That's what sex means in a medical context, though: your equipment. Your doctor is on the short list of people who have a need to care about that, because it's one of the rare places where anatomy matters.
I'm fairly far right on a lot of matters (and just spent a few ammo boxes hunting the elusive wild skeet this weekend). I'm socially liberal in the classic sense, though, in that I don't care what people do if it doesn't affect me. Want to smoke pot? Marry your gay partner? Go by a gender different from your biological sex (or even something totally different)? I couldn't care less. That's between you and your loved ones.
They are not medically or legally different things.
I grew up in a medical family and I've worked in healthcare in various capacities for a couple of decades now. In any organization I've dealt with, "sex" or "biological" sex explicitly refers to your anatomy. That's important because biological males can't get cervical cancer and biological females can't get testicular cancer, for instance. They're the words used on the occasions when anatomy are relevant. Most medical organizations I've been around in the last decade or so distinguish between "sex" and "gender", which is what the patient presents themselves as. Sure, they're most commonly the same value, but they are separate database fields referring to different concepts.
But what you and other extreme liberals
LOL. You presume much, and wrongly. But con/lib aside, I've never encountered a single problem with referring to someone by their gender. The people who care to distinguish between sex and gender appreciate the respect, and understand when medical decisions require healthcare providers to discuss their sex instead. It's easy to be nice to people, so why not do so? It doesn't cost us anything.
What special privilege is Chelsea asking for? She wants to be called by her gender (not biological sex; those are medically and legally different things). She's not asking to go to an all-girls high school or otherwise do anything controversial. In what remote sense does her request harm you in any way?
And yet here we are explaining the basics of gender to you, so I guess some of us still have sympathy for the weakminded.
A definition of "clemency" says:
Leniency or mercy. A power given to a public official, such as a governor or the president, to in some way lower or moderate the harshness of punishment imposed upon a prisoner.
Clemency is considered to be an act of grace. It is based on the policy of fairness, justice, and forgiveness. It is not a right but rather a privilege, and one who is granted clemency does not have the crime forgotten, as in Amnesty, but is forgiven and treated more leniently for the criminal acts. Clemency is similar to pardon inasmuch as it is an act of grace exempting someone from punishment.
Barring contrary definitions, the President granted her clemency. I strongly suspect Assange is far too little to live up to his promise, but this is exactly the situation the Wikileaks tweet described.
The tone gets even better when the question changes to "I'm trying to learn xyz, and here's what I've already done and where I'm stuck".
So by your reasoning, if a car manufacturer accidentally made a bug which caused the engine to cheat on diesel emissions tests, it's actually the EPA's fault for not designing their test to more accurately mimic how people use their cars in real life?
Not even remotely. I'm saying that if there was a bug where putting the transmission into test mode caused emissions to go out of spec, but almost no one except for technicians would ever go into that mode, then it's a lot different from the case where the average owner should expect their emissions to be out of spec.
Your no-spin version is somewhat correct, except that it misses the key fact that CR reported those bad numbers and told people not to buy the laptop because of them. If Ford says a Focus should get 30MPG and testing shows it really gets 25MPG, then that's probably a legitimate result explainable by different testing scenarios. But if Consumer Reports puts their Focus into a test mode that regular owners will never use, and it gets somewhere between 13.5MPG and 58.5MPG, then something's probably gone wrong. Given that it's Ford and not Joe's Crawfish and Car Factory, it doesn't seem unreasonable for CR to doublecheck their results before publishing a "don't buy a Ford Focus because it only gets 13.5MPG!" recommendation.
(Note: those numbers are to scale. Apple says the 13" MBP should get 10 hours of web usage. CR said it varies from 4.5 to 19.5 hours. I multiplied those by 3MPG/hour to show the proportions.)
No, it's actually a Bug. The article describes a problem with the "Disable Caches" setting such that:
use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab.
But many developers probably use Safari Developer Mode to work on their projects, and this will help them.
Yes, but those developers don't get their recommendations from Consumer Reports. That magazine's audience would never have encountered that bug.
Obligatory car analogy: say they're testing a Ford Focus. They disable its antilock brakes so that a professional driver can get its best-case dry pavement stopping distance. Along the way, the find an OBD-II bug that causes the brakes to take twice as long to stop the car. They report the bad results instead of the normal, expected values. Yes, their test was correct! It found a bug that needs to be fixed. However, the only people who would ever see that bug are the exact ones who'd notice something was wrong and be able to troubleshoot it. You and I aren't ever going to disable our antilock brakes, even if a test engineer might.
I think that's kind of what happened here. Again, yes, they legit found a bug. My problem with it is that they reported the buggy results instead of the actual ones that a normal non-developer would see. A developer would notice their battery draining in a fourth the expected time and that it only happened when they were debugging in Safari, so they probably wouldn't even be significantly affected by the bug.
The earth is like a tiny grain of sand, only much, much heavier.