Now we have 40 million esoteric permutations of soyjaks, one for every occasion.
7666 (7666@comp.lain.la)'s status on Wednesday, 21-Aug-2024 10:37:22 JST
7666I frequently find myself overwhelmed by the machinations of technology, business, society, etc. I feel like it is impossible for me to understand it without me building it myself. I think of all the possibilities and things that have to get done around processes and systems and my brain goes "aight imma head out".
7666 (7666@comp.lain.la)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Aug-2024 09:20:04 JST
7666Today i fought with a CSS compiler to remove a simple toolbar from my infrablog that should have never been there in the first place from an upgrade to a newer version of Drupal (the toolbar was sourced from a theme which required an update alongside the core Drupal update)
The CSS I needed to remove was in six separate compiled files and three minified ones. Of course the software did not include the compiler. The six each had their own non-CSS file that was in a pseudo-CSS format. Rather than figure out this esoteric language and find a compiler to output exactly the same file plus my change spliced in, I opted to just hand edit all the compiled and minifed files.
No, I don't know why there were nine of these files. No, I didn't enjoy it. I wish web devs would just throw themselves into a river.
@flisk explicit? no, they did not explicitly make that claim. i'd even go as far as to grant that it's not the fault of the OP that the headline suggested streetlights were the sole cause of this phenomenon simply because the testing was limited to that source and the article latched onto it.
however, it's disingenuous to assume that doing something about streetlights was *not* the intent of the article itself via a preponderance of the evidence here, and I remain vindicated by the nuclear response of OP that their intent was likely also such. I think the research here is sound, if extremely preliminary, but the circus it has generated/will generate around it is certainly not
@flisk i didn't find them contemptible in my initial reply, all i said was "hey maybe those streetlights are still kinda useful despite the findings" and wam bam here we are
it is a bit silly and i hope he finds this entire chain and does a fediblock post about me so i can get some mileage out of this
@flisk "For both species of tree, higher levels of artificial light meant tougher leaves. The tougher the leaf, the less evidence of insect herbivory. The more intense the light, the more frequently scientists encountered leaves that showed no signs at all of herbivory."
underlying mechanism already existed and is not a mutation caused by humans, meaning it is reversible - how you reverse it is up to debate but "muh streetlights" ain't it
@flisk i will refrain from "missing the forest for the trees" puns but this diverse array of hashtags (a calling card for the quick to anger and slow to understand kind) and the fervor of OP strongly suggests the grand implication that no streetlights = problem solved
with the utilitarian value of streetlights ignored completely it sure does make a case for their removal, yet the article would suggest a much broader scope of general light pollution from urban areas which can be generated by anything - it's just that the eye grabbing headline says "streetlights" (since that's what they exclusively used for their testing) so that's what i focused on too in my defense of the humble streetlight
anyway his responses after the fact escalating streetlights into climate change led to exactly the expected response from a virtue signalling mastodon whore rather than any sort of discourse around ideas that allows bugs and streetlights to coexist which would be the most likely outcome of any research (e.g. replant the trees. or directional lighting. maybe the trees prefer different colors? idk. not my department - good for the next phase of research though!)
i'll leave you with '"Our study was conducted in only one city and involved just two tree species," cautioned Zhang."'