RustyEarthfire

joined 1 year ago
[–] RustyEarthfire 17 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

nobody thinks Ted Cruz is a man of great honor

No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here... nothing valued is here

It is dangerous and repulsive to us

The danger is still present, in your time, as it was in ours

[–] RustyEarthfire 6 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Not sure what njm is trying to say, but Harris and Cheney did do an appearance together:

https://youtu.be/aPdRtKbw2L4?t=1318

[–] RustyEarthfire 9 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

Perhaps not every disability benefit is, but Social Security Disability Insurance and State Disability Insurance certainly are.

[–] RustyEarthfire 1 points 14 hours ago

Four minutes for a cup of coffee? Yesterday it was three!

[–] RustyEarthfire 2 points 15 hours ago

I think the "correct" usage of acronym is only when it is spoken as a word. But language evolves and all that.

You can see the tension in the way MW defines it (including the extended description). Like: here's the definition of the word, but some people use it when they actually mean initialism. This is in contrast to your more concise and cohesive definition of "[abbreviations] that take the first letter from each word". https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/acronym

[–] RustyEarthfire 4 points 1 day ago

It hard to see this as anything other than a bad faith comparison.

  1. It compares trans-oceanic LNG vs. US domestic coal
  2. It makes a lot of assumptions about inefficient and leaky extraction, processing, and transport approaches
  3. It only considers CO2 and methane ignoring other ways that LNG is far cleaner than coal

It is important to consider the entire life cycle of LNG, but a more even-handed author would conclude we should address these inefficiencies (e.g. via regulation), rather than fixating on promoting coal.

Direct link to paper: https://scijournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.1934

[–] RustyEarthfire 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, but for a different reason.

Conversations have extremely short life spans. After a day, conversations dwindle down to individual threads with back and forths between two people (at best), since they are the only ones revisiting the post (due to notifications).

Even if people were committed (and/or reminded) about revisiting posts, the threading makes it difficult to find what's new.

[–] RustyEarthfire 2 points 3 days ago

Actually it is for formal women.

Although "Formerly WAS" is a good "Who's on first" style set up.

[–] RustyEarthfire 2 points 3 days ago

Ha, I love the backsplanation that they are small and yellow like corn.

[–] RustyEarthfire 4 points 5 days ago

That assumes "you" are just the conscious part. If you accept the rest of your brain (and body) as part of "you", then it's a less dramatic divide.

[–] RustyEarthfire 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Based on what I know of Imposter Syndrome and the Dunning-Kruger effect, it seems you’re at your most competent when you feel like you’re at your least.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion, even with the internet meme version of the Dunning-Kruger effect. In the meme version, the incompetent think they are most competent, but I don't think it follows that the most competent would think they are least competent.

I would summarize the actual Dunning-Kruger effect as: people tend to think they are a bit above average, and actual skill factors in only slightly. Worth emphasizing that these results are over groups of people, and individuals have extreme variation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Dunning-Kruger percentile chart

Dunning-Kruger raw score chart

[–] RustyEarthfire 1 points 3 weeks ago

tell me source of any one claim

The report provides sources, as well as its criteria and methodology. If you are interested in facts, you may find them there.

view more: next ›