I agree that in both cases there is an issue that needs to be solved (see NYPD budget as example) so don’t take “defund” at face value but more like “radical changes are needed”
if you want to tear something apart to rebuild peacefully this is the way. their salaries are paid by public money so defund, get everyone out and rebuild. not unlike dept of education which may also need a similar treatment to rebuild
Most of humanity has lived without police for most of its existence. It's not an inherent part of life. And in many places, the police is a very recent (few centuries old) invention with ties to oppressive structures such as slavery and colonialism.
Whether abolishing the police, or defunding the police (to deescalate the militarization), both are proposals formulated by serious academics and politicians, whether you agree or not. It's not virtue signalling. If anything, "defund the police" is still very badly regarded outside very small circles and there's no credit to be gained by holding such positions.
There should be standard procedures for this. Something like, you go through the emails for compromising materials, so you would know vectors of attack beforehand, and train the person to not fall for them.
I think not many people are arguing that we shouldn’t exclude people based on testosterone in elite events, but none of these were trans women, these were all women who lived their entire lives as women from the moment they were born
I'd argue about testosterone. High testosterone happens in some woman naturally, why exclude them? They still are woman, they should have a right to participate.
Height is also an advantage in sports, and women statistically are much shorter then man, should we ban tall woman from sports? Should we say "she exhibits a male amount of height, it isn't fair to let her participate with 'normal' woman"?
The more "fair" we make woman competition the narrower our definition of a woman gets.
If you want to make it fair, let's pick a random chemical in man exclude people from competition based on their readings. That surely would make sport career look more fun for everyone, training all your life only to find out that some committee doesn't consider you a man. And then we can celebrate equality by noticing that man-to-woman sport participation ratio got closer to 50-50
My view is that testosterone is a reasonable thing to discriminate on because:
1. It is causally connected to primary and secondary sex characteristics
2. It has a large impact on performance in many sports
3. It's easy to explain to most people and somewhat matches people's intuitions around fairness
But, yes, it is true that there are cis women with high T levels and it is somewhat unfair and arbitrary to include them when not excluding other random advantages that people have. I'm just not sure if I have a better solution
It doesn't.In tennis a 14 UTR whatever wins against a 13 UTR whatever. UTR is your effectiveness rating against every other player. Same in chess with ELO.
The issue is woman would disappear from profesional sports. Sinners 16.27 rating means that he double bagels Sabalenkas 13.29 essentially 100% of the time. The 500th ATP player has a UTR of 13.81, half a point is quite a bit stronger, do he's still very much stronger than Sabalenka. You probably have to start looking well into the thousand somethings for something that is consisently beaten by her.
Only the top 200 players make money, the top 100 good money, and the top 50 ridiculous money.
So women would not be in something like top 2000 of tennis players or worse. Which would basically remove any incentive for women to participate in pro tennis at all.
I don't get how you can compare Sinner's UTR against Sabalenka's when they're based to two disparate group scores? Doesn't there need to be at least a modicum of cross-pollination to make a meaningful comparison?
There is some cross pollination. Women can play vs men, just usually don't. I'm fairly certain singles UTR is universal across players, it only distinguishes between doubles and singles UTR.
UTR can also include unranked games if one of the players submits a score and the other approves it.
Basically proving my point. Very few women in top chess. Currently there are 0 women in top 100 chess players. Only 3 women were ever in the top 100 chess players. And chess is not even a game where men have a natural advantage like in almost all of the physical sports.
I don't deny that there are very few women in top chess, but that wasn't your point. You said it would end up being all men at all the skill rating levels, which is not true. Take chess as an example: there are a lot more women at around 1500 elo than at 2500 elo. So if you host an intermediate-level tournament just for players around 1500 elo, plenty of women will participate.
The ratio of men to women who are at 1500 Elo in chess is like worse than 90:1, so no, you host an intermediate level tournament and it will be almost all men. Well, mostly boys but that’s current chess for you.
But it’s not just that. If there are no top women in any kind of leagues in chess, that will only further discourage women from participating competitively in chess in the first place.
Note that most competitive women chess players play in women’s only tournaments even though they can easily join open men’s tournaments as well. For various reasons, one being that these women’s only tournaments are where they have the best chance of winning or being in the top k for prizes.
The male-to-female ratio at 1500 elo is not 90:1, but more like 9:1. 10% is a visible minority.
But I see where our disagreement is. You think there ought to be more women in chess. I think different people can do different things, so women don't need to match men in every statistic and vice versa. If we open it up to universal participation and it turns out to be a male-dominated game, then let it be. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
> I think different people can do different things, so women don't need to match men in every statistic and vice versa. If we open it up to universal participation and it turns out to be a male-dominated game, then let it be. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
You don't have a say though, others want to see women play chess against each others and happily pay for and organize that event. Or do you want to make female only events illegal? As long as they are legal they will continue to be held.
Lol. These NoKings protests are so incredibly pathetic and ineffective. These bunch of airheads standing on the side of a road or bridge with close to non-existent foot traffic so there is not the smallest possibility of them inconveniencing anyone.
What are they even expecting their so called protests to achieve anyway. These people have absolutely no goals or plans to have any. Guess it's a way for them to have an roadside party instead of whinging about politics online lol.
Actual disruptive protests that have actual goals.
Having a roadside party with signs and calling it a protest is just pathetic, ineffective, and embarrassing. These people simply are not serious people.
How do you square your opinion with multiple NoKings days at the top of the list of largest protests in US history? Perhaps that there are mini demonstrations (as you have described) every day is a sign that the frustration is more persistent.
I had that happen too recently… Basically rg x would show nothing but grep -r x showed the lines for any x. Tried multiple times with different x, then I kept using grep -r at that time. After a few days, I started using rg again and it worked fine but now I tend to use grep -r occasionally too to make sure.
Next time that happens try looking at the paths, adding a pair of -u, or running with --debug: by default rg will ignore files which are hidden (dotfiles) or excluded by ignore files (.gitignore, .ignore, …).
I use "grep" to search files (it should never skip any unless I tell it to do otherwise) and "git grep" to be a programmer searching a codebase (where it should only look at code files unless I tell it to do otherwise). Two different hats.
I wouldn't want to use tools that straddle the two, unless they had a nice clear way of picking one or the other. ripgrep does have "--no-ignore", though I would prefer -a / --all (one could make their own with alias rga='rg --no-ignore')
This is a Western-centric framing. Iran have an oligarchy of IRGC billionaires consolidating power. Gazans and Lebanese and Yemeni are only slightly more disposable than their own populations.
It’s tempting to turn adversary into heroism. But the truth is Iran has supported the laughter of Gazans and Yemenis to keep war away from its shores for a few more years. These proxies need to rule ruthlessly, like their parent, because they’re violent, ruthless and cruel regimes. Powerful. But no paragon, and certainly not one who give two shits about Western notions of who is committing genocide or war crimes against whom.
Whenever I see this, I recognize it as obvious scaremongering.
reply