• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2023

help-circle


  • Firstly, this is for creating concrete on mars, where resources are very scarce and making regular concrete is not viable. Secondly, to survive martian conditions, we need to build bases, a lot of very sturdy, structurally sound bases. And lastly, before the potato based concrete, blood was genuinely the most viable solution, being an easily renewable resource. IIRC the martian concrete is now magnitudes better than regular concrete.


  • I hear you, in a system where votes are distributed equally and where a duopoly isn’t an eventuality, you’re absolutely supposed to vote for the party you allign most with. The current system does not permit this, causing a black and white world of politics. Not participating in this is your right, and with two regular candidates, we’d probably never have this conversation.

    One party has the rationality to change its opinion and work on mutually beneficial solutions, and the other party polarises the population, advocates for violence and creates lies and deceptions at every corner.





  • This US election is not about who wins, but who doesn’t win. Project 2025 is an attack on democracy and fair elections as a whole. Want to argue about actual political issues? Vote blue. Want to fight for fundamental rights the next 4 years? Vote red, 3rd party or just don’t vote.

    Using a 3rd party vote to protest the system is saying you’re choosing between equal evils. Saying a convinced fellon, insurrectionist and known fascist is an equal evil as a person with actual reasonability and literally zero negative qualifications just proves you have the moral compass of a sand dune.







  • When you put all the five year olds on earth in one room, every one of you would be able to compare two blocks, a rod and a ball. Depending on how you were thought you either pass the rod along or the ball. Then some very smart people came up with special ways to do very hard maths using those blocks.

    Now, in the olden days they kept the way they thought those kids a secret. But we knew what the results were, so we could all do much harder math then we could do in our heads. So while the other adults knew how to pack you all closer together and needed new ways to do even harder math, there was a group of good people who didn’t really like all the secrecy and thought that they were doing it way to complicated but couldn’t do anything about it.

    Like it always is, years went by and the world changed, they kept making up new rules on how the blocks should be passed around so it became slower. Those good people then decided we should be simplifying, to make it faster yet again! “And no more secrecy!” - They said. “So everyone can build their own mini five year old sweat shops and it would cost significantly less then it does now!”




  • I agree though, we can argue open science is much better and more reliable. We can argue privatly conducting a study and doing all the steps that would be conducted by the academic community within one organisation leads to more biased and less reliable results. But it’s still science by its very definition, I’d even argue denying that is a bit disrespectful to all scientists doing so.


  • I think the word you’re looking for is merit, publication which are cited and peer reviewed hold much more merit than those who don’t.

    Science is a rigorous, systematic endeavor that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world. 1

    Nothing in this quote requires external publication. Following the scientific method, publishing, peer reviewing and reproduction can all happen internally in organisation using independent teams. Those private publications hold but a fraction of the merit of publications in recognised journals, but are science nonetheless.