Can be, yes.
But are at a statistically significant rate above & below a certain threshold.
Young kids and old folks cause a significant portion of all fatal accidents yet our society provides them no alternatives.
huginn
joined 1 year ago
Assassination attempts don't correlate with wins per se. Neither does debate performance.
Sure but that's specialist models.
Generalist models are stagnant and show little potential for progress.
-
Tiktok is a company comparable in scale to Google. 130Bn in revenue last year.
-
Patreon is nowhere near the scale of YouTube. But I also think it's the only viable solution to privacy and supporting creators.
On the one hand: fuck AI driving up these emissions for no useful fucking reason
On the other hand: fuck carbon credits - they're universally scams perpetuated by "preventing deforestation" or other inane solutions.
The future solutions are always going to be reduction and drawdown. They're only funding drawdown now, because they're not even trying to reduce emissions.
We do need drawdown in the future but it shouldn't distract from replacing our polluting infrastructure. Kill gas cars. Death to coal plants. Natural gas needs to stay in the ground.
If Google were funding that they'd actually be doing good.
The only statistic that matters is sold not occupied and even that is only useful if it excludes houses that just haven't been moved into yet.
The majority of those figures are just showing that houses are unoccupied in resort towns because there's nothing there half the year or that houses sit empty for a month while a new renter is sorted out or a new owner is moving in.
We don't need to shove the homeless into a remote resort town where they have no access to services - we need more housing in our cities where support networks can help those in need.
The fact is that there arent enough houses to house every homeless person in the USA and maintain sufficient housing stock for people to move houses.
Anything below a 5% vacancy rate is considered a housing shortage - it indicates there's too much demand for housing and not enough supply.
Very few American cities are sitting at or above 5% vacancy.
That's one of the reasons it was popularized - coal miner unions wearing red bandanas. But late 19th century usage appears to be sunburnt workers.
Nobody was saying that you must eat eggs to survive - the point is to show the flaws in the hypothesis of the study when related to the sample group.
If you are sampling 3000 mothers in New Hampshire and looking for those who eat less poor people food and more rich people food you should expect to see a correlation that can be equally described by socioeconomic status as it can by diet.
I think OP is saying a movie critics loved and everyone else pans.
Call me crazy but I don't think traditional Kazakh diets were part of the study of 3000 pregnant mothers in New Hampshire.
Coffee, eggs, white rice
Selection bias much?
If you don't consume any of those 3 you're probably ridiculously wealthy on some freaky diet.
All this says to me is "The food of the masses is contaminated" which yeah - we already knew the rich pay a premium to get less contaminated food.
For real - A cyber security company should basically always be pushing out updates.