Aedis

You can throw statistics upon statistics and they will mean nothing without a comparison point, control group, or null hypothesis.

Yeah. I agree.

Jill Stein? Unless I’m wrong. It’s nuanced, but her position is to stop the genocide.

Honest question. What do you do for someone who’s sole issue right now is to stop the genocide? There’s only one candidate going for that afaik, and it’s not Harris or Trump.

Always has been.

GDPR doesn’t just protect PII, it also protects user Generated Content.

This doesn’t make that behavior any less scummy, but have you tried using any Google website on a browser that isn’t chrome?

That’s fair. Personally in the 4 years he was president I was terrified he would come out with something that would force me out of my job and thus out of the country. (and he nearly did, I wasn’t allowed to work for 3 months at one point.)

Not to mention that these pro-Trumpers can’t even vote.

Cool and all… But why did you have to post this over and over in a gajillion subs?

That’s the fun part about being in a place where you can hold a discussion. Some people don’t agree with you, but they can still see the benefits of the option you are talking about or even agree that they are a great solution for now.

At least what I see with this experiment/article is that is overly verbose, he takes a long time to get to the point. And then when he does his methodology shows an experiment that cannot be verified. Even when something is “subjective” we can still draw conclusions from it if we set up proper non-subjective ways of evaluating the results we see (ie. Rubrics). The fact that he doesn’t really say what leads him to say in detail what is a “terrible/v. bad/bad/good result” is a massive red flag in his method.

After seeing that, I no longer read the rest of it. Any conclusions drawn from a flawed methodology are inherently fallacies or hearsay.

If in any case it is further explained in the article and that somehow refutes what I’ve postulated later on, then I would have to say that the article is poorly written.

All this to say… I agree with you, not worth the read.