Are they asking for a huge increase then, and relying on the fact that congress doesn't understand that two negatives multiplied together is a positive?
Or is the headline writer just dumb?
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
138 points (100.0% liked)
science
26379 readers
185 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
dart board;; science bs
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I wrote the snippet. I mentioned why I phrased it as such elsewhere in thread:
I've found that people misinterpret percentage decreases as odds ratios unless I include the negative sign. The negative sign following decrease language is at best redundant and at worst actually means what is technically opposite to what I want to convey, but including it appears to make things clearer for folks for whatever reason.
Lemmy seems to be better than Reddit in this regard, given that I've now twice commented the explanation. Perhaps I'll try without the negative sign in the future.
Working hard to accelerate this crossover point, I see.
China believes in the future. We don't
I don't believe in USA's future either.
2049 is serious business for them.
Who needs science funding when there's a whole planet full of mostly-unbombed elementary schools?
Unbombed? I prefer the shootings to keep those gremlins on edge /s
Every damn time that country declares a part of itself declining, this man is happy:
Cutting by negative % 🧐
I've found that people misinterpret percentage decreases as odds ratios unless I include the negative sign. The negative sign following decrease language is at best redundant and at worst actually means what is technically opposite to what I want to convey, but including it appears to make things clearer for folks for whatever reason.
Scientists being sneaky