When Americans become part of Canada it lowers the average IQ of both countries.

A scout’s job is to gather facts and information, and report back so that an army can make informed decisions.

Can’t imagine why a right-wing extremist would be afraid of an organization that teaches those skills to kids.

Did you read the article? The difference between the two transcripts was:

“The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters”

vs

“The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporter’s”

And stenographers use a special keyboard that records phonics, not words. It doesn’t have punctuation. That gets added later.

I can see you’re clearly not interested in understanding the situation the physician was in or discussing solutions that would have saved this patient’s life.

I’m not going to debate you further.

Do you hear yourself?

It was an emergency because she died?

She died days after it was too late for an abortion to save her.

If they performed the abortion when it would have saved her life, she wouldn’t have died, by your own logic it would’n’ve been an emergency.

And you’d be here arguing that the doctor should lose his license for performing an abortion when it wasn’t an emergency.

Yes.

That’s the problem with this law.

It takes the decision away from the medical experts, and puts in the hands of lawyers and judges who may or may not have a different agenda.

Any doctor that performs an abortion in Texas is risking a minimum $100,000 fine and permanently losing there license to practice medicine if lawyers, who are not medical professionals, decide it was medically necessary yet.

As a result, doctors in TX have been advised by their lawyers not to perform abortions unless the mother is literally minutes away from death, because otherwise you can’t prove that it was medically necessary.

In the case, the patient died of sepsis. Doctors couldn’t perform the abortion when she needed it because they couldn’t prove that it was medically necessary yet.

They knew that not performing the abortion would put mom at a much high risk of dying later. But they couldn’t legally prove that risk exists because all pregnancies involve some degree of risk.

If you want doctors to perform medical procedures when it’s medically necessary, you need doctors making that decision, not lawyers, not the state. That’s what Texas had before this law went into effect.

It’s literally created a trolly problem, it’s now better for the doctors to let some women die so they can save more lives later.

You need to add a — at the end to make the rest of the line a comment.

I can understand that a doctor might personally be against termination of a pregnancy when it isn’t medically necessary. I don’t agree, but I can understand being against it.

But even if you’re a doctor that feels that way, do you really want the state second guessing your decision if you performed an emergency abortion that was medically necessary?

Even a pro-life doctor should be 100% against the state getting involved in a patient’s medical decisions.

The problem with all “abortions are illegal except in cases where the mother’s life is at risk” laws is who gets to decide when the mother’s life is at sufficiently at risk?

Any pregnancy is a risk to the mother’s life to some extent. The only person who should be making the decision of how much risk it too much is the mother after an informed and private discussion with her doctor.

These stupid laws today make it so that even if it’s an emergency, any doctor performing an abortion is taking a risk that the state won’t agree it was an emergency (or perhaps that it wasn’t an emergency yet). That means that even in an emergency it gets left to the last minute where it’s high risk for everyone.

The only way to actually be pro-life and make abortions safe when it’s medically required. Is to make abortion legal and left as a decision between a woman and her doctor.

America avoiding giving money to low income schools?

I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.

My mental image of the bicycle changed as each detail was added, but sometimes the detail changed the image (the handlebars were straight until you said they were dropped) and sometimes the detail didn’t exist; the dropped handlebars were wrapped in handlebar tape, but that tape didn’t have a colour (not sure how to explain that better) until you mentioned it was black. Most of the details “added” something to the scene rather than “changing” an assumed detail.

The “front forks on the ground” question was particularly interesting to me.

The bicycle started with two wheels, and front wheel just sorta disappeared from my image when you mentioned it was stolen, but the front fork remained floating in the air as if there was a wheel still supporting it. But asking the question about the forks on the ground made gravity exist, and then there had to be a reason it was floating, which became it was being held up by the U-Lock.

I seem to imagine scenes with few superfluous details that mostly includes only what is mentioned or implied by the narrative. But it’s super interesting to me what details we’re in fact implied.

The ball on the table was similar. The table was at waist height to the person, and the ball had a specific size of roughly the size of a racket ball because it had to be something that could be easily pushed. But the person pushing it was just a silhouette of a person, it had no gender, the only thing I pictured clearly was the hand that pushed the ball. It was pushed in an intentional way that made the ball roll across the table away from the “person” (as opposed to bouncing, or pushed sideways)

The table was just an elevated plane it had no texture, or even legs supporting it, (probably because there was no ground for those legs to be on,) it didn’t go on forever, you could see the end of the table, but it also didn’t have a size.

After going nuclear against ad blockers, at some point google is going to introduce a new “feature” where YouTube uses AI with your phone’s camera to automatically pause videos when you look away from your phone.

Then they’ll make it so you have to buy a subscription to turn it off during ads.

Who tf wrote those requirements?

It seems pretty clear to me that they intended the Trump Bible to be the only one that fit all the specifications.

Just beware, sometimes the AI suggestions are scary good, some times they’re batshit crazy.

Just because AI suggests it, doesn’t mean it’s something you should use or learn from.

The article author is either confused or over-simplifying. We don’t need a “time zone” for the moon an earth time zone would almost certainly be used by anyone on the moon.

What we need is a standard way for how we keep time on the moon. Mainly so that we can establish the lunar equivalent of GPS.

It was a UPS I bought on Amazon.

It arrived damaged in the box, almost certainly because the driver dropped it.

My experience with Amazon customer service was umm… fun.

1. click the request return button.

This item is not returnable.

2. call customer service

Them: “This item is not returnable”

Me “it arrived damaged”

Them: “We’ll send you an email, reply to it with evidence of damage”

3. reply to email sending pictures with close up of the damage

Please send the email from the same address associated with the Amazon account

4. resend reply from my other email

The pictures you sent are in the wrong format please resend as jpeg or pdf

5. convert the images and resend

The pictures you sent do not show the entire product

6. take new pictures from farther away

Please send pictures that clearly show the damage

😡

Such bullsh*t.

“Dear Doctors… You should perform abortions when it’s medically necessary… oh and if we don’t agree it was medically necessary (yet) you lose your license and possibly face criminal charges. - Sincerely Florida”

RECs and similar market based methods for Scope 2 accounting are complete bullshit and need to be removed from the GHG protocol.

It’s not driving a transition to renewables just literally just giving companies permission to claim their emissions are lower without actually changing anything.

I read in a firefighter’s thread that the trick is to use a low pressure spray directly on the battery compartment. (It was a thread about Tesla cars not semis though so that might not apply)

The reason was you can’t actually put the fire out, it’s self oxidizing (it can literally burn underwater) so you basically need to wait till it burns itself out. Fortunately batteries only hold something like 1/10th the energy of gasoline and can’t release that energy as quickly so a fine light spray is enough to keep it from getting hot enough to catch anything else on fire including batteries in the surrounding battery modules.

Takes a long time, like hours to get it to a point they can move the vehicle and literally a couple weeks before the reaction completely fizzles out. They have special lots they tow them to where the car can fizzle itself out without damaging anything surrounding it.