rhombus

That’s true of any poorly socialized dog, even more so if it’s an intact male. If you’re against pitbull breeding you should be against every large breed with the capacity to maim and kill.

I guess he’s kind of notorious for saying really obvious things, so it’s a meme to put his face next to super obvious statements or facts.

Low morale/dissatisfaction =/= anger. They’re more likely to be uncomfortable and unwilling to use violence against protesters, especially since they are significantly more trained to identify threats than police are. They know these protesters are not a threat, and all their training and rules of engagement tell them to not engage.

It is a thing, but most controlled studies haven’t found pitbulls to be inherently more aggressive than other breeds, just more dangerous if they happen to attack. Any dog that is poorly socialized will probably attack someone sooner or later, they just weren’t bred to latch on and shred things with their jaws like pitbulls were. So maybe there is a discussion to be had about “dangerous” breeds, but it’s not a genetics one.

That’s not it. Even without any added variability they would still be wrong all the time. The issue is inherent to LLMs; they don’t actually understand your questions or even their own responses. It’s just the most probable jumble of words that would follow the question.

To be fair, ADHD is a developmental disorder that sometimes can present as delayed development rather than halted development. I.e being behind in executive functioning development but eventually “catching up” to peers.

That said, the severity of cases is still often determined through the lens of “how well do they fit in/mask it” and not “how is their emotional/mental wellbeing”, which definitely gives the impression of kids “growing out of it”.

Years later, Sarah Palin started yammering about the “death panels” in ObamaCare, and I thought "the insurance companies already have death panels, why isn’t anybody worried about that?

And not even death panels, just individuals who are not licensed to practice medicine who deny anyone and everyone they can make up a reason for. The merits are never considered, death is the default option.

I’m sure forcing a bunch of troops to be immigration enforcement will go over well. Definitely not going to tank morale and recruitment…

The ADHD part is doing it constantly. Everyone loses stuff some times, ADHD people lose stuff all the time.

That’s the part that irks me when people pull the “oh but I do that so it’s not ADHD”. The difference isn’t if it does or doesn’t happen, it’s how often it happens and how much it impacts your day to day life.

Neither 110VAC or 240VAC is inherently more dangerous as long as the system is paired with the right gauge of wire. As for personal safety, both are more than capable of killing you regardless of amperage. 240VAC may even be a little more capable because it can push more current through the resistance of your body.

I’ll admit, American plugs/outlets leave a lot to be desired, but it’s not any more dangerous because of the higher current.

It’s a bit of both with a healthy dose of “we’re not sure”. We know that ADHD brains don’t regulate neurotransmitters properly and that the theta vs beta waves are different, but there are a lot of other mechanisms we don’t understand.

Another great example is guanfacine. It’s primarily a blood pressure medication, but it also improves emotional regulation for ADHD patients. We think it improves connections in the prefrontal cortex, but we ultimately don’t have a solid understanding of why it actually helps.

It probably would get her in some hot water, but a first name alone is a gray area. It becomes a definite violation if it’s combined with health information, even as simple “a baby was born here with the name X”. If she just says “I saw a name spelled X” then it may not be a violation of the law, but the hospital would probably still can her for it.

And their dissent is utter nonsense. It entirely hinges on the fact the petitioners didn’t wait long enough for an injunction from the District Court before their appeal the Circuit Court, claiming there is no evidence that they were in imminent danger of removal. People have been getting kidnapped and shipped off in a matter of days and these absolute chucklefucks are trying to pretend this is business as usual. Fucking Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence that they needed immediate relief!

Roughly 40 floors.

The most pressure it would experience would be the difference in internal vs external pressure. At 1000ft of depth there’s a pressure of 440psi. Assuming the sphere somehow managed a perfect vacuum that’s still well below the 6000psi compressive strength of high strength concrete, hell they would still have more flexural strength. The spheres themselves definitely wouldn’t be the weak link.

1 in 400 is 0.25% a day.

According this report roughly 325 people a day are shot a day in the US (if we’re including those who don’t die).

325 in 340,000,000 is 0.0000955882%, four orders of magnitude less.

In a room of 400 people that’s one gun violence victim every 7 years. Or, conversely, 0.25% would be 850,000 per day in 340,000,000 people.

All that said, 325 victims a day is still completely absurd and doesn’t need to be so wildly exaggerated.

The rot will definitely still be there, but the power vacuum Trump will leave behind is going to massive. Not only that, but a lot of Republicans are just spineless opportunists and not hardcore ideologues, and they may see it as an opportunity to push back against the nutjobs who have taken over the party.

The actual translations are something like Bundestag=Federal Diet and Bundesrat=Federal Council. Bundestag was originally the Reichstag in Imperial Germany (Diet of the Realm, or Imperial Diet) while the Bundesrat had the same name as it represented the state governments as it does now.

Or afraid of losing access. They keep throwing soft balls because they’re worried about being banned from press conferences and interviews.

Putting aside the conversation about sexuality, I think viewing Vasquez as emphasis for Ripley’s femininity downplays the importance they both have. You’re totally right that Ripley shows a strong woman that embraces feminine traits, but there’s a lot to say about a character that breaks gender norms. I think the line you brought up shows that Vasquez doesn’t reject femininity outright, she just chooses to present that differently.