Texas man accused of threatening to shoot up Pride parade to ‘pay them back for taking out Charlie Kirk’
gbzm @ gbzm @piefed.social Posts 0Comments 21Joined 4 mo. ago
gbzm @ gbzm @piefed.social
Posts
0
Comments
21
Joined
4 mo. ago
Another way to look at it is "one can't fuck children, because fucking implies consent so you should use the appropriate term which is rape", which is what I believe they meant.
The tweet is a lie, the photo is from a novelty shop (thx falcunculus@jlai.lu)
At a glance it even looks like an AI wrote the whole thing, doesn't it?
EDIT: 3 posts in history, all with the same hollow Green LinkedIn vibe...
Actually 157 out of 192 UN countries recognize the state of Palestine right now. When Crimea was invaded by Russia in 2014 and Israël had already been occupying parts of it illegaly for over 40 years, the count was 133. As soon as 1994, even before Netanyahu's first tenure, there were more than half (96) UN member states recognizing the state of Palestine.
Most countries absolutely do and have recognized Palestine and the imperialism that goes on there is old as fuck. Yours maybe doesn't, mine only switched this year as a mostly performative act. Source: even a passing glance at wikipedia
Unfortunately not. Quantum teleportation is an awful name: it's called that way because it implies "destroying" a quantum state somewhere, and "recreating" it identically somewhere else, effectively transmitting information. However, the process also requires a classical information transfer at some point, and is absolutely not instantaneous . It's only useful for cryptography because it's mathematically impossible to listen in on this information being transferred without disturbing it.
It's one of the most unfavorable coolness-of-name vs. coolness-of-actual-thing ratio in physics.
I don't know about this Milhouse business, but he did have some very salient points: that time he gushed blood uncontrollably from his neck and died has raised serious doubt in my previously staunch anti-gun disposition. Now I have to manually remind myself that most gun violence victims are unfortunately not Charlie Kirk.
Gender is not "for blurred lines", it's about social constructs, and society happens to be a complex emergent system, so its binaries tend to be approximative at best. The point of separating it was not to deal with blurred lines, but to deal with sociology in an unequivocal manner.
Sex is about biology which is also a complex emergent system. You may assert that sex is binary and immutable in the whole field of biology, and I don't know what your credentials are to support this claim but my sources beg to differ. I've read and heard biologists use different definitions for different subfields and contexts, and argue that none is a simple binary when you start to look at individual expressions. Even your article starts with three qualifiers for sex: "anatomical gonadic and chromosomal", and deals specifically with people who may have none or both gametes. So much for the major scientific win of an immutable binary.
You seem to be decided on one definition having the primacy over the others and I get why: gamete size is basically the first logical step of the male/female differenciation in species, so it makes sense when your study is about reproductive strategies across species and how sexual differenciation is so widespread. I'm not sure it's going to make as much sense when your field of study is embryo morphogenesis or ethology, though.
All the biologists I've met or read are actually fairly used to "sex" meaning different things in different contexts, and they're absolutely going to be fine with people calling themselves intersex if they don't want their biological singularity defined by a disorder.
Also, did you read the part in your own article where they said the nomenclature "DSD" was decided in Chicago when a bunch of doctors thought maybe "hermaphrodite" and "intersex" was maybe pejorative? It's okay to just ask the people who actually have it what they prefer and use that, it's just phonemes, it's fine. No scientific content is removed by being considerate.
The word intersex is used mainly because actual people out there would rather be regarded as sitting on the blurry line between the imperfect categories that our meat computers want to pattern-recognize, rather than "Disorders" of a "binary and immutable" yet somehow very accident-prone nature. I really fail to see what is confusing or misleading with that, just switch your heaviside with a sigmoid, put the quigley scale around 0, you'll be fine.
You should read the "controversy" part at least, your article is interesting
Maybe one of them performed their spell over the dark web, with bitcoin as sacrifice.
My sibling in Christ, this is what these words were specifically built to mean.
The U in Utopia is both the privative "u" and a form of the meliorative "eu". The word was coined by Thomas More in 1516 to literally to mean "a place that is so perfect it cannot exist", and the hope was that the fiction would serve as an unattainable model to aim for, to motivate and direct the progress of real-life society Though the word "dystopia" was later coined as an inverse mirror of utopia, it doesn't use nor does it require a mirrored etymological wordplay: "dys" just means "bad", basically, no implication of inexistence there. And for good reason: the dystopia is a trope that is used mainly in anticipatory fiction as a warning for where real-life society could be headed, as such it would make no sense for it to be depicted as impossible, on the contrary it must have a ring of truth to be an effective warning.
That and making, in what should be seen as the sole crowning jewel upon a veritable turdwagon of a life as a professional waste of carbon, the best argument in favor of gun violence since Brian Thompson
At least he died doing what he loved
TIL the French Novel/Memoir "Métaphysique des Tubes" (lit. metaphysics of tubes) by Amélie Nothomb was translated in English as "the Character of Rain". Weird choice.
Do you know where I could find more about the "correct" usage of ð then? My understanding was only the voiced/unvoiced thing, I'd like to know more.
Nothing to so with the substance of your comment, but may I ask why always þ and never ð?
You know maybe I'm starting to understand your point.
On the surface your question is easy to answer: clock uncertainties are a thing, and are very analogous to space-position uncertainty. Also time-of-arrival is a question that you can pretty much always ask, and it's precisely the "uncertain t for given x" to the usual "uncertain x for given t". Conversely you don't have the standard deviation of "just space": as universal as it is, Delta x is always incarnated as some well-defined space variable in each setting.
But it's also true that clock and time-of-arrival uncertainties are not what's usually meant in the time-energy relation: in general it's a mean duration (rather than a standard deviation) linked to a spectral width. And it does make sense, because quantum mechanics are all about probability densities in space propagating in a well-parametrized time. So Fourier on space=>uncertainties while Fourier on time=>actual duration/frequency. And if you go deeper than that, I'm used to thinking of the uncertainty principle in terms of Fourier because of the usual Delta x Delta p > 1/2 formulation, but for the full-blown Heisenberg-y formula you need operators, and you don't have a generally defined time operator of the standard QM because of Pauli's argument.
But that's a whole thing in and of itself, because now I'm wondering about time of arrival operators, quantum clocks and their observables, and is Pauli's argument as solid as that since people do be defining time operators now and it's quite fun, so thanks for that.
I was also under the same impression, but it seems to have grown less clear?
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2025/09/15/tyler-robinsons-groyper-connection-truth-or-conspiracy-theory/
In any case, Kirk enjoyers have never been known to let facts get in the way of their hate