Immediately afterwards? I’ve been told to wait at least half an hour after eating, or else brushing will have a negative effect on your teeth.

Still, some are closer to the source of these ideas than others, think about awards attributed to individuals for example.

This is where the researchers would disagree with you. I don’t know if you’ve ever been involved in research (or startups). There’s a common saying that ideas are a dime a dozen. It’s much more so the work you do that’s important, not the idea itself.

singers, actors, politicians, or youtubers

Notice how being in the spotlight is an important aspect of all the professions you’ve listed. That naturally selects for people who are comfortable with or enjoy being on camera and are good at that kind of live performance. Similarly, science selects for people who are good at doing science. Sometimes, there’s an overlap, but it’s not that common.

If you’re interested in interviews with prominent scientists, Lex Fridman does quite a few of those. But if you want more people to do this, you’ll have to contend with the fact that most scientists simply have no interest in being on camera and probably never developed the skills needed for it.

We likely don’t know much about the researchers of modern technology because they’re often created by a huge team of hundreds of people. There’s no single person responsible for the bulk of the work. In the case of ChatGPT and the line of work leading up to it, it was very much also the researchers’ choice as well to not name a specific person as being the main contributor. For example, the transformer paper had all the author names shuffled so the credit doesn’t all end up with one person.

The numbers you want to look at are PDCASS and/or DIAAS scores of each protein source.

I think the part that stinks is all the dead skin sticking to the hair and all the skin oils and bacteria accumulating on that mass.

You can do the protein powder first. Just make sure that when you pour in the water, it stays on top of the protein and doesn’t seep through to the bottom. Then flip the bottle over, shake it (without flipping) until all the powder unsticks from the bottom, then proceed to shake normally.

Alternatively, fill the bottle with about an inch of water, add the powder, then fill the rest of the way with water and shake normally.

The problem with water first is that you can’t stick the scoop into the bottle and protein powder flies off everywhere.

Much faster to skim the contents of an article than a video.

Your comment is a great example of the kind of biases I’m telling everyone to avoid. You misunderstood my initial message, then decided to cling on to that interpretation despite clarifications.

In any case, if you have feedback (e.g. what made the comment unclear, or how you interpreted it), I’d appreciate hearing about it so I can improve my writing. I’m not always aware of the hidden meanings non-autistic people pull out of words that weren’t intended to have any.

https://lemmy.ca/post/28915538/11651615

I’ve rephrased this comment more explicitly and concretely here. Feel free to read through the rest of that thread. I’d rather not repeat myself unless you have something new to add.

I’m here with a toddler who just learned to walk and wants to hold my hand and do laps up and down the hallway for hours at a time. Cute af, but also mind numbingly boring.

You’re stuck on the toilet I presume? Doesn’t sound pleasant. Hope that gets better for you soon.

I wasn’t referring to any of that. I was referring to you jumping on an entirely third party, Samvega, and attacking them of baseless accusations. Which is where I joined the conversation. So that might tell you where I came from, since you’re so interested in context.

I thought Samvega disagreed with me when I said baseless accusations are bad, but they denied it and refused to elaborate, so I have no idea what that’s all about. They have not made any themselves and I never accused them of such.

Your only defense for all of this is, “I just don’t want people to accuse random people of being racist.”

I don’t know what you mean by “defense”. I’m restating my main point.

But you also recognize that hasn’t happened here. So why are you arguing with me?

Yes. It’s often better to prevent a Bad Thing than to fix the consequences after Bad Thing has happened. I don’t understand what you’re disagreeing with.

No. I don’t expect people to reveal everything they hold in their head that could be relevant to the discussion. That would be ridiculous. I do expect people to be wary of their biases and not make assumptions without adequate evidence.

Protist made a very reasonable response to the article given what they knew, and was clear that they didn’t have enough information to make further judgement.

treadful’s response was saying there also isn’t enough evidence to conclude that she isn’t racist. Many would read that as saying she’s probably racist, so my response is intended to curb that bias.

I’m not accusing anyone of making baseless accusations. I am preemptively drawing attention to a common bias and asking people be aware of it and to avoid it.

You understand that not everyone has the same context as you, right? It’s fine to say “[she] made an extremely racist post online” if either

a) you’ve read the post and recognize that it is racist, or

b) someone else who has read the post has informed you that it is racist

It is not okay to make that claim if neither of the above hold. I’m assuming you’ve read it, so if you said she made a racist post, then that’s acceptable. I’ve read it too at this point, so I can say the same. I do not want someone who knows nothing about the situation telling me that she made a racist post.

Well, I’m utterly confused by what you’ve been trying to say, so a clarification would be nice. But I understand if you don’t want to continue the conversation.

the lady who made an extremely racist post online might be racist

Bolded the baseless accusations. In the context of my initial comment in this thread, we didn’t have access to this post, so no one actually knew if it was actually racist.

Evidence which wasn’t available to the participants of the conversation at the time. With only what we see in the article, there’s no reason to believe that this post she made was racist.

https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/10659257

Is this not written in support of treadful’s comment and in disagreement to my response? If not, then I have no idea what you were getting at.

And so you’ll improve it by throwing around random accusations?

You can believe what you want about human nature, but consider how well society would function if it was acceptable to make baseless accusations and act on them as if they were facts.

Alright, I found a screenshot of it posted on twitter. Can confirm that this is racist.