Ech

deleted by creator

Bummer :/

If it’s a site you use often, right-click and “block element” is your friend. Might be able to sus out a universal block as well if you dig around the different elements there.

If the rest of those turned their crimes into social media hustles, the cops would have a much easier time.

it is also somewhat misleading

…what? No it isn’t. Restricting the premise from infinite to any finite amount of time completely negates it. That doesn’t prove it’s “misleading”, it proves anyone that thinks it does has no idea what they’re talking about.

What are we supposed to do[…]?

All of these articles treat energy usage like a massive crime, but miss/ignore that the world’s energy use needs to go up as we increasingly turn to electric alternatives. The problem truly lies in how we generate electricity, not how we use it.

So the actual answer to your question is intense and rapid investment in sustainable, non-carbon energy production. An infrastructure revamp to rival any other in history. It would’ve been far better to do so decades ago, but that’s no longer an option. Anything else is just half measures we can’t afford.

Clearly you haven’t heard of rat lungworm.

I didn’t read the article, but wouldn’t the site see the phone as soon as it’s taken out of the bag? Unless the plan is to leave the phone in the bag the whole time, at which point it seems easier to just leave it behind.

Maybe they’d end up being toxic Stardew Valley players

I’m certain that exists. I remember a few years back when I ran into a subreddit that was entirely devoted to vehemently hating a specific animal crossing character (I can’t remember which one and have no interest in looking for the sub again). And it was fairly active, too!

People get fucking weird about anything and everything, turning funny jokes into legit worrying belief systems.

Dib gets his vocal cords (I think) swapped with the cow can. The lady gets her brain swapped with a soda can and starts foaming at the mouth. It’s a wild episode XD

I’ve already agreed that situations vary. My point has always been about this study, not others. In this situation, the 15-20% of births in teens was not “the traditional driver of USA birth rates” (paraphrasing).

As for the other person, they were being an asshole for repeatedly attempting to use their own misunderstanding to delegitimize my point instead of taking even a moment to consider my words wholly. Pardon me for not having a surplus of patience to endure that today.

Feel free to stop responding to my discussion with someone else with your asinine “contributions”. They serve no purpose but to derail the conversation with your brash lack of understanding.

This was my first thought too, hah.

Yeah, that’s not what I said.

Obviously even 1 extreme outlier can skew things, but that’s not the case here.

In the terms of your analogy, this is about 3 people out of 20 pedaling a (weirdly long) bike and steered by all of them (somehow). Would you say that group of 3 are driving? Or would you concede it’s the two groups of 6 that are mostly driving the bike?

He should save up for some punctuation first. Got dam.

The amount the percentage represents is irrelevant. A billion people could be involved, but if the total is 7 billion, it’s not going to be a significant part of the total trend.

Less than 20% of a total is “significant”?

“Driven” suggest more than half of total pregnancies, which is not true looking at the graph given above. It was solidly thirdfourth* in terms of totals, which is still unsettling, but not as pronounced as your comment suggests.

*I overlooked 25-29

A fundamental misunderstanding of what the AI Singularity is, or AI in general.