FundMECFSResearch

But I win a tempo no? Might be a fair trade. (I ended up winning this game on a tempo) While the alternative bishop move (which is objectively better as rated higher by the engine), dedevellops the bishop and loses on tempo.

There might be a kingside attack in 10+ moves that I’m missing out on maybe you’re right.

There’s definitely islamophobia here, but it’s “soft” compared to most other online places. And I’m not using “soft” to excuse it, but that it tends to be less bad and less noticeable here (than reddit, twitter facebook etc).

I mean math is the backbone of science and technology. And technology can lead to fucked up things.

Nuclear bombs wouldn’t be possible without fairly recent math.

Not to mention the unethical hell that is the whole financial sector / trader type where mathematicians often end up working.

And finally these days, by making new discoveries in some fields your directly contributing to the growth of AI and LLMs.

An infamous example of someone who quit math over ethical concerns (ironic given the rest of the story) is Ted Kacyznski (the unabomber), who saw math as leading to more and more advanced technology which oppresses people and destroys nature.

A not very trustworthy looking hungarian website says 1890

https://pressnavigator.hu/photold/2023/03/25/photo-of-the-great-sphinx-from-a-hot-air-balloon-this-is-before-it-was-excavated-and-restored-1890/

There are three main concerns that arise from awarding construction contracts to ccp-owned companies.

1. The companies tend to have incredibly poor safety and environmental safety standards, and there are lots of cases of them not following the local law.

2. Quality concerns. While these companies often offer by far the cheapest deals, there is a decent quality tradeoff.

3. Removing pretty much any economic benefit construction brings from the local population. (jobs, contracts, material orders).

(and a bonus problem you’re literally sending money to a government who oppresses its own people, genocides its uyghur population, has wet dreams about invading its neighbours, and is an all-round authoritarian dictatorship).

You’re aware that disability can literally mean being slightly nearsighted right? Or losing your sense of smell? Or having ADHD? Disability can also be temporary, would you kill yourself because you broke your wrist?

Unless you are a radical eugenicist. It’s absurd to say you would kill yourself for all of these as a blanket statement. Especially considering the fact no one has the cerebral capacity to be aware of every single disability.

And anyways, it’s very questionable to come in here and say things like this. This community is a safe space and support group for chronically ill people, so coming here and saying “oh hi, if I was like you I’d kill myself” is just incredibly insensitive and inappropriate.

Also what do you play against the chatard akheline attack

Assisted dying is and should be heavily regulated.

I’m Swiss and there’s been heavy debated about “forced” suicide where for example someone who’se disabled and unable to work but wants to live is almost forced to kill themselves because disability benefits are too low to survive on.

This is a major problem is Canada for example.

I’d much prefer this to be well regulated than not at all. So I don’t think investigating a case, would be “screwing it up”.

I honestly don’t care what food it is. If all you eat in a day is quinoa, that’s unhealthy. It’s not the food, but eating just one food type in a day is unhealthy.

You’re completely right that I didn’t apply the same standards to that statement. This is because Rule 3 is intended in favour to medical advice (and preventing quackery). So even if I was completely pulling the “being vegan is expensive” out of my ass, it would technically not be rulebreaking as that isn’t medical advice, unlike the persons comment above who insinuates being vegan will help autism and cancer.

But here’s my rationale (which is not peer reviewed lol) for why being vegan is expensive (TLDR personal experience, read the rest if you want details).

I mean unless you’ve got a lot of of time on your hand, which would mean you’re privileged, it’s going to be hard to not risk deficiencies as it is a tough balance to achieve. (I spent two yeats vegan).

And unless you’re willing to splurge a lot on expensive nut milks, B12 is really hard to get enough of.

Then there’s calcium, iron, Omega 3 fatty acids, vitamin D, none of which are necessary to supplement if you’re doing the diet right but you’re going to need to either live somewhere with a very large product selection (like a city) to have varied sources of, or be meticulous in your dieting and tracking, which can mean spending a long long time checking food labels and planning meals.

Most people will end up having to buy a couple of these supplements which are extremely expensive.

Disabled is a social status.

There are more disabilities than pretty much anyone can imagine. A disability can be anything from a foot defect, to partial blindness, to scoliosis.

A disabled life is not necessarily a life of suffering or an unhealthy life, you’re already stereotyping here. Ableism teaches people that disability is full of suffering and nothing else, and that therefore disabled lives are not worth living. This is the rationale the nazis used when genociding the disabled population.

Are you really saying you’d rather die then have a foot malformation, or rather die than being hard of hearing? Saying you’d rather die than being disabled talks more about the social status of a disabled person, than the disability itself, as there is so much diversity in disability.

It’s okay to think, “I’d rather die than having [x] disability”. Although you should never say that to someone with the disability because it amounts to saying “if I were like you I would kill myself”. But saying “I’d rather die than be disabled” is not okay, because you’re missing out on the nuance of disability and therefore commenting on the social status and not the disability itself.