• 6 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle









  • kep@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlwelp.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s a grain of truth in here, but not quite. One in every four or so (not quite, but we can roll with it regardless) identified species of animal is a beetle. Not one in every four animals, by population nor overall species.

    The reasons for this is are many, but may include because beetles are big, easy to catch, agriculturally-significant, and are particularly easy to pin and study, dramatically boosting the count of beetle species we work with on an academic level (lending to higher identification rates). There are also just a shitload of beetle species, naturally.

    Scientists estimate something closer to ~10 million species of animals, which would still make beetles a huge percentage of the species, but a far cry from 25%. If you looked at the total number (estimated) of individual animals, beetles are pretty insignificant.

    Source: Studied entomology and love me some Coleoptera


  • I love how when new waves of people discover old technology, there are always these types of fundamental questions.

    Firefox has been here for a long time. Plenty of people use it. Casuals don’t care about what browser they have installed. That’s the entire conversation!

    The actual interesting part of these questions popping up is the staggering lack of awareness. We can click your profile, and, as I’ve linked above, see you try Firefox for the first time, ever. Then, you proceed to ask fundamental questions like the one in this thread without referencing that you’re brand new to the software, or that you haven’t bothered to look up previous discussions.

    As for being the “reasonable conservative” in the room, well, I’ll let that speak for itself.














  • I always find it so extraordinary when someone replies to one of my comments with some off-the-wall shit like this.

    You’re splitting hairs I already split. I specifically pointed out that their core products, you know, the things that actually matter, render the company among the most-reliable tech giants out there. I explicitly countered the notion that the fling-shit-and-see-what-sticks method is anything other than an elaborate R&D scheme.

    Yet, here you are, responding to me raging about Google’s failproducts as if I didn’t JUST get finished explaining what that’s all about and how it doesn’t detract from their ability to generate income. They’re not lunatics, you just don’t understand what’s happening. Which again, is wild, because you’re literally responding to a comment where I explained what’s happening.