“Republicans repeat propaganda and democrats don’t” isn’t even the conclusion of this paper, which you’d know if you had actually looked at it. In fact, we already knew that republicans spread more disinfo than democrats, it’s been demonstrated in multiple studies that are cited in this paper.

This particular study’s interest is about what triggers it : “Our research enhances our understanding of when and why conservatives tend to spread more misinformation than liberals. We find that an ideological asymmetry emerges when politically polarized situations trigger conservatives’ desire for ingroup dominance. Acting on that salient desire, conservatives spread ingroup-skewed political misinformation, which is of uncertain accuracy, but not definitively false. In less polarized situations, conservatives’ desire to achieve ingroup dominance is tempered, along with their misinformation conveyance.”

No problem. Thanks for the giveaway anyway :)

I’d like Kerbal Space program please.

That’s a Donald I can vote for.

Oh yeah ? Well Trump had an uncle who was a professor at MIT, so I guess they’re even. /s

With Trump and the current GOP, the corruption is in plain sight anyway. At this stage, you could dig up a thousand more incriminating dossiers and it still wouldn’t move the needle for the MAGhats.

It’s true they would probably be more useful to the average keyboard user than say the scroll lock key, or the fucking copilot key. But to be really useful, they would have to be easily accessible without moving you bands, or else it’d just be faster to use a shortcut. Keyboards with macro keys do exist so maybe get one and map them to CTRL+C/V

It’s a bit ridiculous to say the only obstacle between us and “monstrous behemoths created in labs” is some sports regulations ^^'. Luckily there are already laws that severely restrict what you’re allowed to do with genetic engineering, so don’t you worry.

But coming back to your “monstrous behemoths”, wouldn’t some basketball players for example already fall in that category ? How tall is too tall? When it’s about basketball, you could be 8 feet 1 (2.46 m for my metric brethren) and no-one would try to have you banned from the game, they would probably congratulate you on your lucky genetics instead. Similarly, I’ve never heard of any suggestion of, say, enforcing a minimum resting heart rate for endurance based sports.

Yet if you’re a woman and too muscular for some obscure regulatory body’s liking, you face the risk of being ostracized and banned from competing. The same genetic lottery winning ticket would in this case be considered an unfair advantage. This goes to show that unfairness is not rooted in any hard, undeniable, mesurable quantity, but is at its root a cultural phenomenon. Fairness is in the eye of the beholder, there can be no objective measure for it, -which is why I’m say it simply doesn’t truly exist in sports.

The people clamoring against the inclusion of biological outliers are operating under the false -and frankly poorly thought out- idea that sports are fair and that it’s only by training the hardest that you can and will achieve victory, shonen style.

Ultimately the only completely fair-ish competition is the one where you try to outdo your previous best performance and beat your own records. Otherwise, there are so many other variables you’d have to correct for to level the playing field (and testosterone levels is not a great pick for that anyway) that you might as well have single athlete categories.

And a C-level exec his golden parachute

That’s a french ‘Poilu’, a WW1 soldier. I’m pretty sure he would strangle you with his sausages if he heard you call him Hans.

Both Ground News and Media Bias are tuned to a very US-centric vision of what is left or right, which means that thanks to this right biased Overton window, anything they classify as left would probably be considered center in Europe. Unfortunately, said window is also slinding to the right in Europe under the influence of European right leaders calling anything left of center “far-left”, see for example : Macron.

I honestly don’t understand why you’d go back to Intel these days. Performance is only comparable if Intel chips guzzle like twice the wattage, and they’ll make sure you have to also change your mobo by conveniently switching sockets every two years. What’s the upside of going Intel?

This has to be a portrayal of the last supper devised as a clever scheme to upset Christians. I know this because at no other point in history have people ever been gathered around a table.

sigh

This dumbass has made enough career ending faux-pas and declarations as to disgrace a dozen or so Congresses worth of politicians, and yet here we are. The desensitization is complete, he can just flatly announce his intention of ending democracy in the middle of an incoherent tirade, and people will cheer.

It really helps understanding how past autocrats got into power.

The resemblance is uncanny.

I agree with you but this phone comes with a proprietary super fast 100W charging tech that only works with their charger and cable.

Donald wants everyone to pay for their own defence yet will also charge the taxpayer extra for this own protection (while not paying taxes himself).

From the NYT : "Shortly after J.D. Vance’s selection was announced, his hometown, Middletown, Ohio, was pounded by a strong storm with hail the size of golf balls that cleared parks and splash pads as people fled for cover. "

What Macron has lately been calling “far-left” would have been considered middle of the road leftism only a couple years ago. Macron has pulled such a massive shift of the Overton window --what with calling himself a centrist when all of his policies are right-wing, and constantly calling anyone that’s left of him “far-left”-- that it’s no surprise right-wing extremism is totally normalized now. LFI is not far-left, and I wish the media would stop repeating and thus normalizing that idea.