bramvandijk.bsky.social
Assistant professor at Utrecht University (Theoretical Biology). Simulating microbes, mobile elements, horizontal gene transfer, and whatever else happens on a grain of sand | 🏳️🌈 | he / they | thevirtuallaboratory.com
430 posts
1,545 followers
839 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
(for the 3 Cacatoo-connoisseurs on Bsky: fill="pride" now works for colouring grids and boids!)
comment in response to
post
Zou er al 1 stemmer het vertrouwen in deze prutser hebben verloren, of zou opnieuw stemmen nog meer gedonder geven? Als we peilingwijzer (afbeelding) moeten geloven is het iets minder hopeloos, maar nog steeds krankzinnig hoeveel mensen tegen hun eigen belang in blijven stemmen.
comment in response to
post
The link seems dead. What is the title? Maybe i can find it manually, it seems interesting.
comment in response to
post
Yes! The title makes it sound a lot less exciting than it seems upon deeper investigation. Cool work.
comment in response to
post
I’ve always done it, although honestly, I’ve got mixed feeling. You get a warmer, but also soggier, stroopwafel.
comment in response to
post
It makes sense, and it shouldn’t matter I suppose. I signed.
comment in response to
post
I’ll be honest I read that as more inclusive. Men also don’t need any protection from trans people either. The lunatics are trying to scare cis people in general, not just women. But you’re right, the more reasonable interpretation of that sentence would be cis women.
comment in response to
post
Reread the whole thing twice but I can’t see how it implies the authors are women. Yes, the “we” is clearly cis people, but where would you say it implies women?
comment in response to
post
I fully support the statements in the letter. Is it UK only? Does it help or hinder if people from other countries sign? Also, there appear to be only women on the current letter, is that by design or is that simply men being men?
comment in response to
post
Does it have to be a movie? No series?
comment in response to
post
I should add: many pieces of convergent evidence would constitute a theory, not just any 2 facts if course.
comment in response to
post
The actual word for convergent evidence is “theory” but I understand how that word is confusing given its daily usage as “hunch”.
comment in response to
post
Curious: why a picture rather than the row number?
comment in response to
post
A PhD defence on Sunday? 🥴
comment in response to
post
In this case for "cellulose" we were talking about cell walls. Not sure what kind of "concentration" that translates to.
comment in response to
post
Thanks for the ref! :)