To be fair, CNN "leans left" in the same way US Democrat liberals "lean left". Which is to say, socially progressive (usually) and economically capitalist.
Assuming I'm using those terms right, which I think I am, at least in the context of the US.
vonbaronhans
joined 2 years ago
Hey now. Steven was at least remorseful for shattering Jasper!
This isn't a particularly well thought out stance, but I do wonder if books are kind of self-selecting for appropriate audiences? As in, just being able to read and understand something in a book might be enough to warrant your permission to read it.
Movies and shows can be consumed more passively, with almost no maturity required to experience the media, so I can see why providing that guidance would be warranted.
But I don't know, that stance might crumble under scrutiny.
I'm gonna say unwise.
The implication here is that systems and safeguards ultimately have no effect, and therefore it is not worth trying to bother accommodating or designing for "idiots".
In fact, quite the opposite is true in almost every domain of design.
Streets and roads designed to slow down drivers and better accommodate pedestrians and cyclists make better transit options for everyone.
Software designed to be more intuitive for new users ends up generally improving the quality of the application for all users.
Workplaces designed with accessibility in mind reduce injuries and improve working conditions for everyone.
Will there always be people who can't quite get it? Sure. But they don't make "better idiots". You just discover the kinds of people who don't mesh well with your own processes, workflows, or design ethos.
Man. Without them being willing to confirm how much they're actually losing... it still feels sus to me.
It ain't perfect (cost of living has always been relatively high, even for states with comparable cities), but it's far and away better than any red state to my knowledge.
There are dozens of us
I have a long running DnD 5e game tonight, and on Fridays I'm running DC20 (which is similar heroic fantasy, currently in beta but still lots of fun)
NGL, when I learned about the fig wasp thing, I was proper grossed out.
Nature is weird.
More up front, much fewer repairs in the long run if you stay up on the maintenance.
It does, but that may not necessarily be a bad thing. It largely depends on what the overall dataset looks like.
It's not unusual to tweak your dataset in response to certain biases, especially if there is a known bias at play (for example, I've actually met plenty of parents who keep having kids hoping for a boy/girl, and then stop once they get what they initially wanted. As creepy and weird as that is to me, it's definitely a thing).
This does seem a bit blunt of an approach, however. I would've preferred a survey question as part of data collection where parents are asked if they were "trying" for one sex over another, if they wanted "one of each", etc etc., and then using that info to weight the data.
But without reading the article myself, my assumption is they just used a readily available dataset (such as medical records) rather than recruit participants directly. But I could be wrong, didn't read it after all.
This is splitting hairs a bit, but Ground News is more of an aggregator with useful framing than a source in and of itself.