Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but zero-mistake seems harsh. I would say that AI references are a sign of something that is not simply a mistake.
However, we can have zero tolerance for certain techniques for "writing" a paper. Plagiarism and inventing data are already examples of this, if there is evidence for these techniques being used there is no excuse. We could say the same for AI references - any writing process that could produce these is by definition not a technique we want.
So the mistake isn't not checking a reference the AI gave. The mistake is letting the AI make references for you.
If we agree that academic research is important then I think we can impose certain standards on how you do it. We can dissalow certain tools if that means we can't trust the output. Just like an electrician can't use certain techniques, even if they're easy, because we don't trust the final result.
dns_snek never said any specific person as a mindless consumer. They argued that if you see nothing but drama then that implies you are a mindless consumer.
The argument is that a mindful consumer would see that Louis Rossman is, in his way, arguing for consumer rights.
To be technically correct: if even a single non-premium member can, for some reason, see who viewed their profile, then the statement "only Premium members can see who has viewed their profile" is false.
So technically, you can't say that the first part of the statement is false from the screenshot.
Maybe I'm lucky in the instance I chose or the content I like being uncontroversial, but this isn't my experience at all.
I've heard of instances carrying a lot of Nazi content being banned, and of instances choosing not to re-host adult media (which makes the interface a bit worse, but doesn't actually block you from getting that). But most admins from what I've seen are pretty clear on this in the about page of the instance.
70% seems like a wild claim.
I have had content I like being removed from major social media platforms, like reddit and tumblr.
Also, if you choose an instance and it gets shut down, you just start another account. This isn't serious business, it's social media. To me, complaining about having to choose an instance to start is like complaining about having to choose a class at the start of an RPG.
Personally, I really love mastodon as a platform and I don't understand all the hate it gets here.
There are four open source period tracking apps on F-droid. I didn't do a full investigation of the source code, but unless your data is being uploaded outside the app (e.g. for backups), I feel safe assuming it will stay local only.
> Most societal problems – education, healthcare, climate – have a technological solution.
This is a tricky question. I don't think most societal problems have a technological solution, but those are all examples of societal problems where technology could play a big part in the solution. If technology plays a big part of a solution, is it a technological solution?
I'm not experienced with other CAD programs, but I think scaling stuff works fine.
If you want to scale your entire object, there's a scale part operation in the part toolbench.
But in general you wouldn't want to do this. For most real world part, the dimensions you set are based on real world requirements. E.g. These holes need to be M3 and spaced 30mm apart because that's what the part we are connecting to has, but the space to the next set of holes should scale linearly with the length growing, etc.
If you have requirements like that, you should build them into your constraints. If you do this from the start, it's usually pretty easy to make size adjustments to your model.
You can use an old version of Gnome and accept older software, or you can organize some fellow GNOME enthusiasts to maintain it, possibly with paid developers.
You can't legally get old versions of Windows or Photoshop, and you can't legally fix them if you find problems. GNOME gives you that freedom.
This isn't just a theoretical possibility: both MATE and Cinnamon are GNOME forks.
You can argue that maintaining and developing a desktop environment is an huge project and you can't expect someone to take that on - I completely agree, which is why I think we should be thankful of the developers instead of complaining about being "forced" to use new versions of their software.
Having technical discussions about the merits is fine, but in the end in the free/open source software model the people that make the technical decisions are the ones that make the technology possible. And if so many of those people are moving to Wayland, maybe there is a reason for that.
Technically you can get second-hand keys, but good luck verifying that it's actually a legal resale. Also good luck getting the latest, most up to date version of Vista.
You still aren't allowed to start a group to collectively patch bugs in the old version.
However, we can have zero tolerance for certain techniques for "writing" a paper. Plagiarism and inventing data are already examples of this, if there is evidence for these techniques being used there is no excuse. We could say the same for AI references - any writing process that could produce these is by definition not a technique we want.
So the mistake isn't not checking a reference the AI gave. The mistake is letting the AI make references for you.
If we agree that academic research is important then I think we can impose certain standards on how you do it. We can dissalow certain tools if that means we can't trust the output. Just like an electrician can't use certain techniques, even if they're easy, because we don't trust the final result.