I have googled it and I just found this report here.

Signal is offering the most accessible e2ee messenger right now.

Doesn't matter. In the reach of EU, some law about Chat Control. If they make this into law, no provider within the EU will have a choice in this matter.

If you don't care for the guy, you will nearly certainly lose privat messaging in Europe. Maybe, it's even too late by now.

“Strong” Sapir-Whorf might be bullshit, but the weak version is worth checking.

Really persuasiv sounding. ;-)

My hypothesis is that the sort of people who’d engage on persuasive bullshit cares less about truth value of the statements, and that’s what giving them a hard time asserting the truth value of what others say.

Hontestly speaking. This viewpoint isn't completely false. In some contextes, other aspects are more important than just straight up true value. For instances, some people seems to be used to judge a view not on the merit of it's reasons, but because of the socially consequences which would arise if the view would hold by a lage mayority. Even if we agree that such points should be irrelevant for a rational discussion, we already know that not all discussions are rational.

I really hope this impressiv and "scientific sounding" headline is more than just another example of the named effect. ;-)

In a series of studies conducted with over 800 participants from the US and Canada, the researchers examined the relations between participants’ self-reported engagement in both types of BSing and their ratings of how profound, truthful, or accurate they found pseudo-profound and pseudo-scientific statements and fake news headlines.

Selfreporting. And this 800 participants, where are they from? Students?

I remember, there are a lot of studies about the (supposed) psychological traits of persons who believe in "conspiricy theories". Getting to the big parts, I still have some criticism of the study

1. You use a sample of students. No matter how lage the number are, do you really believe students are representative of the entire population of "conspiricy believers"?
2. How could you messure intellectuall humility?
3. The correlation between agreeableness and belief in conspiracy theories is easily explained by the fact that you will most likely get a lot of strange looks if you confess your conspiratorial beliefs in an academic environment. I doubt that this result would be transferable to other environments such as "normal" workspaces, nights out in pubs, and the like.

Interesting.

Google "Deep Bach".

Does this mean that writing by hand is an important mental exercise?

Ask a AI

It remembered me these study about NDE I heared from.

I don't have much trust in studies like this at all.

I remember read studies which shows opposed conclusions.

I don't think so.

The postings of a specific individual are not important for great companies. Its the mass. They search for patterns and want to use this patterns for advertisment or to lead your use of the internet. The postings or information of one single individuum may be not even necessary after the analyis. And even if they could use them for some purpose, after 5 years or so, they arn't current anymore. In this time, there will be 1000s of users who spend their data.

Companies exist to make money.

Therfor, it isn't a great problem, tbh.

The gouverment my spyy on us just to have as much information as possible to get profiles but companies need you as possible customer. If you never use the side againt, they would not find any use of the data and to store it makes costs. So, they probable delete them after a certain time.