• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle
  • There seems to be a bit of a difference, even though both involve asking questions. To quote wiktionary:

    sealioning (uncountable)
    A type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity (“I’m just trying to have a debate”), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter, in order to wear down an opponent and incite angry responses that will discredit them.

    Apparently coined by this webcomic:

    https://wondermark.com/c/1k62/

    JAQ off (third-person singular simple present JAQs off, present participle JAQing off, simple past and past participle JAQed off) (slang, derogatory) To ask loaded questions inviting someone to justify their views or behaviours, in an attempt to make tangential claims of little verisimilitude appear acceptable.

    So the way I understand it, “JAQing off” is when you’re trying to guide your audience towards a certain conclusion without stating it outright (e.g. “Are the official numbers of holocaust victims really as solid as people claim? Are there alternative historical interpretations? I’m just asking questions here, not implying anything folks.” when you think just saying “The holocaust didn’t happen!” might make it too obvious you’re a Nazi), while sealioning is more about annoying the other party and trying to make them look bad/unreasonable and yourself polite and reasonable in comparison (e.g. “I’m just curious, is there any actual evidence that fascists are inherently bad people, as you claim? As a person with no opinion on the matter, I would just like to have an honest and open debate on this subject.” so when people reply with something like “Fuck off, fascist!” you can say “Wow, so much for the tolerant left.”). Both tactics are frequently applied by online trolls, especially of the far right, but they have somewhat different goals.



  • 4ce@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mljackpot
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    That takes something from being completely unreasonable to be understandable.

    Why would taxing a gross income of above a billion US$ by ~66% be “completely unreasonable”? Imo taxes for such incomes should generally be higher if anything.





  • Yeah that’s what woke is. It’s believing what Americans have always said about our country and demanding it do that.

    I’m afraid that the word has long since transcended the borders of your country. In fact it has even transcended the English language and found its way into the language of right-wing culture warriors all over the world.

    Also, while I think I know what you’re trying to say, “traditional American values like the idea that all people are created equal” sounds a bit funny considering that your country expressly allowed slavery upon its foundation.



  • 4ce@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mlThe only political map I need
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As a non colorblind person, I would like to understand how this image could have been modified to include our colorblind brethren.

    In general it is a good idea to use colour gradients that monotonically increase (or decrease) in brightness in addition to (or instead of) hue (see here for an in-depth comparison of different colour maps. It’s from a Python package, but it shows some interesting plots comparing different colour maps when it comes to brightness vs. hue). This isn’t just useful for colour blind people, but also helpful when printing in black-and-white.

    If you absolutely have to use a diverging colour map, you might reach most people by using blue as a major component of one, but only one of the two branches (the map in the OP uses blue as a major component of both branches, which is why red/green colour blind people can have a problem with it). That way most colour blind people should be able to distinguish the branches, since blue colour blindness (Tritanopia/Tritanomaly) is much rarer than red (Protanopia/Protanomaly) or green (Deuteranopia/Deuteranomaly) colour blindness.

    Apart from that it is also possible to mark information visually in other ways than by colour, e.g. by shapes and patterns, like dotted or dashed lines for line graphs, shaded or dotted areas for bar and area graphs, or different geometric shapes like crosses, diamonds, and circles when plotting individual data points, but that is probably more useful when different sets of data are plotted in the same graph.



  • 4ce@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mlI'm tired of the inequality
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    i read that something like 1/3 of all human caused extinctions are because we keep bringing cats with us

    Do you have a source for that? Intuitively 1/3 of all species extinctions (keep in mind this in general includes plants and other kingdoms of life, not just animals) sounds far too high imo. Maybe you have read that number in a slightly different context, like bird deaths in urban areas, or perhaps in a more specific context similar to the one in your link? Don’t get me wrong, like your link shows, (house) cats can easily have a devastating effect on the local wildlife, in particular birds and small mammals or reptiles (wikipedia has an article on the topic, although I didn’t find anything like your numbers in it). But as far as I know the major ways in which humans have caused extinctions are historically overhunting (mostly affecting large birds and mammals), habitat loss in particular since the advent of agriculture, and more recently of course the effects of the climate crisis since the industrial revolution.