• 2 Posts
  • 115 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle







  • This seems like… a bad idea? If I understand you correctly, each region maintains disaster relief infrastructure & staff with help from the central/national government? If so, does that translate to richer regions being less affected by calamities (since they can pour more money into said infrastructure than the bare minimum)?

    In most countries (with such plans in place) the national government maintains all disaster relief management to assist local governments, right?

    Sorry I’ve asked a lot of questions, but I’m genuinely interested to know!







  • Hoback argues

    In any case, says Hoback, the identity of the real Satoshi is a matter of public interest. “This person is potentially on track to become the wealthiest on Earth,” says Hoback. “If countries are considering adopting this in their treasuries or making it legal tender, the idea that there’s potentially this anonymous figure out there who controls one-twentieth of the total supply of digital gold is pretty important.”

    Currently bitcoin or any block chain based currency is more of a grift than financial freedom. However countries like El Salvador have taken it up as official currency, so real lives can be affected by whoever holds that bitcoin stockpile.






  • From the article:

    If the population is small to begin with, accidentally counting fewer animals has a more dramatic, negative effect on the population trend than accidentally counting more.

    This seems sloppy or intentionally misleading. Studies like these need to be extremely self critical. Plants, Animal, Insects, etc. are definitely dying due to human activity. Studies like these put an easy target on skeptics (ignorant or malicious) to dismiss the entire problem.

    And indeed the article mentions just this:

    Young also mentioned that the “extinction denier” community … feeds off examples, real or not, that show that wildlife is doing better than we thought. That makes it ever more important for measures of biodiversity loss to capture examples of successful conservation.

    Academia is broken, where citications are used as currency to further academic careers/funding. My question is how do we fight this? Are there real solutions to rigourous peer review (mostly) free from bias?