LovableSidekick

More like Wildly Enthusiastic

Typical pattern: "Scientists find something strange when they look at a common whatever - and it's not good!"

This kind of crap used to be the style of little blurbs at the side or the bottom of an article, but it's in the headlines now. Until you click the headline you don't even really know what the article is about anymore - just the general topic area, with maybe a fear trigger.

Clicking on the headline is going to display ads, but at that point the goal isn't to get you to buy anything yet, it's just to generate ad impressions, which the content provider gets paid for regardless of whether you even see the ads. It's a weird meta-revenue created by the delivery mechanism, and it has altered the substance of headlines, and our expectations of what "headline" even means.

Dunno what made me think of this just now. When I worked for IT in a school district way back in the 90s, a librarian told me she kept a supply of mouse balls in her desk because kids would steal them out of the school computers. What I remember about those balls was they picked up dust and crud off surfaces. Pretty soon optical mice came along and they were history.

No idea how I got there but somehow I saw this post somehow on sh.itjust.works, about a prefab house that was found floating in the Pacific. I wanted to comment but the only login I have is on lemmy.world. Notice the post is from The Picard Maneuver, whose posts I've seen many times, and it says lemmy.world above their name.

Lemmy.world has a whitepeopletwitter community but the newest post is 2 months old. This one is from 10 hours ago. Search on the lemmy.world main page for "Minding" turns up a bunch of posts going back months, but this one isn't there.

I thought I understood how federation works but I'm stumped. Is this really a lemmy.world post? If not, what does the presence of "lemmy.world" on it indicate?

Ever since I first heard about the Big Bang as a kid, I've never really bought it. The concept of the entire universe being literally a dimensionless point - I just don't think so. If that's what the math leads to, doubt the math or the observations the math is based on. Same with dark matter and dark energy - I mean come on, if a theoretical model of the universe says it has to be 20x more dense than we can measure, you rethink the model - don't decide 95% of everything must be "dark". Dark is for the 3rd movie in a superhero franchise when the 2nd one doesn't make enough money, it's not a way to define the universe.

/end rant