Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Healthcare (Score 1) 265

On one hand what you say is true, but it misses some potential nuance which I would like to believe the OP intended, not that I have any faith.

Appearance is a proxy for hormones. This should not be surprising since hormones' effect is to alter the function of cells. The Russian fox breeding experiments tell us that as you breed animals to be tractable you are actually changing their hormonal balance, and they also change in appearance at the same time.

It's well known that e.g. hair growth in humans is governed in large part by hormones, so this speaks directly to what's being discussed.

What you say may actually even be playing a part here; it's possible that there is some sort of cultural shift that is causing men who have a hormonal advantage in the breeding department to be less favored as partners, perhaps perceiving them (rightly or wrongly) as more likely to be abusive at a time when that is increasingly seen as unacceptable. (And if so, yes, good! But it's not the morality or even the reality that causes the shift, but the perception, hence the sentence.)

Comment Re:Houses (Score 1) 265

more kids = bigger GA

Oh good, a bigger debt.

and SNAP payments

That part's true. 1 out of 3 is OK in baseball:

= less need to work

They have to house all of those kids. They have to clothe them. They have to take them to things. GA and SNAP don't pay for those things. Welfare does, but since Clinton's welfare reform act of 1996, that only lasts for five years.

= more kids running the streets causing trouble.

Thanks to shutting down all the programs that used to keep them busy.

If you want this fixed, then you educate people and make birth control available. But Republicans are opposed to both public education and birth control. They therefore clearly want there to be more kids running the streets causing trouble. Why would you vote for that?

Comment Re:Why doesn't this exist? (Score 1) 51

You seem not to understand that current LLMs suffer greatly from inaccuracy.

I'm not continuing this conversation with you until you acknowledge your failure to read what I actually wrote, because I won't have any belief that anything I say might change your mind about anything no matter how wrong I've proven you to be. Thanks.

Comment Re:Sold in 2023 with a 3 year warrantry (Score 1) 60

They shut down the "Wemo Mini Smart Plug" which was still sold in November 2023. It came with a 3 year warranty.

That's good news for people in California, who therefore have a right to a refund under our state warranty laws. Other Americans are fucked because they don't have a right to a refund, only replacement. In California we even have the right to choose.

By my understanding this is also grounds for at least a partial refund in the EU, as the goods are not in conformity with the consumer sales contract if they do not comply with the description given by the seller, which in this case includes remote functionality. But they're not entitled to a full refund like we are. We Californians further have the right to a refund from the seller during the warranty period, we never have to go to the manufacturer.

Slashdot Top Deals

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.

Working...