hessenjunge

joined 1 year ago
[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Not ~~consuming~~ implying you’re wrong but I’d really like to see that list.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I rather think he’s trying to tank the Tesla stock price lately. No idea why though.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A tortoise? What’s that?

How is being listed there pretending it’s not a thing?

You should check the provenience of your alternatives. Except maybe Vivaldi these aren’t really better.

The difference between linear tv (that your dad watched) and the internet is that there is no alternative to the latter.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 4 weeks ago

That’s an invitation to the general public (including conservatives) to attend (could be online) a Trump rally to see for themselves. It wasn’t an order to go to the opponent (and heckle them).

It’s gigantic difference.

It’s also the sad reality in basically all places world wide that aren’t in the middle of nowhere.

People sometimes even spend over 50% of their paycheck for rent and most consider this normal.

Hence the downvotes on your comment.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

it's a so-so store of value at best.

For that to be true you need to be living in a place where price/rent has not doubled or even quadrupled in the past 10 years.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 month ago

Also

‘He took to Twitter and tweeted a tweet.’

Should now be

‘He took to Xitter and xat a xit.’

The X being pronounced ‘sh’ every time.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Sorry, did you mean to reply to another comment? There is no reflection whatsoever to the comment you are replying to.

Edit: As this comment has whooshed at least 6 people:

it is very very very obvious that the article tries to manufacture outrage over one prediction model that is not publicised but avalable to the agency.

I pointed out that there is one other, equally good model unrestricted and there are about 20 other models that are equally not listed as restricted. Again, the restriction refers to publicising, not to government usage.

I hope this helps the understanding of crapwittyname@lemm.ee and his friends as I don't think it makes sense to break this down simpler.

[–] hessenjunge@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Sorry, what a shit, rage bait article is this?

… it was deemed in a National Hurricane Center (NHC) report [PDF] to be one of the two "best performers," the other being a model called IVCN (Intensity Variable Consensus).

OK, what about IVCN? Is this available? We can assume it is as is not mentioned any more in the article. Also skimming the report it’s not like the other reports are wildly inaccurate/unusable.

Asked whether the NOAA deal affected the release of information about Hurricane Helene, Buchanan said, "HCCA is one of many computer models that forecasters use at the National Hurricane Center. NHC forecasters use a variety of model guidance, observations, and expert knowledge to develop the best and most consistent forecast, along with watches, warnings and other hazard information for use by the emergency management community, the public, and other core partners and decision makers."

So the outrage is hot air over nothing. Got it.

view more: next ›