I have to say this I don’t buy this constant nuclear threat. Iran supposedly started their nuclear program 30 years ago. Either they have a bomb or they will never get it. It doesn’t take that long to replicate what other countries did in a few years.
You misunderstand. I do not take issue with anything that’s written in the scientific paper. What I take issue with is how the paper is marketed to the general public. When you read the article you will see that it does not claim to “proof” that these models cannot reason. It merely points out some strengths and weaknesses of the models.
I mean… “proving” is also just marketing speak. There is no clear definition of reasoning, so there’s also no way to prove or disprove that something/someone reasons.
Again, mtf or any transgender issue can be solved with birth certificates. It doesn’t require genetic testing. Genetic testing is targeted at humans that according to all our traditional laws and practices are treated as female, yet may potentially be banned from female sports.
What are you talking about? This is not about transgender at all. For those you could require a birth certificate. This is targeting women that are born as girls but, due to genetic anomalies, do not appear as such on genetic tests. Many (most?) would never discover the genetic anomaly during their lifetime.
This. I mean the primary responsibility of schools is to teach and certify academic achievement. They should never withhold certification on non-academic grounds.
Isn’t there a warrant for their arrest in Florida? I believe they were there for two nights and on one of these nights he raped someone. I think he went back to Romania to escape US jail.
Yes indeed. You should ask your parents about the aunts and uncles you would have had if only smartphones had been invented 2 decades earlier. I am sure they will have tons of stories to tell /s.
Lol… yes my classmates died en masse.
Oof that resonates badly with the community here. I thought that by putting left-wing in quotes, it would be obvious that I was sarcastic, but either people did not read it that way, or something else about my post rubbed people the wrong way.
Economist here. There’s obviously no single measure of the state of the economy, and if there were, jobs and wages would clearly be a key component. It’s mostly those “left-wing” journalist that will have you believe that one number, GDP growth, represents the state of the economy.
I mean, yes, but by the same token beer is far less lethal than whiskey. Our response to that is to sell beer in pints and whiskey in smaller glasses. Just wondering why such an approach would be impossible for drugs.
Capitalism was supposed to be our economic system, not our political system.
Very nice explanation and only nitpicking, but saying that Thorium is much much safer than uranium implies that uranium nuclear plants are unsafe. In reality uranium nuclear power has one of the best safety records in energy production.
Tariffs are at 245 percent. I doubt they can do much in terms of adding their own surcharges.
Just to be clear, such a change to the birth certificate should NEVER happen if the person involved does not agree with it. It would 100 percent violate the Hippocratic Oath, as it can be very harmful.
Fair. I think my point was related to what makes sense in any reasonable social setting, not what is the exact biological definition which appears to be more of a scientific question.
Just to be clear on this, in my opinion anyone born with a vagina who wants to identify as a woman, should be treated as such. That’s if you have grown up thinking you were a woman, such an identity cannot be taken away.
There are only two reasonable definitions. One is: born with genitalia that look female (i.e. female on birth certificate). The other is “identifies as”. Both of these could be important in different contexts.
Your definition has the downside that the government would have to check your medical records to determine gender. That is an insane breach of the medical records.
I don’t want to talk ethics, but as a rule of thumb, winning a war is easier if you take out strategic targets than if you target civilians. Targeting civilians is what you do if your weapons aren’t precise enough to target tanks/planes etc.