Missile guidance in the Peace section - :yep:

The/In short from Wikipedia:

The Ig Nobel Prize is a satiric prize awarded annually since 1991

• Anatomy: Roman Khonsari, for finding that there is a greater instance of scalp hair spiraling in a counter-clockwise direction in the Southern Hemisphere.
• Biology: Fordyce Ely and William Petersen, for finding that placing a cat on the back of cows and repeatedly exploding paper bags every 10 seconds for two minutes led to them producing less milk.
• Chemistry: Tess Heeremans, Antoine Deblais, Daniel Bonn and Sander Woutersen, for their use of chromatography to separate drunk and sober worms as part of their research into polymer science.
• Botany: Jacob White and Felipe Yamashita, for finding that the plant Boquila trifoliolata can mimic the leaves of plastic plants placed alongside it, leading them to conclude that “plant vision” is plausible.
• Demography: Saul Newman, for finding that many claims regarding the existence of supercentenarians and other extreme age-related records originate from areas with short life spans, no birth certificates, and rampant clerical errors and pension fraud.
• Medicine: Lieven Schenk, Tahmine Fadai and Christian Büchel, for finding that counterfeit medicine that induces painful side-effects can be more effective in patients than counterfeit medicine that does not cause painful side-effects.
• Peace: B. F. Skinner, for his study on housing live pigeons inside missiles to guide them to their targets.
• Physics: James Liao, for his long-running study on the ability of a dead trout to swim.
• Physiology: Takanori Takebe, for finding that several mammals can breathe through their intestines using their anus.
• Probability: A team of 50 researchers mostly based in the Netherlands, for supporting a prediction by Persi Diaconis that tossed coins are more likely to land the same way up as they started after they had flipped 350,757 coins.

lol

it revealed a number of organs including blood vessels in the brain through the scalp

I’m confused. There’s a skull between scalp skin and the brain, right? o.O

Community rules should deny locked-away content.

Some other communities have a “have it accessible, if not on the link, provide an unlocked alternative link too”.

Enough post content can also allow discussion. But locked away linked content certainly doesn’t.

Maybe one of the participants was named Al.

researchers scanned a dead fish while it was “shown a series of photographs depicting human individuals in social situations. The salmon was asked to determine what emotion the individual in the photo must have been experiencing.”

The work is, however, a compelling and humorous demonstration of the problem of multiple comparisons. This is a principle in statistics that basically says when you’re looking at enough bits of information (i.e. doing lots of statistical tests), some will seem to be what you’re looking for – purely by chance. In fMRI experiments, there are a LOT of pieces of data to compare, and without statistical correction for this phenomenon (which is not always done), some will indeed be significant, just by chance.

Around 30% of people with depression have what’s known as treatment-resistant depression, meaning multiple kinds of medication or therapy have failed to improve their symptoms. And for up to two-thirds of people with depression, treatment fails to fully reverse their symptoms to healthy levels.

Depressingly big numbers

Removed by mod

They’re also very open and transparent. Work, guidelines, workflows, etc.

It’s a shining example of an alternative kind of company, and it’s insightful and a great resource of information.

Yeah, no

Seems fairly obvious and to be expected that they would do that, given their intelligence and environment and utility use.

Still, important and significant to observe and prove in the wild. Especially as not one-off random anecdotal observations.

I think you can learn it when you’re younger than 20 years old

A block on Twitter doesn’t say anything unless you know why they were blocked and know the person. Blocking can be more than warranted and justified. Be it spam, toxicity, harassment, or similar things. “I saw a screenshot of someone being blocked on Twitter” is not a good foundation for an argument.

They talk about malware in npm packages. One example isn’t enough to make a general claim that all software with political opinions or voices becomes malware.

When a platform follows sanctions, and the law, I don’t think you can claim them to be political and activism decisions. If you want to make that argument and want to do so in an absolutist fashion (not assess and reduce risks but evade them entirely), then you can only self-host and I guess on your own servers? No platforms, no services?

Nowadays, there are many teams who buy popular apps and browser extensions to inject malware.

… which has nothing to do with political views and especially not political views of the original authors and sellers.

As you can see, the “opinion” or “political view” of a company is not only a way to hype on sanctions and curry favor with investors, the government, and consumers, but it is also a clear signal about potential threats. It signals that your sensitive data may be hijacked, sold, or wiped anytime if the political compass spins tomorrow and recognizes you as an enemy.

No. None of what was written before showed me any of that.

Some of the red flags I actively use to reject software:

Direct political opinions in a product’s blog, like “we support X” or “we are against X”

“We are free software and we support free software” -> REJECTED! (?)

Some people don’t like gore

Poor people whose first Name is Al

I would nut say that

I assume you don’t mean keyboard text predictions, which would be a different thing, but the platforms.

It’s a new convenience feature. Something they as a platform can shine with, retain users, and set themselves apart from other platforms.

Having training data is not the primary potential gain. It’s user investment, retention, and interaction. Users choosing the generated text is valid training data. Whether they chose similar words, or what was suggested, is still input on user choice.

It does lead to a convergence to a centralized standard speak. With a self-strengthening feedback loop.

Only a cubic millimetre of it

I thought it’s about Retrospective meetings (dev process) , but it’s about accumulated log data.

Experience a Richer Life Today

What a slogan for an app that hides away surroundings :D