They build this picture from many other sources besides ad clicks, so the point is to obscure that. Problem is, if you’re only obscuring your ad click behavior, it should be relatively easy to filter out of the model.

Don’t forget Swiss Army Man!

I hadn’t clicked the link yet, but Concrete Donkey told me what it was immediately

Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified among adults and minors, 1591 of 2664 (59.7%) and 82 of 85 (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively.

This first part parses to me as “Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified, 1591 of 2664 adult surgeries (59.7%) and 82 of 85 minor child surgeries (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively.” However, the next sentence doesn’t seem to line up with that notion…

Of the 636 breast reductions among men, 507 (80%) were performed on cisgender men. Of the 151 breast reductions among boys, 146 (97%) were performed on cisgender boys (Figure 2).

To make this section easier to read, I replaced some words and phrases while hopefully keeping the meaning intact.

I kind of feel like this quote is referencing two different data sets, and is missing a segue. The numbers don’t seem to line up with each other any way I poke at them.

15 square meters isn’t the same as 15m×15m, it’d be a little smaller than 4m×4m. Still a big hole.

I was under the impression that the chemicals involved in recycling paper products, combined with the fact that virgin paper is almost entirely sourced from managed, quick-growing tree farms, make paper recycling also undesirable?