WoodScientist

They obviously don't want anyone confusing her with the Brazilian thrash metal band.

You mean in how magnificent they are?

Have centrists stopped using the deaths of tens of thousands of children for cheap political points at every opportunity?

From Meriam-Webster's entry on the word

Did the definition of n----r change?

There is a widespread belief that the original meaning of n----r, as defined in dictionaries, was "an ignorant person," and a related belief that current dictionary definitions describing its use as a hateful, racist epithet are a recent change. We do not know the source of those beliefs, but they are not accurate. The word was first included in a Merriam-Webster dictionary in 1864, at which time it was defined as a synonym of Negro, with a note indicating that it was used "in derision or depreciation." There has never been a definition like "an ignorant person" for this word in any subsequent dictionary published by this company. Nor do we know of such a definition in any earlier dictionary.

There's been an attempt among white racists over the years to try and redeem the hard-r N-word. They'll say that it originally meant just an ignorant or foolish person in general, not only black people specifically. But this is a historical fiction. It's always been used as a slur against black people. It was originally a complete synonym for "negro." If you asked Yarvin, and he didn't just admit outright to being a flaming racist, he would likely justify it by making a claim like this. He would claim that he's saying these billionaires are just corrupt and foolish. He would say that it's OK to use the word, as he's not referring to black people, just ignorant and lazy people in general. He would say he's using the non-racist definition of the n-word. But again, this is a historical fiction.

Sometimes racists will cite words like "niggardly", meaning cheap or stingy, as an example of how the n-word could be used in ways not applying just to black people. Niggardly is a word that sounds like the n-word but actually does have a non-racist history. They'll try to link niggardly to the hard-r n-word. But what they ignore is that the word niggardly has a completely different etymological root. Niggardly shares roots with words like niggling, tracing back to the 13th century nig, meaning simply a stingy person. The n-word however, as Meriam-Webster notes, derives directly from the Spanish negro.. Racists will connect the n-word to words like niggardly, niggling, etc., citing their real history as non-racist words, and say that the n-word can also be used non-offensively because of this. But there is no common etymological root between the hard-r n-word and similar sounding words that do actually have a non-racist history.

Of course, it's all ultimately a moot point. In polite society today, most people understandably avoid using any word that remotely sounds like the n-word. See controversies around the word niggardly. And really, there's little reason to use words like niggardly, even if one could argue that they're technically not racist. They just sound way too similar, and there's plenty of other perfectly valid words to use in their place. And ultimately, someone could just as easily be hurt or offended by words that sound similar to the n-word even if they're technically not directly related. The words are best avoided, as they just end up hurting people for no good reason, even if some etymologist might argue they're not directly related.

AAPPOMBUANYNTKTUWTHSITA

Really? I never would have thought Captain Planet would take up that much space on a hard drive. Are you storing fucking Captain Planet as a 4k video? It was a cartoon from the early 90s. I think 480p would be more than enough! Sure there were 114 episodes, but they weren't that long. How much space can the complete Captain Planet really take up?

No study on Earth would be published using such a flawed methodology. You can't just retrospectively study people's past opinions like that, compared them to current trans people, and expect any kind of reliability. No one would approve a study design like that. You're full of it.

As this is a bill written by fascists, it will of course not attempt to regulate ghost job postings.

The problem for OpenAI and their ilk is that the actual legitimate uses of LLMs are so few and niche that they cannot hope to pay for the immense cost of developing and running these systems. Like, cool. Sure I can use copilot to generate derivative meme images, but what's that actually worth to me monetarily? I'm not going to subscribe to a monthly service just to access a tool for shit posting.

Cissy freak.

You have a profound lack of critical thinking skills.

Here's what you wrote:

Unfortunately I can’t find it again, because it was such an interesting and surprising bit of data, but I read a study some years ago that split trans people up into three categories, and compared the rate of suicide among them:

1. in the closet
2. out, and reported being supported overall by their community/peers after coming out
3. out, and reported being unsupported overall by their community/peers after coming out

If you had to guess which of the three categories had the lowest suicide rate, I bet it’d be #2, right? So did I, but actually, the group with the least suicidality was #1! The implication that never coming out at all makes a trans person less likely to take their life than coming out to people who accept and support them was stunning, but there it was, in black and white. So what does that mean, exactly?

What this means is that you're misremembering some study, are quoting a right wing hit piece, or are just pulling shit out of your ass. And it means you have a profound lack of critical thinking skills.

Just think about for a second. Actually THINK about it man!

How in the world are you going to have a study with any kind of statistical reliability, when you are polling trans people WHO ARE IN THE FUCKING CLOSET??!!

You do understand what those words mean, do you not? You're talking about people who are not out. You're talking about people who are not publicly out as trans. So obviously you can't poll these people when trying to survey the trans population. At best you can just randomly poll the population and ask random people if they're trans. But that method never works for small minority groups, as if even 1% of cis people lie on the survey and claim to be trans just to fuck with the results, the fake trans people will out number the real trans people in the survey.

Actually THINK about what drivel you are writing. How the hell can you make any claim about trans people that are in the closet? By definition, such people are indistinguishable from the larger cis population.

This is why I know that you're pulling this stuff right out of your ass. You're making a claim that is completely nonsensical.

You have failed at basic fundamental critical thinking.

This man needs to be hanged for treason.