

The more you write about science, statistics, and causality, the more obvious it becomes that your confidence is doing the heavy lifting where methodological understanding should be.


The more you write about science, statistics, and causality, the more obvious it becomes that your confidence is doing the heavy lifting where methodological understanding should be.


If he would be Pinocchio, his nose would be ranging to the Mars and probably back. No need for Elon to create a shuttle then except a train shuttle on the nose.


Food for fish. Happy, relaxed fishes everywhere.


You cannot compare a bullet passing through a heart - an entirely physical process - with diseases from cancer - complex biochemical processes. This is statistically and logically wrong - like comparing apples and oranges, although your example is even more wrong. Apples and oranges are at least fruits, but heart and cancer?
The entire field of ontology is complex in itself. I agree that alcohol CAN (!) increase the chance to get cancer, but - again - Paracelsus plays an imminent role, which is even not considered! Also possible interactions with all the other environmental, psychological etc variables are missing. This diminishes considerably the value of this study.
If I have time and the motivation, I could dig deeper into the design. But it seems to have remarkable flaws and thus makes it in the context of medicine and science a pub, which should be considered with caution!


So more kilometres of street equals larger distances and these larger distances have created U.S. car dependency? And I thought that shorter ways create car dependency. /s
Wow, a logical master work from Yale university 🤣😂 Are they going for the Ig Nobel???


« Could » is the word. It literally means: we don’t know. It stays an assumption.
BTW, was Paracelsus considered in the study?
Perhaps this one:
Proton Mail -> Tuta Mail
Why? I would be careful with Proton Mail b/c it presumably advocates the Swiss surveillance and security law, which allows to keep information for a longer period of time.
BTW, you can add:
GitHub -> Codeberg (or Forgejo)


My parents are understanding very well while reading on the one hand comments from Gen Z - like you - and alike that it is all the boomer’s fault and on the other hand asking themselves how they will pay that month the health bills and other costs from their little pension .
$ sudo userdel atzanteol >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo „Bye, bye!“


This is not unexpected, and hopefully the entire Venezuelan situation will blow up and create another headache for the Orange Men and his entourage. Then they can play „Y.M.C.A.“ for him again.
One are paid to do the job …
I suggest you better stay then with Microsoft or Apple. Suits more your ideology.
But you‘re an Arch derivative user
Wrong, but keep guessing.
Suffice it to say that Ubuntu / RedHat / etc …
Oh, I see, you like being hold by your hands 😂🤣
With a dedicated security team
Where is the difference between „dedicated“ and „commitment paired with skills“???
Being a „rolling release“ has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Sure, Debian and alike are up-to-date as are ArchLinux or Void. Oh, boy!
Any friends in other countries, who may bring you the laptop?


In death we are all the same.


This is also a reason why some are against RedHat distributions (eg Fedora) or products (systemd, pulse audio). If you don’t like to support the company and have an alternative, take the alternative.
Well, Void is not that large, but they quickly patch security issues, especially due to being a rolling release. OpenBSD, not Linux or rolling release though, is not a huge OS either, but they are patching - if there is a security issue - quickly. Similarly Slackware - if we want to come back again to a Linux distro.
In other words: No, the size of its dev team does not necessarily mean that they are behind with patching security issues. it depends on the commitment and skills of devs, and the community.
Have you considered other sellers? Slimbook? System76? Framework? Etc.


True. And although some studies reported a positive effect on companies, I have my doubts based on what I have seen with my eyes in my city. A study issues further concerns:
https://www.economicliberties.us/our-work/the-local-harms-of-amazon/
Discouraging is only that there are still people like you around who think they have a clue, while after just a few comments it becomes obvious that they know very little about the subject they are talking about. Mentioning Occam’s Razor, a basic concept, which you even managed to misinterpret, was clear evidence of that. Even worse, instead of engaging in a technical discussion like someone genuinely interested in science would do, you increasingly turned the conversation into amateur psychoanalysis about my ego. That told me everything I needed to know. You are free to continue writing comments, but I won’t be answering them. If you consider that a win, that’s entirely up to you.