That’s an interesting observation, it’d be interesting to see what could be the reason why that pattern might hold in a proper survey. But it could just be chance that it was that way at that particular facility.
I created a space for people to make connections and learn from each other. I call it Grok.Town and plan to start up a Lemmy instance at that domain, but for now it’s a space on Matrix with a few rooms to chat and get to know one another. Check it out @ https://matrix.to/#/#groktown:matrix.org
That’s an interesting observation, it’d be interesting to see what could be the reason why that pattern might hold in a proper survey. But it could just be chance that it was that way at that particular facility.
Keep talking with your psychiatrist.
Seems like it’s pretty much like any other surface in your kitchen, it requires regular cleaning.
As I understand it, some studies don’t distinguish low-volume drinking from not drinking.
The quoted portion of the meta-study in the post makes it clear that the studies reviewed did distinguish between low-volume drinking and not drinking.
It wouldn’t surprise me if sample selection not taking into account social factors which would cause people who drink at low volumes to lie and say they don’t drink could play a role in certain studies.
Two organizations that are trying to make a difference:
The Journal of Trial and Error.
[The journal’s editor-in-chief was interviewed by Nature.]
SURE: Series of Unsurprising Results in Economics
I found out about these today by the comments linked below:
Citation count has been and continues to be the defacto measure of research importance.
That makes more sense than my initial interpretation, but why the random aspect at all?
You mean “arbitrary”, not “random” right?
I don’t see how a randomly chose picture from reddit would be something the user would likely be interested in.
There was a whole season of The Wire that was dedicated to the theme of news publications demanding that more be done with less as budgets were cut. Craigslist was a major factor in the trend as it cut revenue severely for local publications.
The biggest thing that PieFed has done is get up and running on public data with new accounts open to the public. This trial by fire will make it fail fast or become much improved. It seems that the main developer is quite experienced and has thought about architecture and improvements that have already been implemented. I think it’s promising for all of these reasons.
My biggest potential concern is that moderation tools have not been implimented yet (unless the were very recently).
As far as Python being difficult in larger systems, this can be mitigated by experience and good practice. But I tend to agree that Python is typically not the ideal choice for a large project.
Wikipedia has a great image of orientations on the dates of Saturn’s opposition from 2001 thru 2029 (copied below). It really shows what’s going on and the approximate timing of visibility of the rings as they change from a Northern to Southern view from Earth’s perspective. Between March and November of 2025 the rings will be in the least visible orientations.