![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
However, Wikipedia editors consider Media Bias/Fact Check as “generally unreliable”, recommending against its use for what some see as breaking Wikipedia’s neutral point of view.
However, Wikipedia editors consider Media Bias/Fact Check as “generally unreliable”, recommending against its use for what some see as breaking Wikipedia’s neutral point of view.
Though errors are somewhat monitored by Retraction Watch.
Let’s extend this thought experiment a little. Consider just forum posts; the numbers will be somewhat similar for articles and other writings, as well as photos and videos.
A bot creates how many more posts than a human? Being (ridiculously) conservative, we’ll say 10x more.
On day one: 10 humans are posting (for simplicity’s sake) 10 times a day, totaling 100 posts. Bot is posting 100 a day. For a total of 200 human and bot posts; 50% of which are the bot.
In your (extended) example, at the end of a year: 10 humans are still posting 100 times a day. The 10 bots are posting a total of 1000 times a day. Bots are at 90%, humans 10%.
This statistic can lead you to think human participation in the Internet is difficult to find.
Returning to reality, consider how inhuman AI bots are, with each probably able to outpost humans by millions or billions of times under millions of aliases each. If you find search engines, articles, forums, reviews, and such are bonkers now, just wait a few years. Predicting general chaotic nonsense for the Internet is a rational conclusion, with very few islands of humanity. Unless bots are stopped.
Right now though, bots are increasing.
Exactly. A more accurate headline would be “Americans are Falling Behind on their Income.”
Yes, though in some locales there are “work crews” (slave labor) that clear brush, road litter, and such for businesses, organizations, the state, and individuals.
Some other folks just took the bus.
Back in 2000, there was something like that for the kernel with SELinux (Security-Enhanced Linux). Which continues to live in various distributions’ kernels. Not a full O/S though, and not generally regarded as a PoS.
There was an interesting post on Kagi a few days ago; with an alternative take on how it operates.
Yeah, there are two basic approaches to safety: evidence of harm and evidence of safety. Evidence of safety is the higher standard (e.g. broad long-term independent studies). Evidence of harm is a low standard (e.g. small studies, short-term studies). Guess which one is used for herbicides, pesticides, food, …
Yeah, that sounds reasonable in the long run (years), while the laptop plan is more immediately useful.
And what would be better recommendations for the poor individuals trapped by loans?
The reactions follow a KFF Health News article published by NPR outlining how licensed brokers’ easy access to policyholder information on HealthCare.gov has led unscrupulous agents to switch people’s policies without express permission. Those agents can then take the commission that comes with signing a new customer.
The original NPR and also the linked KFF articles are worth reading.
Ketosis (ketones in blood but not enough to turn acidic) and diabetic ketoacidosis (too much acid in the blood due to lack of insulin) are very different conditions. More. (Edit: clarity)
As to how rationales go, this is the clearest.
I hate it.
Net income: $5.79B for 1 year, 2022 (source: Wikipedia)
Net profits from 50 years of selling product: unknown
Fine payout: $0.88B per year (rough average for 13 years, ignoring inflation)
Medical and environment clean-up costs of the affected, their offspring, and environment for the last 50 years, and next 50 years: unknown
This settlement is just a cost of doing business.
While the article discusses antibiotic resistant gonorrhea in China, the US, and Canada, the problem is not about one country, or one country versus another; but rather…
… this is not just an alarming finding for China but also a “pressing public health concern” for the entire world.
And, as a quick aside, a side effect of the sweetener is to damage DNA.
deleted by creator
Here’s a non-recommended, non-standard, bad practice work-around:
This looks somewhat like a blank line in a browser, but who knows what’ll happen in other apps. (Click the “view source” icon for this example.)
Huh, that’s so, it was there last January. It used to follow this paragraph (still there today anyway), which contains a similar criticism with citation:
So if those are considered fact-based, there’s no need to delve further.