There are probably ways to correlate the military test with a standardized IQ test, and which point the military test might be a rough proxy for IQ. If that was the case, the 80 IQ rule might be roughly accurate.
I don't know if that's been done though. Just playing devil's advocate.
I don't think that's quite right. The act of changing the channel wouldn't have impacted the station's ad revenue because the tech couldn't tell if the ad was served. On YouTube you actually deprive the site of ad revenue with an ad blocker. And if enough people do it, you could also deprive creators of material earnings.
Mate, a good third of the countries on that list are currently suffering such brutal ethnic violence that it might be considered genocide. Close to half are riddled by islamic terrorism, usually directed towards ethnic minorites. At least two of them are in the middle of civil wars.
To be fair, this is how people tend to react to change, generally. I remember every time Facebook or YouTube did a site redesign in the early 2010s people were always up in arms.
On the other hand, Google/Apple Pay are both pretty great products that replace a horrendous legacy payments system. Recall that for like 40 years the most innovative consumer payment system looked like this. And it was essentially a duopoly as well (Visa/Mastercard).
At the end of the day, cash is still a thing as well.
I love the irony of a subreddit against religion trying to collectively reinforce that there is only one true interpretation of a comic. And discrediting contrary viewpoints without addressing the underlying logic.
But the scientist and the religious person are shown to be identical, and the first row showed that he could fly. I.e., the claim that he refused to prove was implied to be true, regardless of his refusal to prove it.
There are probably ways to correlate the military test with a standardized IQ test, and which point the military test might be a rough proxy for IQ. If that was the case, the 80 IQ rule might be roughly accurate.
I don't know if that's been done though. Just playing devil's advocate.
Taylor Swift chose to list on Ticketmaster with full knowledge that those fees would be included.
Interesting topic, but the article's writing style is god-awful and a bit hard to get through.
Your title reads like immigrants are more susceptible to silicosis than non-immigrants.
So it's not the best analogy.
I don't think that's quite right. The act of changing the channel wouldn't have impacted the station's ad revenue because the tech couldn't tell if the ad was served. On YouTube you actually deprive the site of ad revenue with an ad blocker. And if enough people do it, you could also deprive creators of material earnings.
Mate, a good third of the countries on that list are currently suffering such brutal ethnic violence that it might be considered genocide. Close to half are riddled by islamic terrorism, usually directed towards ethnic minorites. At least two of them are in the middle of civil wars.
There's a not insignificant chance that it'll be the secured creditors' company soon 😂
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. You can like the comic and I can not like the comic. That's perfectly fine.
To be fair, this is how people tend to react to change, generally. I remember every time Facebook or YouTube did a site redesign in the early 2010s people were always up in arms.
Jake and Amir parodied this well in their "Facebook Redesign" episode.
On the other hand, Google/Apple Pay are both pretty great products that replace a horrendous legacy payments system. Recall that for like 40 years the most innovative consumer payment system looked like this. And it was essentially a duopoly as well (Visa/Mastercard).
At the end of the day, cash is still a thing as well.
Man, Lemmy is savage with its downvotes.
And also stop goes for hikes in the middle of a heat wave.
At least two interpretations, per the above discussion.
Agreed. I think it's the upvote/downvote system. It's an inherently flawed way to facilitate good faith discussions.
Christ man all I did was point out that the comic's internal logic was an awkward fit for its theme.
I love the irony of a subreddit against religion trying to collectively reinforce that there is only one true interpretation of a comic. And discrediting contrary viewpoints without addressing the underlying logic.
We're an odd species, aren't we?
I think my interpretation is quite reasonble, given the presentation.
But the scientist and the religious person are shown to be identical, and the first row showed that he could fly. I.e., the claim that he refused to prove was implied to be true, regardless of his refusal to prove it.
Since he can actually fly, this implies that his religious beliefs are true...
Edit: I love the irony of a subreddit against religion trying to collectively reinforce that there is only one true interpretation of a comic.