Even by the article you linked, it's not wrong to point out a fallacy. It'd be wrong to conclude that since the argument was fallacious, the opposite must be true, but the local man didn't say that.
I'm not an enemy of the cause, but this graphic is not very convincing. These are absolute numbers, not adjusted for the fact there are significantly more cars around than bikes.
I get that this thread started from a joke, but I think it's also important to note that no matter how obvious some things may seem to some people, the exact opposite will seem obvious to many others. Without evidence, like the study, both groups are really just stating their opinions
It's also why the formal investigations are required. And whenever policies and laws are made based on verifiable studies rather than people's hunches, it's not sad, it's a good thing!
Additionally, Discord will implement its age inference model, a new system that runs in the background to help determine whether an account belongs to an adult
Came here to say this. Even "3D movies" are actually just stereoscopic 2D (meaning two ever-so-slightly-different 2D images, one for each eye). True 3D vision would be, for lack of better term, x-ray vision.
Sorry to butt in, but I think I might know where the confusion is coming from. Apart from its strictly logical meaning of "a statement that's always true", the word tautology is often used to mean repetition or circular circular reasoning (e.g. "I should join this honor society to show colleges I'm honorable, and I'm honorable because I'm in an honor society?").
Even by the article you linked, it's not wrong to point out a fallacy. It'd be wrong to conclude that since the argument was fallacious, the opposite must be true, but the local man didn't say that.
He didn't say otherwise, just pointed out the argument used was poor.
I'm not an enemy of the cause, but this graphic is not very convincing. These are absolute numbers, not adjusted for the fact there are significantly more cars around than bikes.
I get that this thread started from a joke, but I think it's also important to note that no matter how obvious some things may seem to some people, the exact opposite will seem obvious to many others. Without evidence, like the study, both groups are really just stating their opinions
It's also why the formal investigations are required. And whenever policies and laws are made based on verifiable studies rather than people's hunches, it's not sad, it's a good thing!
from the official release.
Came here to say this. Even "3D movies" are actually just stereoscopic 2D (meaning two ever-so-slightly-different 2D images, one for each eye). True 3D vision would be, for lack of better term, x-ray vision.