otp

joined 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

then it would be closer to F and not so hard to convert.

So few countries use Fahrenheit that this shouldn't even be a consideration

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

It's not surveilling children, it's surveilling the byproducts of vaping.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

...so kids can freely vape in school buildings during school hours?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 weeks ago

That's normal. Kids will regular school adults on dinosaur details they're learning in school.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Wait, it does videos of websites? What are you looking to capture, exactly? Like, screen recordings of what the website looks like?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I feel like that'd just move lobbying from governments to people. So there'd be far more propaganda and garbage. Politicians would be becoming "power delegates", collecting as many people's votes as possible. Then we'd end up with another representative democracy (or whatever it's called to vote for people who then vote for policies)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And yeah it's rather they use whatever critical thinking they're going to use on the source itself rather than have a bot claiming to do it for them.

How does one go about doing that for a brand new source each time they encounter one?

With the bot, the critical thinking needs to be done far fewer times. It's the same bot with the same source. Understand the source's bias and credibility, and then you'll have an idea of how to interpret its results. Not so without the bot -- whatever process needs to be done for each new source every time a new source is encountered.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's a whole lot of days. It starts in late October and ends in January-ish. That's a lot of days where Trump doesn't threaten to sue!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Are you trying to tell me that it's a problem to suggest people use critical thinking with the results of MBFCbot in addition to the post, and instead the solution is to suggest there should be no bot and people should use critical thinking skills for the post itself?

We already know how many people stop at the headlines.

As well, you seem to be focusing on the bias component. I think the reliability/fact-checking component is much more important.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I don't think it's bad information. It's information that needs to be taken in with an understanding of its source...like most information.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Well, it's definitely not Christmas!

EDIT: Typo

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I'd be happy if someone wanted to make a better site that had better answers and a more international scale. We don't have it, though

 

I know MediaBiasFactCheck is not a be-all-end-all to truth/bias in media, but I find it to be a useful resource.

It makes sense to downvote it in posts that have great discussion -- let the content rise up so people can have discussions with humans, sure.

But sometimes I see it getting downvoted when it's the only comment there. Which does nothing, unless a reader has rules that automatically hide downvoted comments (but a reader would be able to expand the comment anyways...so really no difference).

What's the point of downvoting? My only guess is that there's people who are salty about something it said about some source they like. Yet I don't see anyone providing an alternative to MediaBiasFactCheck...

 
  1. Tap search button on the bottom.

  2. Search like normal for communities with the search term. Results returned like normal.

  3. Clicking the unfilled heart (to subscribe) results in the error presented in the attached screenshot.

  4. The back button (Android) doesn't work. App must be force-closed.

  5. The subscribing action was successful; discovered on reboot.

  6. Repeating the steps, but instead of the unfilled heart, clicking on the community successfully navigates to the community.

  7. This didn't happen before.

  8. I might be one update behind current as of Mar 18

 

Bananas are ridiculously cheap even up here in Canada, and they aren't grown anywhere near here. Yet a banana can grow, be harvested, be shipped, be stocked, and then be purchased by me for less than it'd cost to mail a letter across town. (Well, if I could buy a single banana maybe...or maybe that's not the best comparison, but I think you get my point)

Along the banana's journey, the farmer, the harvester, the shipper, the grocer, the clerk, and the cashier all (presumably) get paid. Yet a single banana is mere cents. If you didn't know any better, you might think a single banana should cost $10!

I'm presuming that this is because of some sort of exploitation somewhere down the line, or possibly loss-leading on the grocery store's side of things.

I'm wondering what other products like bananas are a lot cheaper than they "should" be (e.g., based on how far they have to travel, or how difficult they are to produce, or how much money we're saving "unethically").

I've heard that this applies to coffee and chocolate to varying extents, but I'm not certain.

Anyone know any others?

 

I know money can't buy happiness blahblahblah.

Do they do gift exchanges at all?

Do they ask for anything?

They have enough money that they could get anything made or done for them at a moment's notice. Like having ChatGPT, but for services. Ridiculous things we couldn't imagine.

Anyone have any insight into general trends along those lines?

view more: next ›