Nah, it's just that I developed an aversion against any kind of clickbait. I do understand that "Dams shifted earth's rotation" doesn't sound nearly as engaging, though.

[–] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

sure, but this isn't a clickbait article. It's a substantial article with quotes, data, and context, which uses a clickbait headline to garner engagement because nobody clicks on boring headlines anymore. You could certainly distill the article down to "Manmade dams shifted the Earth's rotation", but that doesn't even get into the "how". Becky Ferreira gets into the "how" in the article. I understand that the internet has turned into a hellscape of ai-generated clickbait articles, but could we be more careful about throwing that accusation at real articles from real journalists?

[–] ranandtoldthat@beehaw.org 3 points 5 days ago

Completely agree. This is a great article from an established science journalist journalist writing for a publication that's quickly proven itself as as reliable, and anything but clickbait. People will call anything that doesn't squeeze the entire article into the headline clickbait. The accusation has lost all meaning.

[–] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 days ago

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

How did anyone think this wouldn't have impacts?

[–] Longpork3@lemmy.nz 2 points 5 days ago

"How could this project effect the earth's rotation?" Is probably not considered in any projects that don't directly interface with space.

[–] Mobiuthuselah@mander.xyz 1 points 6 days ago

About as much as beavers have guessed. Still, kinda interesting.