Skip Navigation

Posts
14
Comments
609
Joined
6 mo. ago

  • Thank you!

  • Alternate title: "Inland lake filling to levels not seen in 160 years":

    For the second year in a row, an inland sea is making its slow journey through some of Australia's driest country to its home in the heart of South Australia.

    Not only is every major catchment that drains into Kati Thanda-Lake Eyre already wet, more rain is forecast and there is plenty of water yet to arrive from upstream.

    If this water fills Australia's largest inland lake — after getting tantalisingly close last year — it could be just the fourth time that has happened in 160 years.

    Where is the water coming from?

    The Kati Thanda-Lake Eyre Basin is fed by a network of inland creeks and river systems across 1.2 million square kilometres, more than five times the size of Victoria.

    It's the fourth-largest catchment in the world that does not drain into the ocean.

  • The same argument holds up to any government doesn't it? Why have a government that can enforce legislation since it could one day be infiltrated by actors I don't like? Isn't the point of most democratic governments that they handle local issues at one level of government, national issues at another but at all layers have some method of enforcement and including the voices / will of the voters? I'm not saying they're perfect, just that your argument against a UN with more teeth seems to apply to all governments

  • I'd argue these quotes are on topic but don't come close to addressing the logical inconsistencies.

    OpenAI said it had found a way to put safeguards into its technologies that would somehow prevent the systems from being used in ways that it does not want them to be.

    That could depend on your take of this statement. I personally don't understand how this could be done with high certainty and most AI researchers I respect seem to have a similar analysis

  • I think you're probably using the word "page" in a way many people don't, or just lacking context for what system that page is a part of. What do you mean when you say "page"?

  • "The end of language as we know it"? That's a lot too dramatic for me given the content but then I'm not hugely fond of wordplay

  • I probably didn't deserve that reply but thanks.

    For what it's worth, I'm with you that the tools have a button doing this so using a comment isn't ideal for the person that made it and affects everyone else. So I do see that action as a bit unreasonable. I just saw the push against it as more unreasonable, honestly less the fact you made the comments and more that they seemed reasonably upvoted

  • So anyone that says something others don't like shouldn't speak?

    The whole platform is based around upvotes and downvotes as a signal to highlight/filter (via sorting) posts and comments that, based on the viewing algorithm chosen, are more/less useful to an averaged user.

    I get the litter analogy, that was blindingly obvious from the first comment. I just don't think it carries well for a platform like this, or quickly expands to "I don't personally like your comments and the way you use this platform so stop". I appreciate sometimes that's needed, but this seems pretty far from those situations. Plus the post seemed presumptuous and insulting because... someone used a tool slightly differently than them and had the audacity to reply?

  • How are the dead in the water in this context?

  • I went to upvote for the link but I'm pretty luke warm on the rest of the comment so didn't.

  • I can appreciate you don't like this, but much like someone thats warlike about mistaken grammar, I'm a bit at a loss for how the original action is that problematic compared to the intolerant response. Its minor spam that gets downranked my most options for reading, presuming you're not desperate on reading every single comment but that's a bit inconsistent with the "taking away my time" slight you appear to be offended by

  • And social media is arguably the main thing. The network effects make it sticky but the US has been amazing at exporting it's culture, social media amplifies that, and right now that culture is a bit fascisty with a hint of freedom stopping regulation of the rich and misleading. That said, but that lens, I'm not really sure Lemmy is a great alternative since it has a lot of people from the US already and I think it wouldn't scale well (either because of lack of instances, burn out from moderators, or the problems migrating here)

  • Ironically I went searching for if that was true and ended up at this same article:

    History was unmade last year, as engineers began the massive project of ripping the first-ever transoceanic fiber-optic cable from the ocean floor. Just don’t mention sharks.

    SHARKS ARE INNOCENT. Or at least they’re not eating the internet. As a family of cartilaginous fish, sharks are collectively not guilty of most, if not all, charges of biting, chomping, chewing, or otherwise attacking the underwater network of fiber-optic cables. The people who build and maintain the nearly 600 subsea cables that carry almost all of our intercontinental traffic—supporting just about every swipe, tap, Zoom, and doomscroll anywhere on the planet—have a love-hate relationship with this myth, which has persisted for decades. They might even hate that I’m starting this piece with it.

    It's a terrible way to open an article: here's some irrelevant bullshit that hides what will actually be in the article until after you pay us.

  • I think that's adjectives not verbs but then the language in my post may have only been nouns

  • Ah, I see.

    I'd argue we all believe in a thing or two that we don't have great evidence for when confronted. And I'd argue the size of the collection of things we could believe is mind bogglingly large. So then you end up with combinations like this.

    But yeah, agreed from the framing in your comment that believing both is pretty logically inconsistent.

    Thinking through this idea a bit more, I think there are a lot of people that would describe themselves as atheists that believe that certain things will improve their health in a way that others would describe as lacking evidence and should be included on that list. If you push on that idea then I think you'd start getting tension and pushback from a lot of atheists. I'm sure there are other categories you could do this with but I'm not thinking of others quickly now.

  • And what's with the (presumably genAI) image of a shark tearing the cable? Is a shark associated with something I'm not aware of like a company or something?

  • News @lemmy.world

    Read Bondi's Letter to Minnesota's Governor

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    What are some alternatives to US bonds, stocks and ETFs?

  • World News @lemmy.world

    Mark Carney's full speech on middle powers navigating a rapidly changing world

  • Political Discussion and Commentary @lemmy.world

    What are some examples of world leaders claiming to be heads of other countries?

  • Astronomy @mander.xyz

    Why doesn't Argentina have more telescopes?

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    What events are you looking forward to in 2026?

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    What's an unpopular UI opinion you have?

  • techsupport @lemmy.world

    Disabling iPhone offloading to free up storage space

  • Dungeon Crawler Carl! @lemmy.ca

    Changes in Fandom wiki's pictures

  • News @lemmy.world

    USDA says it can’t use contingency fund for food stamps: Department memo appears to contradict shutdown plan released last month for SNAP

    rollcall.com /2025/10/24/usda-says-it-cant-use-contingency-fund-for-food-stamps/
  • Lemmy Apps @lemmy.world

    Why do so many lemmy clients drop information about other servers?

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    Why are so many lemmy clients channel focused?

  • News @lemmy.world

    The White House - Presidential Action - Columbus Day, 2025

  • Selfhosted @lemmy.world

    Looking for a good ebook library alternative