• 1 Post
  • 74 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2023

help-circle
  • There are a bunch of interacting factors, too. Something like 10% of the homeless are chronically homeless and don’t really have good prospects of being able to give themselves housing stability even if given money. This population in particular seems to be better served by the “Housing First” movement where they are given homes and supervised so that they can then get the treatment they need relating to substance abuse, mental health, etc., from a position of at least having a place to go home to. Here is a summary with citations to studies.

    But for the housing insecure people who are at risk of becoming part of the 80% of the homeless experiencing transient homelessness, or the already homeless in that category, dropping money in their lap might be an effective way to improve their lives permanently, putting them on a better trajectory. From what I’ve seen of the reporting of very recent studies, many of which were complicated by the fact that a pandemic happened right in the middle of the experiments, there is some evidence that giving money directly is helpful. But there’s open questions about whether it should be a lump sum, whether big numbers ($500+/month) result in something different from small numbers ($25/month), etc.

    So yeah, I think even if we start from the assumption that giving directly is more effective than in-kind support like free/subsidized food or healthcare or housing or childcare, or treatment for mental health or substance abuse, we have to figure out which populations are best served by which intervention, and whether temporary/time limited programs are as cost effective as long term commitments, etc.



  • Everything I know about dinosaur fur I learned from the Tim Meadows sketch on I Think You Should Leave:

    Fuck! I should’ve been Barney!

    How?

    Could’ve been like Barney’s hair. Hey look at me, I’m Barney. Like Barney’s hair.

    Barney doesn’t have hair.

    Will you shut the fuck up, he’s like a cloth! Cloth is hairs, just little tiny hairs. Even his mouth has little hairs. I mean it’s cloth, cloth is little hairs!





  • I get how it works with wifi connections, and Bluetooth scanning (since that’s a peer to peer protocol that needs to broadcast its availability), and obviously the OS-level location services, but I’m still not seeing how seeing wifi beacons would reveal anything. For one, pretty much every mobile device OS now uses MAC randomization so that your wifi activity on one network can’t be correlated with another. And for another, I think the BSSID scanning protocol is listen only for client devices.

    Happy to be proven wrong, and to learn more, but the article linked doesn’t seem to explain anything on this particular supposed threat.



  • booly@sh.itjust.workstoScience Memes@mander.xyzLinguistics
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s much harder for spoken language to be misunderstood among the population that a native grew up in,

    Well, there’s still register switching, which is an important part of the study of linguistics. A native English speaker might freely switch between the different ways to say the same meaning, depending on context and audience (“sorry” versus “my bad” versus “apologies,” or “you’re welcome” versus “don’t mention it” versus “my pleasure”).

    There are perceived formalities, common membership in different groups, unspoken social relationships and positions that are reflected in speech.

    These systems can be described with rules, and we can recognize that sometimes one register is inappropriate or poorly fit for a particular situation, and that some registers have different rules of grammar.



  • booly@sh.itjust.workstoScience Memes@mander.xyzLinguistics
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m a descriptivist but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t rules and that we can’t point out things still being wrong.

    Descriptivism still describes rules as they’re used in the real world. Breaking those rules still subjects the speaker/writer to the consequences: being misunderstood, having the spoken or written sentence to simply be rejected or disregarded, etc.

    “Colour” and “color” are both correct spellings of the word, because we are able to describe entire communities who spell things that way. “Culler” is not, because anyone who does spell it that way is immediately corrected, and their written spelling is rejected by the person who receives it. We can describe these rules of that interaction as descriptivists, and still conclude that something is wrong or incorrect.







  • We have tons of evidence that it happened but our models for explaining and predicting it are bad at consistently and reliably explaining everything we’ve already seen, and each new discovery seems to break those models even more.

    The theory is the model trying to explain how it works. The fact, though, is that we have evidence showing that it did happen, even if we don’t have a unified theory of how it happened.

    Imagine a car crash site, where the cars have definitely crashed, but everyone has different debates about what caused the crash. Imagine further that the specifics of any person’s explanation has a few inconsistencies with what we see. So we’d have the fact that a car crash happened, but lousy theories explaining how it happened.


  • booly@sh.itjust.workstoScience Memes@mander.xyz"Theory" of Evolution (SMBC)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    So anybody who says dark matter doesn’t exist is plain wrong, the discrepancies are there plain as day.

    There’s dark matter, the real thing that exists and we can “see”.

    No, we have observations that are consistent with the existence of matter that does interact gravitationally with regular matter, but does not appear to interact with light or electromagnetic forces. It’s not like any matter we know about, other than the fact that it seems to have gravity.

    General relativity works really well to explain matter in the solar system. Bigger than that, you have to use something else. The general consensus is that dark matter exists, but it’s not strictly proven, as there are alternative theories.

    Then, even bigger than that, dark matter alone isn’t enough, you need dark energy to explain some observations, if you assume that cosmological constants are constant. If it turns out that they’re not truly universally constant, we might need to modify some theories (including the proposed existence of dark matter and dark energy).


  • Then there’s the theory of gravity, this is our attempt to explain why gravity exists and why it does the things it does.

    Not just the why, but also the what. We didn’t observe gravitational waves until 2015. People have proposed the existence of dark matter and dark energy because observed gravity doesn’t behave as our models would predict at certain cosmological scales.