More transparency in some form, requiring researchers to publish code and data openly for instance.
2 karma · joined April 20, 2021
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apposition#Restrictive_versus_...
So the source of the confusion is that, in English, non-restrictive appositives typically are indicated with commas, but so are lists of conjuncts.
Due to the tone of your over-confident first post, initially I thought you were a lawyer on Facebook's payroll making a deceitful argument.
You really think Facebook's lawyers would advise disclosing a link between Facebook usage and depression found in their internal studies? Do you really think that Facebook would even ever allow for that conclusion to be reached in this particular internal study? Come on.
Or how about that starting in 4th grade we had D.A.R.E., where they regularly bring in actual cops to teach a "class" during which they attempt to coerce students into snitching on their families? This is when they're not busy teaching us about drugs that 95% of the students had never even heard of.
How about that it's very common for the police, if they find someone with a larger amount of drugs, to rob them rather than arrest them? This happens all the time with cops learning the license plates of particular dealers, although most drug dealers that I know have preferred this eventuality even if they lost a larger amount. Another friend lost 2 pounds of weed and a lot of money over a random noise complaint.
These American institutions, the schools and the cops in this case, are a total failure and need to be completely reworked.
There is no concrete evidence of this. A lot of sea creatures, including fish, have skin cells that can create polarized light and some seem to have developed communication systems with pulses of polarized light.
Just the other day it was found that some fish can pass the mirror test, didn't you see that?
The prevailing theory is that ratio of brain mass to body mass is more telling than the absolute size of the brain. Fish may fare worse on this metric but I suspect it's just an area where we have very little understanding yet.
Being vegetarian or vegan is not so hard. It is one of many fundamental changes that society should pursue to avert the current ecological crisis and mitigate species loss.
Who is telling people that they are victims? Who thinks that being a victim means that it's 100% outside of that person's control?
These are the straw-men that so many dumb comments here are based on. There are real victims in the world and most of the time they're just trying to tell their stories, only to get constant derision from idiots in cesspools like Hacker News.
I do.
Language is unconscious and you won't understand how it works until you let go of a lot of false culturally-programmed notions, and then actually study it by engaging with the work of linguists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coarticulation
For Hindi there are additional phenomena that will alter the sounds of spoken language in certain contexts.
One of the languages I know allows for a word-initial /ŋ/, which English does not have at all.
A "word family" is the term for the related forms of a word resulting from derivation, inflection, and other processes. Usually "conjugation" only refers to inflection of verbs whereas "declension" is used for inflection of nouns. And "lexeme" or "headword" are sometimes used to refer to some canonical form of a word family.
No it doesn't. Not at all actually.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study#Criticism
Maybe an actual geneticist can jump in here, but it's my non-expert opinion that you all are jumping to conclusions about a topic that you're not experts in either.
There are other problems with twin studies, most importantly that developmental health starts at conception which means that genetics are not the only thing that twins are sharing. Once again I'll refer you to Wikipedia for further criticisms of twin studies:
This one? It does not indicate nearly the certainty that other commenters here do. Read it yourself, it's a good argument for what I'm saying. The GP characterized this scientific debate as settled, yet there is actually very slim evidence in that article for what is being claimed.
Why would it be surprising if among 1000s of the highest IQ individuals in some particular place, that there would be genetic similarities between them? It's completely possible that large groups among these people share a closer familial lineage far back into history that has influenced their present-day social and economic status, which are the factors that are actually responsible for developmental health and correspondingly intelligence, and so the genetic similarity is just a byproduct of the conferral of wealth and status between generations over a long period of time.
I highly doubt it. Why exactly do you think this? Because some traits have been associated with intelligence?
Where I am it is common for the hierarchy within a corporation to have a clear separation along ethnic lines, e.g. construction workers will be local, their supervisors will be from a nearby country, and the big bosses will be from another larger, wealthier country.
Because accent has nothing to doing with "conducting oneself accordingly". Why is the onus on the victim of discrimination to align with your bogus, outdated way of thinking?
I add at least 1500-2000 calories a day when I am lifting in addition to normal training (as in, 1-2 hours of intense exercise every day).
Last year a building collapsed here during construction and killed about 60 people. Stuff like that happens all the time.
I never knew how much I can't stand "free" software types until today.