Welcome to Katz Motel
@techncats.bsky.social
Call me Katz.
Instead of cooking grannie stew, I cook up posts on hacking and our broken systems– both in tech and society.
Let's figure out how to fix them, starting with the fascists in seats of power.
💻👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾💻
Instead of cooking grannie stew, I cook up posts on hacking and our broken systems– both in tech and society.
Let's figure out how to fix them, starting with the fascists in seats of power.
💻👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾👾💻
Reposted by Welcome to Katz Motel
CLARIFICATION :
The Trevor Project's hotline will still be live. But basically this means LGBTQ people can no longer be connected to it through the US national 988 suicide prevention hotline.
They will need to be contacted DIRECTLY
So spread this around
They can be texted. They can be called.
The Trevor Project's hotline will still be live. But basically this means LGBTQ people can no longer be connected to it through the US national 988 suicide prevention hotline.
They will need to be contacted DIRECTLY
So spread this around
They can be texted. They can be called.
June 18, 2025 at 10:21 PM
Reposted by Welcome to Katz Motel
Reposted by Welcome to Katz Motel
To be fair, many sci-fi and fantasy creatures take heavy inspiration from weird creatures we have here at home.
The inner mouth of the xenomorph from "Alien" is likely inspired by pharyngeal jaws that Moray Eels and some other fish have, as an example
The inner mouth of the xenomorph from "Alien" is likely inspired by pharyngeal jaws that Moray Eels and some other fish have, as an example
May 23, 2025 at 3:15 PM
To be fair, many sci-fi and fantasy creatures take heavy inspiration from weird creatures we have here at home.
The inner mouth of the xenomorph from "Alien" is likely inspired by pharyngeal jaws that Moray Eels and some other fish have, as an example
The inner mouth of the xenomorph from "Alien" is likely inspired by pharyngeal jaws that Moray Eels and some other fish have, as an example
So far I've only been accused of being a bot, accused of being intellectually dishonest (without further examples than one), accused of being too weak willed for online discussion, told my points are invalid without basis or reasoning, and gained nothing to show for it intellectually :/
March 23, 2025 at 12:52 AM
So far I've only been accused of being a bot, accused of being intellectually dishonest (without further examples than one), accused of being too weak willed for online discussion, told my points are invalid without basis or reasoning, and gained nothing to show for it intellectually :/
...when I tried to engage with you on a point you made by requesting sources on that point it amounted to "trust me bro" :/
March 23, 2025 at 12:49 AM
...when I tried to engage with you on a point you made by requesting sources on that point it amounted to "trust me bro" :/
Well this is disappointing. You're right: this provided nothing to either party and not for lack of trying
Your entire side of the argument essentially amounted to denying any points I provided without justification other than simply saying that it was irrelevant and not explaining why and then
Your entire side of the argument essentially amounted to denying any points I provided without justification other than simply saying that it was irrelevant and not explaining why and then
March 23, 2025 at 12:48 AM
Well this is disappointing. You're right: this provided nothing to either party and not for lack of trying
Your entire side of the argument essentially amounted to denying any points I provided without justification other than simply saying that it was irrelevant and not explaining why and then
Your entire side of the argument essentially amounted to denying any points I provided without justification other than simply saying that it was irrelevant and not explaining why and then
We've agreed to close the matter, I know, but would you happen to have those interviews? I'm interested to learn more, since I'm getting more into astronomy generally
March 22, 2025 at 11:11 PM
We've agreed to close the matter, I know, but would you happen to have those interviews? I'm interested to learn more, since I'm getting more into astronomy generally
I'm sorry you feel this way, I'm genuinely not trying to troll or anything. I'm being intellectually honest in that I promise I'm legitimately arguing with the aim of trading perspectives and learning more about the counterargument, and I truthfully couldn't care less about "winning"
March 22, 2025 at 11:06 PM
I'm sorry you feel this way, I'm genuinely not trying to troll or anything. I'm being intellectually honest in that I promise I'm legitimately arguing with the aim of trading perspectives and learning more about the counterargument, and I truthfully couldn't care less about "winning"
Given that they use the terms in the IAU it seems possible, even probable, that at least some exogeologists were there to decide
March 22, 2025 at 11:00 PM
Given that they use the terms in the IAU it seems possible, even probable, that at least some exogeologists were there to decide
less so on solar system body classification, but I could definitely see your point that they'd have a great argument about that classification.
Even still, I believe the crux of your point here is that they had no, or at least little, say in whether Pluto is a planet but
Even still, I believe the crux of your point here is that they had no, or at least little, say in whether Pluto is a planet but
March 22, 2025 at 10:58 PM
less so on solar system body classification, but I could definitely see your point that they'd have a great argument about that classification.
Even still, I believe the crux of your point here is that they had no, or at least little, say in whether Pluto is a planet but
Even still, I believe the crux of your point here is that they had no, or at least little, say in whether Pluto is a planet but
Ah interesting! Thanks for sharing, this article states that planetary geologists (I like exogeologists personally) tend to use terms determined by the IAU. Moreover I could argue that exogeologists are more interested in planetary composition and dynamics and
March 22, 2025 at 10:56 PM
Ah interesting! Thanks for sharing, this article states that planetary geologists (I like exogeologists personally) tend to use terms determined by the IAU. Moreover I could argue that exogeologists are more interested in planetary composition and dynamics and
So are you now arguing that scientists ought to base their definitions on what the general usage is?
If so that is a completely different discussion than I thought. This entire time I thought we were arguing about what the scientific classification should be
If so that is a completely different discussion than I thought. This entire time I thought we were arguing about what the scientific classification should be
March 22, 2025 at 10:52 PM
So are you now arguing that scientists ought to base their definitions on what the general usage is?
If so that is a completely different discussion than I thought. This entire time I thought we were arguing about what the scientific classification should be
If so that is a completely different discussion than I thought. This entire time I thought we were arguing about what the scientific classification should be
Why can't we though? Why do you disagree? What's wrong with my arguments so far?
March 22, 2025 at 10:50 PM
Why can't we though? Why do you disagree? What's wrong with my arguments so far?
Planetary scientists aren't really a thing, and geologists typically specialize in Earth geology. I believe you'd be wanting to speak to a xenogeologist, but generally I believe astronomers handle this, not geologists
March 22, 2025 at 9:42 PM
Planetary scientists aren't really a thing, and geologists typically specialize in Earth geology. I believe you'd be wanting to speak to a xenogeologist, but generally I believe astronomers handle this, not geologists
The point was that there are areas of science in which we must classify objects relative to other objects, or their environment.
I therefore ask: why can we not classify based on environment for planets?
I therefore ask: why can we not classify based on environment for planets?
March 22, 2025 at 9:41 PM
The point was that there are areas of science in which we must classify objects relative to other objects, or their environment.
I therefore ask: why can we not classify based on environment for planets?
I therefore ask: why can we not classify based on environment for planets?
Per this article from ncbi Escherichia coli (E. Coli) is one of many bacterial species that can cause pink eye:
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
From Wikipedia we can see that e. Coli is 100% incident in gut microflora, the source they cited is a textbook:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_mic...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
From Wikipedia we can see that e. Coli is 100% incident in gut microflora, the source they cited is a textbook:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_mic...
Bacterial profile of ocular infections: a systematic review
Bacteria are the major contributor of ocular infections worldwide. Ocular infections, if left untreated, can damage the structures of the eye with possible blindness and visual impairments. This work ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
March 22, 2025 at 9:39 PM
Per this article from ncbi Escherichia coli (E. Coli) is one of many bacterial species that can cause pink eye:
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
From Wikipedia we can see that e. Coli is 100% incident in gut microflora, the source they cited is a textbook:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_mic...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
From Wikipedia we can see that e. Coli is 100% incident in gut microflora, the source they cited is a textbook:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_mic...
I will concede that the circumstances upon which this was decided are suspect. However I still find the definitions they propose to be reasonable, so I'm interested to hear: what other criteria should we use so as to include Pluto but exclude others, and what would our new solar system count be?
March 22, 2025 at 9:28 PM
I will concede that the circumstances upon which this was decided are suspect. However I still find the definitions they propose to be reasonable, so I'm interested to hear: what other criteria should we use so as to include Pluto but exclude others, and what would our new solar system count be?
Who are these planetary scientists other than astronomers that should make such definitions? And what definitions do you think they should use?
March 22, 2025 at 9:26 PM
Who are these planetary scientists other than astronomers that should make such definitions? And what definitions do you think they should use?
I already apologized for missing your question. May we please move on? In what other way have I moved the goal posts since then?
March 22, 2025 at 9:25 PM
I already apologized for missing your question. May we please move on? In what other way have I moved the goal posts since then?
The dictionary definition fails here
A bacterium specifically can be commensal when it is in a location it's supposed to be, like one's colon, but if it ends up in the wrong place (like their eye) it could then be considered pathogenic (causing pink eye)
A bacterium specifically can be commensal when it is in a location it's supposed to be, like one's colon, but if it ends up in the wrong place (like their eye) it could then be considered pathogenic (causing pink eye)
March 22, 2025 at 9:24 PM
The dictionary definition fails here
A bacterium specifically can be commensal when it is in a location it's supposed to be, like one's colon, but if it ends up in the wrong place (like their eye) it could then be considered pathogenic (causing pink eye)
A bacterium specifically can be commensal when it is in a location it's supposed to be, like one's colon, but if it ends up in the wrong place (like their eye) it could then be considered pathogenic (causing pink eye)
Yeah absolutely fair and I see why
March 22, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Yeah absolutely fair and I see why