TheOctonaut

People are answering your headline but not understanding your question; the two aren't as linked as they would be in French.

All of these are valid:

• I went to a Moscow school
• I went to a school in Moscow
• I went to a Versaille cafe
• I went to a cafe in Versaille.
• I dated a London girl
• I dated a girl from London

These sound more natural than the following:

• I went to a Muscovite school
• I went to a Versaillian cafe (People have been giving you the direct French for Versaillais, but English wouldn't use fhat)
• I dated a Londoner girl.

At least for Muscovite, it retains the implication that the school is for people from Moscow, rather than the school being in Moscow. You could have a Muscovite school in London. You could have a Versaillian cafe in Osaka.

You can see this a lot more often in religion, eg. I went to a Presbyterian school - I went to a school for Presbyterians.

You missed the point and wrote like 3.5 paragraphs. Maybe AI could summarise for you. I asked Gemini to give it a go:

This comic strip conveys a cautionary message about the potential overconfidence of humans regarding the irreplaceable nature of their professions in the face of advancing technology, specifically artificial intelligence. Here's a breakdown:

• The first five panels show various people confidently stating that their professions (cook, driver, lawyer, doctor, teacher) are inherently human, rely on talent, and therefore cannot be replaced. They seem to believe they are immune to automation or technological disruption.

• The remaining four panels reveal identical, faceless robots labeled with other professions (personal, journalist, artist, translator). This visually suggests that even roles considered creative, nuanced, or requiring "human touch" are susceptible to being taken over by AI or robots.

• The humor lies in the dramatic irony. The characters' confident assertions are juxtaposed with the stark reality of the robots, highlighting the potential for human hubris in underestimating the capabilities of emerging technologies. In essence, the comic warns against complacency and suggests that many professions, even those requiring creativity and human interaction, might not be as safe from automation as people believe. It prompts reflection on the evolving nature of work and the potential impact of AI on various fields.

Bada-bing!

Our other trade partner also went batshit about 10 years ago and made it a lot more difficult to trade with them.

Life's lonely as a relatively norma neutrall northern-hemisphere anglophone state.

No, because what he's describing is a self-run comment editing and deleting script.

GDPR account deletion works very differently.

Note I'm not defending Reddit here, as much as anything it's advice for anyone (like me) who has to go back and re-run the script every few months because of those brave people whose form of protest is very temporarily inconveniencing themselves.

There's a non-malicious reason for this - if you used a script based on interacting with the website, when subreddits went hidden, it actually hidden your own comments from you. So they aren't visible to automated scripts and then when subreddits go visible again, suddenly it looks like comments "came back".

Hello.

My nan passed with dementia a few years ago too. I felt for my dad at the time but after visiting her and her not recognising me, not recognising my dad, basically living and suffering for nothing, it was pretty neutral when she did die.

I didn't miss the old lady in a chair pointed at a TV that kept her conscious. I missed my nan who'd always sneak us biscuits (cookies) and insisted I was handsome from 0 years old to 30 years old. But she'd been gone a long time. I think my dad had hope she'd snap out of it. My hope is that I never see him like that. And that me losing things is my ADHD, not a precursor.

Do you usually interact with people at parties the way you interact with people in the comments section of a link aggregator?

and that's just at a glance

That's a you problem. As it turns out, science isn't based on glances and vibes.

It's plainly evident that taking any person with high testosterone and getting them to train at a physical activity will almost always result in better performance than training a person in the same way with lower testosterone.

The papers talk about the evidence based on ordinary, presumably nonspecialised individuals, not cherry-picking a few thousand people who have trained in such a way that testosterone can make its difference over time.

As you've spotted, good hearing is advantageous to everyone.

However the men hunting/women gathering stereotype is increasingly regarded as wrong or at least simplistic.

https://phys.org/news/2023-10-prehistoric-gender-roles-women-hunters.html

Not how evolution works, and not how oppression works either.

You've combined the two things together and said they are worse than one on its own. Duh.

The original poster is talking about the vast majority of kids today who do in fact get a decent sex education and if they see/hear their parents going at it, the 'trauma' is in seeing them in an unexpected context, not thinking Dad is beating mom.