Squiddlioni

It shows an 18+ tag for me too, and the image is blurred. I assume it’s because of our host software. I’m on kbin.melroy.org (Mbin), and the original commenter is on moist.catsweat.com (also Mbin).

Almost 20 years ago I convinced my high school library to let me install Debian on one of the computer groups. I found the “eject” command, and wrote a script that just invoked it with an argument to close the tray. I named that script “inject”. Being high schoolers, my friends and I made scripts to “eject” and “inject”, along with various beeps, and named the scripts suggestive and tawdry things. We all had a good giggle setting the systems off on their little routines and walking away.

Or, in the modern nomenclature, “systemd and friends”

Like many respondents on this decorporatized FOSS wang-dang-doodle, my answer is some variation on “Linux for desktop/laptop unless I’m forced to use the W-word” and “Whichever mobile OS makes the browser happen while I’m away from Linux, but I’m sad that it’s not Linux”.

Even proper TED talks can have some big issues. I’m thinking specifically about Kary Mullis getting up on stage and saying anthropogenic climate change isn’t real because he found a study that says there’s a current that fluctuates and absorbs anything we do–or something to that effect. If you didn’t know anything about Kary Mullis and just heard “Nobel prize winner” you might assume he’s credible. In actuality he was a pariah for talking out his ass about things he doesn’t have expertise in and doesn’t understand, specifically his climate and HIV/AIDS denialism.

It’s always a good idea to approach any lecture with a critical view, but I can see why TED talks might warrant extra scrutiny. They project expertise and authority which may or may not actually be credible. The organization has a mottled record of vetting their speakers for actual expertise. (ETA: actual expertise in the content of their talk. Obviously Kary Mullis had actual expertise, just not in the things he said on stage)

Not sure why you’re being downvoted. The anecdote happens to parallel the scientific consensus, but “I’m told that dentists can tell” isn’t an appropriate argument when discussing medical research.

The link above is not reputable and was directly refuted by, among others, the American Dental Association, the American Dental Education Association, the American Association for Dental Research, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Harvard School of Dental Medicine itself. From the response letter signed by the dean of the HSDM:

The magazine article states that CWF “does not appear to have any benefits in adults” based on the results of the Cochrane systematic review. However, the Cochrane review did not make this conclusion. Rather, the review specifically states “We did not identify any evidence, meeting the review’s inclusion criteria, to determine the effectiveness of water fluoridation for preventing caries in adults.” Due to the lack of studies that met the inclusion criteria, the Cochrane authors were not able to make any conclusion on the effect of CWF on adults. In fact, there are studies that were not included in the Cochrane review that demonstrate a caries preventive benefit of CWF in adults.

See the letter I linked for the studies it’s referencing with a demonstrated benefit to adult teeth. The Cochrane review’s inability to conclude whether there was a benefit or not was a limitation of the Cochrane review’s inclusion criteria, and not an absence of studies indicating a benefit.

The source is not as reputable as it appears. The article in question is not from the Harvard School of Dental Medicine, and in fact was condemned by the HSDM. The actual dental experts at Harvard requested a formal retraction of the article: “Based on the significant flaws in the magazine article, we respectfully request that the article be rescinded, and a correction be published to clarify any misleading information that was provided.”

Thank you for the link. It’s worth mentioning that there are response letters to the publication you linked from other experts, the majority of which are critical and point out misinterpretations and omissions by the author. It’s always good to question, but in this instance it looks like the consensus amongst experts evaluating that publication is still that fluoridation is safe and improves dental health. The response letters can be read here.

Edit to add: The responses include a letter from the dean of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine stating that the publication is deeply flawed and requesting a retraction, and a similar condemnation from the students of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. The article was given greater weight by being linked to Harvard, but in fact Harvard dental experts explicitly disagree.

Hand of Juno just released their first album, Psychotic Banana, and I’ve been binging it for a solid two weeks. Good mix of heavy and melodic, and good variation between songs. Got its hooks in me.

I will say, some songs are different enough that they almost sound like different artists, so if you check them out it’s worth trying a few tracks. “Polline” and “Destroy the Line” are my favorite heavy songs. “The One”, “We’ve Built the Line”, and “Not a Game” are my favorites on the melodic side.

Twitch (and YouTube currently) switches to a new content stream to play an ad, which is easy to detect and block in an extension. If I understand the tech correctly, server side ads would be stitched into the playing content stream. The extension would have to know the content of the video to know that an ad is playing. There are some clever ways that might be caught (looking for spikes in bitrate, volume differences, etc), but none of that currently exists in the software in the OP.

The small one’s Stun, big one’s Kill

Huh. I expected to wander in here and see people confused about why this is on unpopularopinion. I’m apparently a repulsive philistine. A meteorite-forged knife sharpened on daylight is a joy to use, but you can also just buy cheap stamped knives, do basic maintenance, and spend your mental capital elsewhere if you want.

Maybe “credentialed” wasn’t the right word. I was thinking of software licenses and access to third party tools and systems. Probably not as big a mess in game dev as it is in government.

It’s called Brook’s Law. It takes a lot of time and effort getting people up to speed, and that takes experienced devs away from coding. You also have to get them credentialed, teach them the tools, need extra code reviews/testing/bugfixes while they learn the quirks and pitfalls of the code base, etc. In the long term you’ll be able to get more done, but it comes at the cost of short term agility.