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.

Clearly someone needs to figure out how to get an old Furby to interact with a new Furby.

(Of course, someone has already done ChatGPT + Furby)

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

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.

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.

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.

Yes, that sentence is in the original article. Did you have something you wanted to discuss? There are three studies in all in the article, so I don’t find cherry-picking a single sentence contributes much here.

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.

Non-paywall article on the same topic: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iowa-meteorologist-chris-gloninger-quits-18-year-career-after-receiving-death-threat-over-his-climate-coverage/

I’m saddened by this, but not surprised. The rationalist in me wants to think that at some point the red state attacks on science will have consequences in worse quality of life for their residents, but I’m not optimistic enough to believe that will happen before the whole culture collapses.

It’s not just about the information though, is it? Web forums can offer a sense of community that his preferred alternative (long-form Medium articles with comments) just can’t match, in my experience.

And yet politicians are still talking about fixing Social Security. Good luck with that.

Speaking just for myself, I’ll be giving cultivated meat a pass. Not because I’m a vegan, but because I avoid ultraprocessed foods and venture capitalism as much as possible.

Looks like it’s already under discussion (not surprising given that some of the cultured meat companies are in Israel: https://time.com/6251154/lab-grown-meat-kosher-israel-rabbi/ https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2293219/jewish/Is-Lab-Grown-Meat-Kosher.htm

Yeah so far it seems to be battling experts. UC Davis is a big agriculture/animal science school. On the other hand I don’t trust the lab meat industry’s own experts either. Hoping at some point to see a credible neutral analysis.