arteteco @arteteco@qoto.org
- License
- CC-BY-SA 4.0
Mod
#Italian, PhD student in computational biology (#bioinformatics)
#atheist, #evolution lover, very bad #banjo player, very casual poster, I am glad whenever a feel a sincere human connection
I'm a mod here at #QOTO, feel free to reach out!
Joined Jul 2018
Silencing Spinster Instance for all of QOTO, CW for Length
Do you think we could wait until @alex is back in town to proceed, so that he can check what's what and give us his opinion?
Silencing Spinster Instance for all of QOTO, CW for Length
@freemo @angelobottone @Surasanji
Hello all,
I was quite busy today and didn't pay attention to the matter here.
I have to say that I follow some people from spinster (2 accounts) and I enjoy them, never have found problems there.
Now, I see there is a problem with a single user - and with how the mod are deciding to deal with it, that is fine.
But couldn't we take a couple of days to think this through? This all problem seems quite easy from here.
I think (hope) that @alex and @mk obviously want to protect their users, but also would not want a block.
I'm asking to the spinster mod, can you just keep an eye on that user and if he happen to tag freemo again proceed with, idk, something?
arteteco
boosted
🇳🇱
Please dont forget to check in on your friends struggling with Depression and other mental illnesses. Your compassion means a lot to them I'm sure!
Smilodon. It's awesome.
Sure, sure, I don't intend to stop anyone!
@freemo
Do you think there is a need for a fork? Couldn't we just work something on top of mastodon, to make it easy to mantain, or proceed without technical measures, mostly with social contracts?
@Downes is webcast the same as podcast? I didn't know that...
#podcast Wednesday. It sucks there is no weekday or even month name starting with P.
Evolution Talk is a podcast, who'd guess, about evolution.
Rick coast is pretty a passionate host. Even if the topic was well known, like convergent evolution or natural selection, I had fun with the trivias and the anecdotes.
Oftentimes the topic has however been new to me, like who Robert Chambers or Diderot were.
To be frank a few episodes are a bit devoid of real content, but seemed to me like the exception rather than the rule.
@imnotafeline First 2 episodes were actually pretty nice!
@Surasanji
It's not an automated message. It's me pulling your leg =D
Mastalab and many other clients do not autotruncate btw
I'll check if those songs are in youtube too and give them a try, thanks!
On a sidenote, I know you are new here and this is not a request, just asking you for a favour.
As you know in qoto we basically have no char limit, it's up to the users to CW down their long posts. To CW you can just press the CW button somewhere (depending on the client).
Just a way not to clog up your followers and instance timeline, thanks!
If you need further help just write me or other mods. Welcome here, @Surasanji =D
Science and shizzle
That's kind of a problem for policy making, as I was saying. From a scientific POV, is totally ok.
Pretending that it's not ok is not understanding how this works.
And I'm not saying we should "believe" in science, skepticism is a very welcome thing, I consider myself a skeptic as well. Just let's not mistake this for a blind, emotion-based refusing of the evidence so far brought forward, as it could be with the climate change issue.
Long post
I do believe that there is such a consensus, but I wouldn't say that it's only because of that that I think human-driven climate change is real. I read quite many researches, we surely have a margin of doubt on many things, especially on the ecological models that try to predict the effects of such a warming up (in that sense we are in high sea, IMO), but some stuff, some stuff we got it.
May be we wrong? Sure. I call back what I said before: we've been wrong in the past, it's ok. The amount of times the consensus has been right (or to better say, "right enough") is pretty strong, though, and we do not have any better option anyway. Or, do we?
I think I'm missing the point and I fear we are talking in parallel about 2 different things, because I feel confident we don't disagree in this.
I'm sorry in this case, maybe I can't catch your point or explain myself.
Long post
I'm not sure if I'm making that mistake. If you take a plane you trust the technology and by proxy the research and the knowledge (and the statistics) that confirms that it is "safe".
If you don't trust the method you don't trust the results of the method neither, so I don't see why you can't make an epistemological argument by starting from a tool.
It's like, if I do not believe in those saying homeopathy works I do not take those water-pills. If I did take them, I'd recognize that I trust the research and its methods.
@imnotafeline I checked their website, seems interesting. I'll give it a try, thanks!
Long post
I hope I'm getting the point here
You that the science "fucked up".
Science didn't fucked up. It guesses wrong and corrects itself with time. That is the scientific method in action. It's not like Newton fucked up because Einstein disprove it, you need Newton to have Einstein, it's a neverending process.
And in that process, on a medical level, we got so many huge, awesome stuff that they are hard to count. And yes, many mistakes too along the way, and surely many present at the moment. So what?
Something which has a high consensus it's still your best bet.
the author says:
science has earned its lack of credibility with the public
Really? With the scientific method we know stuff like the evolution, we grow our food, we fly, we write at this very moment...
I don't even think this trust is really eroded. People take planes, take medicines, undergoes surgeries, and so on, all without too many doubts.
@freemo It was a tough call.
@adrianomaini@framapiaf.org Molto belle le tue foto, grazie per condividerle!
@strypey I didn't like this article.
The author puts in the word "science" a whole lot of things: the scientific method, the governmental choices based on scientific research, the opinions of some scientists, the media portrait of it... those are different players in the game.
Saying "science was pretty damned cocky about being right" doesn't really make sense. Who was cocky? The journalists? The scientist?
Science in itself is just a method. The results from scientists are usually packed with "maybe" and "further research is needed". What the author says, "we are totally sure the answer is X", that is bad science, and seldom seen.
If you want to make a public policy or a diet based on it feel free, but I wouldn't blame the method.
The last paragraph looks like really just rhetoric.
- License
- CC-BY-SA 4.0
Mod
#Italian, PhD student in computational biology (#bioinformatics)
#atheist, #evolution lover, very bad #banjo player, very casual poster, I am glad whenever a feel a sincere human connection
I'm a mod here at #QOTO, feel free to reach out!
Joined Jul 2018
