Amazing answer, thanks a lot!

Dunno what i’m getting downvotes for

So… are you saying the air inside a city park isn’t better at all?

I really really hope you are right

Yeah but then it would be a massive and cheap stretch to say they “use lightning” to kill neighbours

How the fluff do they kill an average of 9 neighboring trees? By throwing wines at them? Or do they forward the elecrocute?

(I know it doesn’t have detailed info in the article but maybe some of you nerds can provide some sweet knowledge)

You misgendered round spicy flames

Sometimes its a fine line between infographs and memes. Sometimes it isn’t

Thanks! I think it would be a great rule of thumb for lemmy to always include sauce and especially the sidefacts about the data that relativize it. (See other replies)

Less shiny maybe, but more real :)

“White american male twitter users”, according to the last paragraph

Interesting. Can we have have at least a tiny bit of info how this data came to be?

Not just this one, but all the infographs, maps etc. Always leave entirely open if someone just guessed the data for the lulz.

This makes me a litte sad sometimes

How about I synthesize them aminos in my biceps, amigos

I’ll see myself out

Fast enough to shift dimensions

It is also a somehow hot take because it kinda puts the burden of systemic misconfiguration on individuals shoulders (oh hey we’ve seen this before, after and all the time, hashtag (neo)liberalism).

I agree people who did that fucked up. But having your existence as an academic, your job, maybe the only thing you’re good at rely on publishing a ton of papers no matter what should be taken into account.

This is a huge problem for science not just since LLM’s.

I see. Thanks

Isnt thatvway to much volume for text? I would imagine every book ever written to be judt a few tb. But I also don’t know much about the issue

Cringe is life.

You’re welcome. Well kudos to them anyways I guess. Some hinterlands outeight ban gender equality language so I’ll them in as progressive :3

You can just replace / with *, in pronouns as well: Seine * ihre, Kolleg * innen, jede * r.

[Edit: without spaces inbetween, but otherwise things become italic in here]

This way you are the surest, since everybody is included every time.

I really have no clue where your teacher got this mixing thing from. But all this is work in progress. Societies and languages have to transform and that doesn’t need to be a linear process. Imo it’s even better if it isn’t, because exploration and multiperspectivity aren’t very linear by nature and irritation and changes make for good opportunities to think and discuss.

For example sometimes I like saying just one gender, if it makes for good, well placed irritation.

*Die Stadt sollte designierte Fahrradstraßen haben, damit Fahrradfahren auch ohne Helm hinreichend sicher ist.

I don’t know where you got this from or if you just invented it, but I have never heard/seen anyone mix * and /.

People interested in gender neutral language used / before the idea of more than two genders came up. Whoever wanted to specifically include non-binary people started using _ or *.

Also it makes little sense imo to include nb’s in the subject of a sentence to go back to binary scheme in the pronouns…