volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@nixCraft "um, unusual isotopic reactions?" :)

@dlevenstein I think this is a generally good way of talking about theory, but I do have one criticism: the focus on humans, bringing up research communities, and all of that.

It's not to say that they don't exist, but I would simply want to downplay their existence, not emphasize it, as I think one of the big values of the scientific method is countering the human factors that are, again, definitely in there and unavoidable.

Yes, the scientific enterprise is about humans solving problems identified by humans, but I would just avoid that wording and talk about the method addressing problems in the abstract.

All too often people get sidetracked about the value of science based on focusing on the human factors, so I would avoid that sort of language.

@drahardja Well right, but the realities of the environment they operate in do require some types of censorship. But not others

@jasonekratz@social.lol Well yeah @cpoliticditto@mas.to

@drahardja Well there's a pretty significant difference between the types of content in legal liability.

@Lazarou and that's not the argument substack is making, so that's not the high ground they are trying to stake.

@mpopp75 Well again, I'm not saying it will happen, but I do hold out the possibility that Republicans will come to their senses and decide they would rather win the election and therefore choose a different nominee.

And things like these make that more likely, making an even stronger case that going with Trump risks losing

@ricardoharvin welcome to social media, a cultural institution largely found it on people sticking their noses into other people's business.

If you choose to remain uninformed, yeah that's your business. Not mine. But that doesn't mean I can't call it out.

I actually think it's pretty antisocial for people to remain in those echo chambers, but you find your own path, even as I criticize it.

@enron and that's why God gave us Bitcoin 🙂

@raineer If it helps, understand that different people have different priorities, and a lot of people continue to use substack because it is an effective way to publish their content.

They just don't have the same crusade you do.

It really shouldn't be hard to understand.

@ricardoharvin I mean you could have been able to reboost. You chose not to. And that's a pretty big difference!

@JuliusGoat

@SirBemrose it's important to recognize that the 14th amendment doesn't say anyone. It instead limits its exclusion in ways that could be pretty substantial in this case.

@ech @cpoliticditto@mas.to the excerpt is talking about opposition to censorship, not about payment.

@bigheadtales no grand conspiracy involved with an echo chamber.

Just a whole lot of confirmation bias and lack of information.

That you're uninformed says nothing about me. It's just that I think you should broaden your mind, broaden your experiences, see more of the world.

But hey, you do you. None of my business.

@JoshuaHolland I think you really put your finger on how easy it is to debunk that sort of claim.

If it was a genocide there wouldn't be 99 out of 100 of the supposed class of victims still alive.

It is BECAUSE only one out of 100 have been killed that we can debunk that whole claim, and we should, because it stands in the way of approaching the conflict in a way that would help to protect the other 99.

@Angle The problem is, it takes labor to make those things. You're overlooking that part of it.

Are you willing to work for free to provide value to someone else? Well maybe you are, but a whole lot of people aren't so interested in being compelled to give up their labor like that.

So long as you overlook the worker in your equation you're not going to be proposing something realistic.

Or, I'd say, moral.

@Mikal folks get the government they vote for

@Neidfyre I know that is the narrative that so many pushed, but it's not realistic.

The rules of the Senate didn't give McConnell that authority. Rather, a whole bunch of other senators were able to scapegoat McConnell instead of facing the public and making that vote.

But then, we elected them, and we reelected a whole bunch of them, so I guess we're okay with that.

Or really, we have bought into the misinformation that inaccurately describe what our representatives are doing, and so we keep giving them that power.

Anyway, think what you want. We all do.

@ewdocparris

@Amoshias no lie, as you can see above I did not make this up. That was someone else

@cpoliticditto@mas.to