Even then - the purpose is not derived from the end result, meaning that the title is still a shit take.

The title is a shit take. We have a word for when what something is doing isn’t aligned with it’s purpose, broken. If something is broken it needs fixing.

Bringing retirement age down really isn’t feasible when people live longer and longer. It’d likely be better to find a middle-ground, where folks can slowly reduce the hours they work as they age until retiring completely.

That’s an impressive track record.

One presidency is more than a full-time job. Whilst I do like him cut the poor guy some slack.

University prof? Witty? Sharp tongue?

I’m down.

An astronaut for president? That’s actually pretty catchy.

Also seems like an interesting guy outside of that.

Seems like an interesting guy, and fits my two basic criteria: not being a geriatric and being a reasonable person. I’ve limited my expectations to avoid disappointment :'D

Fair, I was confused by your parallell between religious groups (christianity, islam) vs ethnicities (amish or ethnic jews). Now that you clarified, your argument makes more sense to me.

I agree with you - nobody should be displaced from their homes, even in the face of somebody elses “home claim”, since this would eternally perpetuate the same problem.

There is some food for thought that follows from this reasoning also. The foundation/creation/growth of almost every nation/state (I’m sure there is some unique obscure one somewhere who can claim to be the first humans to settle their land) has involved displacing people, and almost every settled people has done so by displacing those who came before. Does this not mean almost every other past creation/perpetuation/growth of a state/nation/settled people was wrong? (Even the kurdish people settled their current territories by force, just a long, long time ago)

You mix up the religion Judaism with the ethnicity and culture. The jewish cultural and ethnic group is amongst the least religious peoples in the world, as many as 75% according to a study a few years back being atheist or agnostic (myself included).

The various jewish ethnic groups do have genetic ties to a geographic area and have diseases almost entirely unique to that ancestry.

That does however beg the question of whether ancestry is any sort of motivation to lay claim to an area of land in the first place. A question that can be endlessly debated and if accepted at face value opens up endless cans of worms. (How far back? Forever? Can it be lost? What if multiple peoples have claim to an area? etc. etc.)

I’m glad it managed to survive to the end :)

Yeah, if the road in front is clear on both sides it’s generally safer to swerve than to slam the brakes.

Transport grids aren’t free, and excess electricity production is bad as it requires curtailment (wastage) which isn’t free either to prevent damage to electric equipment (very expensive).

Besides, when renewables produce these excesses, this will often be the case in a very large area.

The existing solution isn’t economical, mostly due to grid costs. If you want it, it’ll have to come from the tax payers pocket, which means it has to compete with stuff like healthcare.

This immediately reminded me of Adventures with Anxiety, a browser game about living with Anxiety.

It’s very well done, and simultaneously funny & serious.

Looks to be an average of 2 ppl per lane with 3m ahead & behind. An average biking speed for commuters is 18-29kph, so let’s do the calculus for 20, 25, & 30. This gives a throughput of 2x3x(20 or 25 or 30)/(3.6x6) ≈ (5.5 or 7 or 8.3) ppl/second

Car occupancy is ~1.5ppl/car in the EU. Given that this is a german highway Average distance between cars ~3 lengths meaning 4x4.5m=18m/car. For a long time these roads had “no speed limit”, but the recommendation was ~130kph. Let’s conservatively use 120 & 100kph. This gives 1.5x3x(100 or 120)/(3.6x18) ≈ (7 or 8.3) ppl/second.

Various things fudge the numbers in either direction, but that’s actually shockingly close between the two.

The real protip is always in the comments 👍

Oh for sure. Child marriage and genital mutilation is also an issue within this scope.

They’re stuck 2 centuries in the past and expect to be able to impose their barbaric “beliefs” on everyone around them.

Pufferfish

develops one of the most lethal toxins in the animal kingdom

Humans

Oooh yummy!

Mandatory

not op but

Religious school wants to teach creationism rather than evolution because it “goes against their beliefs” - law says they have to teach evolution because it’s part of the national curriculum (which in turn is science based) and are not allowed to give creationism equal weight.

Religious school cries foul, says the government is bigoted and discriminating against their religion.

Is this a case of intolerance that needs to be bashed?