TheTechnician27
@TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
- Comment on So true 11 hours ago:
My dad: “The plain peanut butter sandwiches will continue until morale improves.”
- Comment on [deleted] 1 day ago:
This user’s entire history (username included) is spent signal-boosting attacks against Wikipedia. (Incidentally, they just deleted one from this very community because they got called out for it). This user is a ridiculous troll and should be banned from communities for their transparent, bad-faith agenda. I’m sure if there’s a story worth posting, somebody other than “wikipediasuckscoop” can post it. It’s so transparent that in an age where the Internet is blanketed with far-right disinformation, one of the last remaining bastions of truth that refuses to compromise and bend to said disinformation will come under attack by bad-faith, far-right actors desperately flailing to discredit it. This user doesn’t give a single shit about gender equality; they simply aim to discredit a resource standing in the way of their agenda.
A gender gap is a longstanding and severe issue on the English Wikipedia, but there’s a lot this article leaves out about its monumental and ongoing efforts to increase its coverage of women and to welcome more women into the project. This especially includes WikiProject Women in Red, far and away Wikipedia’s largest collaborative project whose entire purpose is to create new biographies about women. A large part of this biographical underrepresentation stems less from a bias in the editors themselves and more from the way that historical women have often been left out of published, reliable sources, and it’s taking scholars enormous efforts to bring those women to the surface today. It also says: “just 10-15% of its editors are female.” What this fails to acknowledge is that there’s an option simply not to declare your gender at all. To be clear, the ratio is atrocious, but 10–15% is likely an underrepresentation: women may be substantially less likely to self-declare their gender than men. The Wikimedia Foundation has outreach, activism, etc. focused specifically on recruiting women to the project and has for well over a decade now. Wikipedia really is trying, and its experienced editors are constantly aware of this.
The article does put forth three hypotheses for why this gap exists, but I don’t think they put forth compelling evidence that the reason it exists is because of the culture on Wikipedia or in general is Wikipedia’s “fault”.
- Comment on Wiki Wars: Editors and propagandists are fighting for influence over the online encyclopedia’s most controversial entries 1 day ago:
This user’s entire history (username included) is spent signal-boosting demonstrably false, bad-faith attacks against Wikipedia. I have no idea how this post has a ratio of 28–0 when the article’s premise is that the ADL of all organizations is a good arbiter of what is antisemitic when it comes to coverage of Israel’s genocide in Palestine. The article starts with “This past March, researchers from the Anti-Defamation League accused Wikipedia of biased coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
Newsflash: it isn’t. The ADL consistently treats anyone who dares to challenge Israel’s genocide as antisemitic. This user is a ridiculous troll and should be banned from communities for their transparent, bad-faith agenda. I’m sure if there’s a story worth posting, somebody other than “wikipediasuckscoop” can post it. It’s so transparent that in an age where the Internet is blanketed with far-right disinformation, one of the last remaining bastions of truth that refuses to compromise and bend to said disinformation will come under attack by bad-faith, far-right actors desperately flailing to discredit it.
I’d like to point out that when the article says “propagandists” (i.e. people opposed to Israel’s genocide) and arbitrarily delineates them from “editors”, what it’s failing to point out (likely because a) its author doesn’t understand shit about fuck or b) its author doesn’t care) is that any article related to a conflict between Israel and Arab countries is extended protected by default (on top of other heavy editing restrictions). This means that it can only be edited 1) on a registered account 2) which is at least 30 days old and 3) which has made at least 500 edits. This isn’t 2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334 typing “Izreel sux lololol” or even just some random sockpuppet account trying to insert anti-Israel bias. You have to be an experienced editor to make changes to these articles. Every single one of these even remotely controversial public changes is put under a microscope and discussed ad nauseum by other experienced editors on the corresponding talk page – not just to make sure that it’s covered without bias per NPOV but that its claims are suitably backed by reliable, independent sources.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 day ago:
This user’s entire history (username included) is spent signal-boosting demonstrably false, bad-faith attacks against Wikipedia. I have no idea how this post has a ratio of 28–0 when the entire article’s premise is that the ADL of all organizations is a good arbiter of what is antisemitic when it comes to coverage of Israel’s genocide in Palestine. The article starts with “'This past March, researchers from the Anti-Defamation League accused Wikipedia of biased coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
Newsflash: it isn’t. The ADL consistently treats anyone who dares to challenge Israel’s genocide as antisemitic. This user is a ridiculous troll and should be banned from communities for their transparent, bad-faith agenda.
- Comment on Trying to avoid antitrust suits, Google senior executives told employees to destroy messages 2 days ago:
I read this as “incinerate”. A principled, pragmatic opposition to the death penalty in any case I can think of is the only reason I would disapprove.
- Comment on 4chan Is Dead. Its Toxic Legacy Is Everywhere 6 days ago:
And other reasons why “security through obscurity” is bullshit.
- Comment on My PhD supervisor when I start to regret choosing a thesis on the Great Vowel Shift [Day 120] 1 week ago:
I’m so sorry that these shitposts keep getting shittier.
- My PhD supervisor when I start to regret choosing a thesis on the Great Vowel Shift [Day 120]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 6 comments
- Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 2 comments
- Comment on When I don't know if she's trying to give me a signal or if I'm just reading too much into it [Day 118] 1 week ago:
This is a series where I make a meme out of every line of dialogue in The Room. It was running every day, but I got kind of burnt out on it for a bit and started having gaps of a day or two. I’m intending to get back to doing it daily now.
- Comment on Google is excited about money! 1 week ago:
It’s likely in your best interest to move away from Gmail, if not immediately then over some period of time (e.g. start new email signups with other address, gradually move over existing ones, etc.)
- When I don't know if she's trying to give me a signal or if I'm just reading too much into it [Day 118]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 5 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Comment on Godfrey IV, Duke of Lower Lorraine, when he hears breathing under the latrine he's using [Day 116] 2 weeks ago:
Mark’s lines are so criminally underappreciated I swear to god. lmfao
- Godfrey IV, Duke of Lower Lorraine, when he hears breathing under the latrine he's using [Day 116]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 6 comments
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Comment on How do I contact Google webhosting to turn in a site for being scammers and breaking their terms of service? 3 weeks ago:
You don’t. You’re asking how to do free labor for a multitrillion-dollar company. Google chooses to be lax enough to constantly let this garbage through and makes gargantuan profits from it; they brought this on themselves. Migrate to a platform that hasn’t enshittified like Google has, tell your friends and family about it, and let Google wallow in the shithole they’ve created for themselves.
- When someone asks me if I mind (I mind tremendously, but I'm a total pushover) [Day 113]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Comment on Trees getting ready to rapidly colonize the land when glaciers retreat due to global warming [Day 112] 3 weeks ago:
- Trees getting ready to rapidly colonize the land when glaciers retreat due to global warming [Day 112]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 4 comments
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to [deleted] | 1 comment
- Comment on AI crawlers cause Wikimedia Commons bandwidth demands to surge 50%. 3 weeks ago:
Not only that, but we make it goddamn trivial. Doing this is just stealing without attribution like the CC BY-SA 4.0 license demands and then on top of that kicking down the ladder for people who actually want to use Wikipedia and not the hallucinatory slop you’re trying to supplant it with. LLM companies have caused incalculable damage to critical thinking, the open web, and the climate.
- Comment on The Rock hitting Ken Shamrock in the face with a steel chair [Day 110] 4 weeks ago:
I don’t actually watch wrestling, but I like to appeal to a diverse audience.
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 2 comments
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 3 comments
- Submitted 4 weeks ago to energy@slrpnk.net | 3 comments
- Comment on Inside arXiv—the Most Transformative Platform in All of Science 4 weeks ago:
Two totally different things, but okay.
- That one final boss who shows up in the first act only to disappear until the final 10 minutes of the game [Day 108]lemmy.world ↗Submitted 4 weeks ago to [deleted] | 3 comments
- Comment on People from the Wild West deciding what time they'll casually throw their life away in a duel [Day 107] 4 weeks ago:
Duels? No clue, honestly. They definitey happened, but their frequency could definitely be overstated. As for meeting at noon? I think it sounds like the most reasonable time and would’ve been common if duels were common. This is pure, complete speculation on my part, so don’t repeat it without doing your own research, but I think the existing facts support my conclusion:
- Home clocks at the time were only seen among rich folks, often as a status symbol.
- Even if you did have one of these, they often lost quite a few minutes per day.
- Towns often had a clock for the church.
- This clock would’ve been more accurate than a home clock.
- This clock often rang at noon.
- Noon is (approximately) pretty easily verifiable by the position of the Sun being the highest in the sky.
- Noon means that neither party should have an advantage based on where the Sun is facing if you line up east–west.
- Noon is around a time most people are most likely to be the most awake.
