Fold, for sure. Actually pocketable, and secure once pocketed.

I have an e-ink tablet that runs Android. Copes with most apps and can deliver stuttery video.

E-Ink can’t be far off replacing glass screens (at least as an option) because the benefits for battery life are substantial. But I’d think it would replace them rather than be in addition to. A phone with screens on both sides would be so fragile.

You missing some context or something?

No zoo does this. She was used for animal testing.

but maybe not something you want to put your life on the line over.

To be fair, their hubris usually only kills poor people so, progress?

I doubt he’s ignoring anything. And I know nothing but I think it’s a little unfair to bash him for this.

Meta does not need the Fediverse to create a ready-populated instance all of its own. It doesn’t need to federate with anyone, it can probably kill Twitter and Reddit with a single stone (if it pours enough resource into moderating and siloing). Just stick a fediwidget in every logged in account page with some thoughtful seeding of content and it’s done.

The danger of federating with Meta is much the same as not federating. It has such a massive userbase it will suck the lifeblood out of everywhere else whether or not it can see us.

The possible silver lining is that there are other very large corporates which can do the same (some of which have said they plan to). We could all end up with multiple logins on corporate instances simply because we have accounts with them for other reasons. And that means a lot of very large instances with name recognition, and easy access, making it much harder for any of them to stop federation and keep their users to themselves.

Being federated with one or more behemoths might well be hell. Some instances won’t do it. Moderation standards will be key for those that do. But multiple federated behemoths can hold each other hostage because their users can all jump ship to the competition so easily.

This is much, much more complicated than just boycott or not. They cannot be trusted one tiny fraction of an inch but this is coming whether we like it or not. We need to work out how to protect ourselves and I’m starting to think that encouraging every site with a user login to make the fediverse a widget on their account pages might be the very best way to do it.

In solidarity with Naples’ economic losses, we must force every port to ban super yachts. Apart from Blackpool, which needs the cash.

The high rate of failure to replicate is not, in and of itself, evidence of fraud. It’s primarily a problem with low power to detect plausible effects (ie small sample sizes). That’s not to say there isn’t much deliberate fraud or p-hacking going on, there’s far too much. But the so-called replication crisis was entirely predictable without needing to assume any wrongdoing. It happened primarily because most researchers don’t fully understand the statistics they are using.

There was a good paper published on this recently: Understanding the Replication Crisis as a Base Rate Fallacy

And this is a nice simple explanation of the base rate fallacy for anyone who can’t access the paper: The p value and the base rate fallacy

tl;dr p<0.05 does not mean what most researchers think it means

Thanks for that.

Lack of blinding is a serious issue for subjective outcomes but blinding when treatment effects are obvious to both intervention and control groups is dishonest (Pharma does it all the time to make their trials look more credible than they are).

Open label is the norm for cancer trials for exactly this reason. It is important to consider the biases that may arise, in subjective endpoints especially. But it is ludicrous to dismiss research on this basis alone. We can’t randomise 12 year olds to become lifetime smokers or not, let alone use placebo controls, but we do know that smoking kills. It’s just a bit more complicated to prove it when perfectly designed RCTs are not possible.

There hasn’t even been an injury in 35 years in a non-military sub,”

xkcd has covered this.

That first reply is incredible.

Demonising entire demographic groups gets people killed. The salient point is their conservatism, not their religion.

That’s not true in the US. They have a tipped minimum wage; there, if you’re not tipping you’re stealing someone’s labour.

It is a sucky system, as the buried lede in that article shows:

However, data from the very checkout system that prompted tipping revealed disparities in pay. Neitzel noticed that Black employees were earning less tips than their White counterparts.

But, until it is burned to the ground, that is the system and (in the US) you should not use it to exploit people.

Not all Muslims agree with them, of course. These are conservative Muslims. “Rights for me and not for thee” is a right-wing trait, regardless of religious belief or heritage.