Comaps is not great for transit. There is a ticket being worked on in their repo to use https://transitous.org/ which I am very excited for.
EDIT: You could try https://cartes.app/ which uses transitous. It's pretty slick but I'm not sure how many countries it covers.

2d ago

I have 100 euros a month to donate to open source projects. Do you think its better to donate more to fewer projects or less to more projects?

F-droid builds everything from source so I trust the binaries.

Speaking of which, I donate to f-droid.

involves these nine principles: Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.” Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view. Arguments from authority carry little weight — “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts. Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will. If whatever it is you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them. Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler. Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified…. You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.