Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Embed this notice
   13 barn owls in a trenchcoat (hauntedowlbear@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 21-Jul-2024 22:10:10 JST 13 barn owls in a trenchcoat

   I know Greg Graffin's the Bad Religion member who does the whole public philosopher bit, but I lowkey suspect that Brett Gurewitz has the more philosophically interesting positions, at least based on a close read of their respective lyrical contributions + interview comments relating to them.

   To be clear I'm an absolute sucker for all of BR's whole bit, but, I think I find whatever's going on in here to be a bit more interesting than the "atheist wrestles with the symbolism and void spaces traced around the image of a god they were societally inculcated to expect, but which is clearly absent" thing that Graffin tends to dwell upon.

   Bad Religion - Marked
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFtgH0zo2vg

2. Embed this notice
   A Concerned Scientist (be@qoto.org)'s status on Tuesday, 21-May-2024 04:12:07 JST A Concerned Scientist

   in reply to

   I have chosen to die on this hill, and so I will continue. I was going to ignore this new opinion piece in The Lancet, but, I can't help myself in the end.

   https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)00244-7/fulltext

   The first time I read it I gave up on the first paragraph.

   Read this carefully:

   "The report proposes that use of the unqualified terms airborne and airborne transmission in the context of infectious disease transmission should be avoided."

   Followed by:

   "It introduces new terms matched to specific definitions, including “through-the-air transmission”, “infectious respiratory particles”, “airborne transmission/inhalation”, “direct deposition”, “semi-ballistic”, and “puff cloud”. "

   What this, literally, says is that we should replace "airborne transmission" with "airborne transmission/inhalation." This is what everyone is fighting over.

   After it came across my timeline for the 20th time I decided I'd give the rest a read.

   Paragraph two. Two examples of airborne being used in papers in the last 127 years to show that there was no confusion regarding the term "airborne"?

   Compare that to the extensive writing of Prof. Jimenez on the history of the droplet dogma and decide if you think everyone understands this.

   https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354772435_Echoes_Through_Time_The_Historical_Origins_of_the_Droplet_Dogma_and_its_Role_in_the_Misidentification_of_Airborne_Respiratory_Infection_Transmission

   https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsfs.2021.0049

   https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ina.13070

   Paragraph 3. Finally something we agree on. The WHO botched the last 4 years horribly.

   The next paragraph is where this falls off the rails for me.

   "This new WHO report appears to assume that because some infectious disease experts believe that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is airborne only “situationally” (ie, under unusual conditions),1"

   I, for one, read this and went directly to the report itself because I was appalled. Guess what? The quoted word, "situationally", never once appears in the document, which is cited. Nor does "under unusual conditions." So now it's just quoting things that don't exist and citing them.

   To be clear, it's citing a document titled "Global technical consultation report
   on proposed terminology
   for pathogens that transmit
   through the air" not the document actually about COVID(https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/376346/9789240090576-eng.pdf), while complaining about COVID.

   I don't see a need to continue.

   Mark my word. The CDC delayed their response to this document, whether or not they would go along and declare COVID airborne, because people are making it "controversial" and giving them cover to.

3. Embed this notice
   Drew DeVault (drewdevault@fosstodon.org)'s status on Saturday, 23-Mar-2024 06:01:33 JST Drew DeVault

   So, you're confused about Redict using the LGPL. I thought you weren't allowed to change the license of a FOSS project like that?

   Well, you're right to raise an eyebrow at that, but note that this only applies to copyleft projects. Permissive licenses are characterized by, perhaps even defined by the fact that you can sublicense them.

   To relicense a copyleft project you would need all of the copyright holders to agree. A CLA is designed to grant a single entity[...]

4. Embed this notice
   Matthias Pfefferle (pfefferle@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 12-Jan-2024 15:51:58 JST Matthias Pfefferle

   in reply to

   @jwz @fraying you can simply disable the local comments system and you have an easy to understand, only fully federated comment system for your blog! No context breaks, no mix of federated and local comments, …

   The problem only comes with the mix and because WordPress has such a history of local comments I do not want to force users to deactivate them.

   To your point share everything, hash usernames: I think THAT is problematic because users do not expect THESE comments to be federated!

5. Embed this notice
   FediTips has moved! (feditips@mstdn.social)'s status on Monday, 03-Jul-2023 03:30:20 JST FediTips has moved!

   in reply to

   @sendcakefilms

   You can find trending things on the website at the link on the right side of the screen called # Explore

   You can find trending things on the official app by clicking the magnifying glass 🔍 and leaving the search box blank.

   Third party apps also have trending things but with various different interfaces to find them.

   To post links, just put the link in your post. Remember to include https:// at the beginning so that the link is clickable.

   1/2

6. Embed this notice
   Carl T. Bergstrom (ct_bergstrom@fediscience.org)'s status on Monday, 03-Jul-2023 00:45:39 JST Carl T. Bergstrom

   in reply to

   3. In this paper, Traag and Waltman propose definitions and methodology for thinking more rigorously about the nature of these differences, in ways that help us identify where we can best intervene to ameliorate them.

   To do so, they propose that we distinguish between *biases* and *disparities*.