Shikadi @ Shikadi @lemmy.sdf.org

Posts

3

Comments

162

Joined

2 yr. ago

Do you mean timing belt? (Chains don't go on pulleys) You're supposed to change those... That's just called not maintaining your vehicle

They're pretty solid budget cars these days. The choice between a Chevy and a Hyundai is obvious.

I hate that the article opens with

Just a decade ago, the concept of self-driving cars might have seemed like something out of a science fiction movie

Ten years ago there was already a ton of competition in self driving car research. They were first legalized on the roads 10 years ago. Tesla autopilot (including it even though it was a scam) was sold 9 years ago. Google spun off its self driving car division as waymo in 2016.

This feels like one of those "bruh Zelda ocarina of time came out 29 years ago, we old" memes

I was trying to politely say go look it up yourself and form your own opinion

Part of the reason I consider those arguments weak, is we could be dedicating research money to solving those problems, but we don't. In his video, he also is very quickly glossing over the counter points. For example, the patient who received a heart stent because they detected early narrowing of an artery would not be given a stent today, and instead it would be monitored, which is a good thing. For the breast cancer bit, two paragraphs show up on the screen showing a study that followed women with DCIS. 5/28 of those women died of breast cancer. So by the numbers in that study, testing positive means you would have an 18% chance of dying from breast cancer if you did nothing. Idk about you, but if my ods were practically 1 in 5 I'd be monitoring the situation. Again in the anecdote the patient chose to operate too early, and a good doctor would be advising against that. Lead time bias is the only argument I think isn't weak, but there also isn't really enough data on it for us to know for sure. That and the fact that deaths to cancer remains steady instead of going down as diagnosis goes up. I still think it would be better to screen people and monitor them if they test positive rather than wait for symptoms, because so often the symptoms come far too late. I also think more research could be done to reduce false positives and understand what makes some cancer not deadly. It's severely under funded research because it doesn't make money and it isn't glamorous, but it could absolutely save lives

It's not that bold, it's something people have been saying for a long time. It's been hotly debated for years, and there's plenty of articles and YouTube videos discussing it

People downvote but it's true. Most cancer can already be cured if we detect it early, and we have many early detection methods that go un-used because it costs insurance companies more. The scientific/medical arguments against routine screening are weak and pathetic.

Sort of. There are colleges within university in the US too, we just don't usually talk about it

ISIS, religion, terrorism

?

It's a balancing act, artistic choice and such. Also depending on the company, it might be designed to increase engagement to keep you addicted

Correction, they put their faith in what people tell them those books say. They don't actually read or comprehend the books.

Kill enemy, save, make certain jump, save. Takes a lot of risk out of the game. I like when games let you save anywhere but if you restart the game or load your save you start in the beginning of a room regardless of where you saved from. (Like ocarina of time)

Honestly I'd say 5 or 6 months ago, if even

Technically anywhere between nothing and 10 years per count depending on how the trial goes

Things have actually gotten worse for me. With how crappy Reddit has been over the last few years in terms of how engaging my feed is, I've been spending less time on it naturally. Now on Lemmy I find myself addicted again, spending 3 hours in a row some days, after having already used it throughout the day. I'm thinking about giving up Lemmy and Reddit all together, wondering if my comments are even valuable to society and what not. I think maybe I'd be happier without either. Not saying you would be, or that others shouldn't be on Lemmy, just that I personally struggle with it and it interferes with my life sometimes.

I wish him plenty of harm, he doesn't deserve to live life in peace. He deserves to live it the way he wants women and minorities to live. It's okay to wish harm on people, it's not like you're trying to cause that harm yourself

What I meant is, I literally don't know where you live, so I don't know why it doesn't impact you "outside the west"

Idk where you live, but much of the world already lacks privacy

Luckily, the best way to become informed is to watch/read more primary sources.