TheTechnician27

This man looks like he was engineered in a lab to be the villain of an iCarly special.

Any 5th any movie is going to be a rehash.

Have you seen it, or do you even know anything about it? This one’s getting solid reviews from critics and audiences. And I say this as someone who’s never gotten into the franchise and didn’t even watch 4 or 5; I have nothing to personally defend here. The Schafrillas review (also on Nebula) was quite positive, and he went in with the same expectations you’re talking about here.

If you’re going to be a pretentious, overgeneralizing jackass, maybe don’t pick on the movie with a 93%/7.8 on Rotten Tomatoes.

T…

Twitter?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuDqNLgVHv8

Wikipedia used to be untrusted. Anyone can put anything there! Now teachers rather see wikipedia than AI bullshit.

As a longtime contributor to Wikipedia, the teachers were categorically correct. 2000s Wikipedia was, broadly, a trashfire where citations were mostly an afterthought and there really weren’t standards. Some of the most bare minimum standards that make Wikipedia actually functional weren’t codified until c. 2006 and took easily over a decade to really take hold culturally. And unfortunately, the popularization of Wikipedia made the late 2000s pretty bad too; whereas the early 2000s were a largely benign wild west, the late ones saw a flood of near-unfiltered garbage that’s still being cleaned up today.

I’d still say not to trust Wikipedia today and use its sources instead for anything even slightly consequential, but back in peak Wikipedia scare days, “use its sources” was very often a nonstarter.

Well the first thing he said to them was “I will make you fishers of men”, so he wanted them to get used to changing identities.

… are the same that perform dockings.

My Mom’s a pediatric oncology nurse and she said

Dude, I’m sorry; it’s not the same thing. Virologists were freaking the fuck out about COVID-19. Your mom being qualified to nurse children with cancer does not qualify her literally at all to give a prediction on the virology of an emergent outbreak. You may as well have said she was a vet tech.

If you’d read it, you would know:

At this early stage of the investigation with limited available information, we consider everyone on the ship to be close contacts, due to the closed setting and shared social areas and activities, aligned with the precautionary principle.

If a cruise ship is close and personal, a fuselage is obviously close and personal. The virologists are taking this into account; you’re not going to have any considerations they haven’t already thought of with 1000x more expertise and scrutiny.

Care to share with the class? Is the Lügenpresse in the room with us right now? I just linked to “the press” who were pushing that WHO quote around.

you don’t have the ability to control what I chose to read, sorry.

What does the word “please” mean to you? It’s a well-informed suggestion, and you were always free to ignore it.

As for the quote “very complicated and required extended intimacy”, can you point me to where the WHO has said that regarding this outbreak? Neither your article nor mine says those exact words.

• I’m not saying that human-to-human transmission isn’t possible. The WHO has acknowledged the possibility.
• The point is that transmissibility is likely quite low, i.e. even if there’s human-to-human transmission, it’s unlikely to be severe.
• “Got infected” in this case is “suspected of being infected”; we don’t know yet.
• For your own health, please don’t read the New York Post. Anything worth reporting will have coverage in other, actually reliable, sources.

The idea of human-to-human transmission is not some kind of fringe media panic. The World Health Organization has acknowledged that it could be human-to-human.

“We do believe ‌that there may ⁠be some human-to-human transmission that’s happening among the really close contacts, the husband and wife, people who have shared cabins,” Maria Van Kerkhove, the director of epidemic and pandemic preparedness and prevention at the WHO, told reporters in Geneva.

It’s just that the spread would likely be limited, unlike COVID which is highly transmissible.

Not likely, OP. Human-to-human transmission is so rare that its existence was credibly disputed in 2021, and virologists collectively assert that public risk is quite low. Good to keep an eye on; just not probably healthy to “COVID-19 2.0” about it.

That’s true, but Zealandia would be the world’s largest microcontinent and links Aotearoa with New Caledonia and Rēkohu. Its topography is super cool and makes for a neat range for deep-sea, benthic organisms.

See also: the Tonga–Kermadec Ridge to the northeast, which imo looks sick.

To be fair, ‘memes’ is inherently a generic community. If you don’t like that, then you should sub to more specific comms and block ones whose scope is too generic. You can’t answer all posts to generic comms like ‘videos’ by saying “Well, there’s this more specific comm”. The threadiverse isn’t a directory structure where you should necessarily filter down to more specific subdirectories where possible.

I agree that LCD genericization is a huge problem on sites like Lemmy and Reddit. It’s seriously troubling how it eventually becomes one big mass without meticulous moderation. But the problem you’re describing is baked into the comm in this case.

Truth is… the oil was rigged from the start.

Yeah, and it’s about to be 2 deep 4 him.

Yeah, that T. rex in the book is clearly about to do something terrible.

I think a little Nuka Cola Quantum splattered on the word “fuck”.