vatlark

From the article:

 text

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.

1

vatlark @lemmy.world 5d ago

Ha, you felt this so strongly that you reported it for being "painfully accurate".

vatlark @lemmy.world 5d ago

This would not make you happy then: https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker

Or this: https://apnews.com/projects/polling-tracker/

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

Ok thanks. This is helpful. I'll try a fresh install.

1

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

I guess I can't please everyone.

I would like the community to be a place for respectful discussion so in general that's how I try to moderate.

This community is my first experience being a mod so I'm sure there are better ways to do it.

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

Thanks for the update!

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

No worries, thanks for updating

2

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

Rule 2 is that the entire thought must be in the title.

Would you be able to update the title?

6

vatlark @lemmy.world 7d ago

Rule 2 is that the entire thought must be in the title. Also, be mindful of rule 3, no politics.

Would you be able to update the title?

1

vatlark @lemmy.world 1w ago

And past:

vatlark @lemmy.world 1w ago

seems to be really well researched

vatlark @lemmy.world 1w ago

I have never looked into the details of an OCR, but if it's a classifier it should give the it's confidence in being a 1 or L so you can start with the low confidence characters.

vatlark @lemmy.world 1w ago

I know a few people that are trans or on a similar journey. I never thought any of them had an agenda, they were just living their lives.

One of them came out publicly while I was working closely with them. They sent out an email informing everyone what their new name was, what their preferred pronouns were, and it included an FAQ with some links with more information. It had to be a super scary thing to do but they understood that it's something new for a lot of people, myself included, and they were happy to talk about questions people had. People were very welcoming. Of course there was some office gossip but it all quickly died down and it never came up again (that I heard). No agenda, just people living.

If a co-worker had continued using the trans person's old name, yeah I'm sure that would be harassment. Not respecting someone's wishes for themselves is typically harassment (at a minimum).

vatlark @lemmy.world 2w ago

i think their website got hacked. There are a bunch of random links inserted into the text of the page.

1

vatlark @lemmy.world 2w ago

I think this is the origin: https://xkcd.com/356/

vatlark @lemmy.world 2w ago

Cows are smart. Sheep are very dumb. IMO