And just like DEI teams, ethics teams will be easy to cut back on if a company runs into economic trouble.

Sure, no argument there. There’s a choice to be made between “post the second story as a comment to the first one” and “post the second story a a separate topic”. I’m in favor of the first approach to keep discussion in one spot, but it’s not something I feel super-strongly about.

Avoiding dupes is, I think, an important one. We’ve had multiple instances on Beehaw of the same story showing up more than once. If you try to post a duplicate link, Lemmy will let you know (by showing the previous copies to you as crossposts). It’s harder to make sure you’re not posting the second or third story from a different source on the same topic. Perhaps we can just encourage people to search before posting.

I’d like the rules to at least ask people to add an image description in their original post. https://beehaw.org/post/686974 would be good to link to here.

And given the nature of many posts in the news, I think it would be good for this community to remind people to be(e) nice in their discussions.

My own high school debate days are decades in the past. From that perspective, though, the fact that you can easily look up the judges’ biases, and so prepare for them, is a huge advance that we would never have even dreamed of. To me that seems like explicitly addressing biases in a useful way.

I’d be interested in a more serious analysis that went through all 47,000+ paradigms and categorized biases so some non-anecdotal conclusions could be drawn. That would take a lot more time and money than picking out a few instances that the writer knows about.

And yes, if an alternative ends up being liked better by debate coaches, people will go in that direction. It’s entirely possible that debate competition will end up being as fragmented as national politics.

The article here takes a bit stronger stance than “losing debates because of tweets”:

The NSDA has allowed hundreds of judges with explicit left-wing bias to infiltrate the organization. These judges proudly display their ideological leanings in statements—or “paradigms”—on a public database maintained by the NSDA called Tabroom, where they declare that debaters who argue in favor of capitalism, or Israel, or the police, will lose the rounds they’re judging.

The article calls out five judges for being biased. The NSDA site shows 47,168 paradigms. So, while there may be an issue, there doesn’t seem to be much proof here. It could equally well be that the author is cherry-picking instances that fit his ideology.

Their web site is down, but their Github account is currently still available, with 3D printing files and software for their microlab.

So many, many choices.

I think my all-time dumbest came when I was about 22, so it doesn’t fit here. In my teens…probably driving drunk at speeds up to 100mph on the mountain roads up above Pasadena with the headlights off at night.

You appear to be unable or unwilling to distinguish between “preventing births” and “voluntarily choosing not to have children.”

Not sure why you’re quite so interested in escalating the rhetoric here (forced sterilization? in a thread that started with individual action to save honeybees? really?) but in view of the first rule of Beehaw (“Be(e) nice”) I’m not interested in joining you.

Telling one person that they can help out by not having kids is rather different from, as the dictionary says

the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group

Even suggesting to a whole group of people not to have kids is not the same as killing them.

So no, it’s not a logical conclusion. It’s illogical rhetoric. But you do you, I guess.

Here in the middle of America, it’s not SUVs - it’s full-size pickup trucks. Just as much of an ecological and safety disaster though.

I’m pretty sure that discovering a new isotope while working on your MS guarantees that you’ll get the degree.

Yep, I get it. Effectively block ads and javascript and it doesn’t much matter what a site wants to do. I skip the few that have actually effective paywalls (as opposed to just putting a div over content on the page - as far as I’m concerned, if it’s downloaded to my computer, I am allowed to read it). Of course, the sites that load up on ads tend to be pretty low-quality content anyhow.

• Every morning: 2 cups Cafix, 1 cup decaf coffee, 4 prunes
• Alternate mornings: 1 thick slice homemade whole wheat bread, dipped in olive oil
• The other mornings: 1 large sourdough pancake, dressed with olive oil and salt

I usually eat breakfast around 5AM, and this holds me until lunch at 11AM.

Pretty sure I’m not in the mainstream.

This is why I use DuckDuckGo instead of Google, and Firefox with a few selected extensions that ensure I almost never see an ad. I would be shocked if Google enabled any long-term ad-free experience.

I’ve seen this “sub affects logitech stock” story a few times now, and I don’t find it very credible. If you look at the 1-month or longer price of the stock, it’s pretty evident that (a) a 5% intraday variation in price is totally normal and (b) the recent news that has actually hurt the stock price substantially is that their CEO resigned.

I’m skeptical that Amazon review trolls are buying enough stock to move the market.

In addition to making it easier to find authentic perspectives, we’re also improving how we rank results in Search overall, with a greater focus on content with unique expertise and experience. Last year, we launched the helpful content system to show more content made for people, and less content made to attract clicks. In the coming months, we’ll roll out an update to this system that more deeply understands content created from a personal or expert point of view, allowing us to rank more of this useful information on Search.

That seems like just a step in the inevitable AI arms race.

Well, most of my work was programming books, so honestly a 5 year copyright term would have been plenty. But the internet put most of those publishers out of business anyhow.

Outside of my own special case, I don’t have really strong opinions on the term.

As a published author, I’m glad copyright existed. Without it, none of my publishers would have been in business and I would have had to find some other income source. But I think the default should be “public domain” rather than “copyright”, and I’m skeptical of allowing corporations to own the copyright to individuals’ works.

Why, just today the notably left-wing Supreme Court upheld speech restrictions on speech encouraging immigration.

I think one of the major benefits is that courts do take notice of science, even in this country. The more we get studies on the record, the harder it will be for transphobic laws to stand judicial challenges.