I’d say a combination of lack of incentive (doctors make good money) and potential for harm. A good doctor making a well thought out video still can’t diagnose a person, and if someone were to misdiagnose themselves based on what a doctor said on youtube, then suffer significant harm because of what the video told her, the doctor could easily be legally liable.

Why is the Russian ambassador delivering this? We’re supposed to believe Russia has just been holding on to classified US documents and just decided to share them?

This isn’t per capita, so it’s primarily a population graph. US population growth is stalling, immigration is already the only reason we’re still maintaining any growth, and it’s easy to guess why that might be slowing down now as well.

I am a man and I’ve been roofied in public. It happens far more frequently than you would like to believe.

I cannot blame any woman who doesn’t want to take that risk with a stranger.

You seem to think I’m targeting men here, but that’s foolish. People are unpredictable, and anyone has the capacity to be dangerous. The only reason to respond to mild caution with such excessive hostility is your own insecurity. Nobody is calling you a rapist here man, it’s not about you, it’s just a precaution.

Do you all have a different idea of what a date is than me or something? The point is to get to know someone you don’t know yet. I guess if you were communicating for weeks beforehand this might seem weird, but that’s making some big assumptions. You’re acting like this woman has requested her friend accompany her for every moment of their ongoing relationship. It’s wild to me to get so insecure about someone not fully trusting you this first time you meet. Trust is built over time, and it’s not a slight against you if someone wants to protect themselves.

call it a crazy thought, but if i were premeditating sexual assault, i probably wouldn’t choose someone who has my name, photos, phone number, and a history of correspondence to show motive. lol

And yet, a casual examination of history shows that it happens all the time. And more often than not, charges never get brought up.

Now certainly the perceived frequency is far higher than the actual likelihood, but I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to roll those dice.

Sorry, but you’re coming from a place of ignorance here, but I do get it. I used to feel that way, but I’ve known too many women in my life who’ve experienced assaults in public places to pretend it’s not a real issue. I’ve been roofied in public myself (wrong target, presumably) and have the privilege of only really having to worry about some scrapes and bruises. But the holes in my memory and understanding that that night could have easily gone far, far worse if I had been someone’s target is something that will always stay with me.

If you develop a phobia of men that is so bad that it prevents you from interacting with men, then that is YOU problem and you need to work that out.

This is stupid bullshit. Nobody has suggested anything like this and bad faith nonsense wastes everyone’s time. Grow up. It’s obvious you’re taking this woman’s caution as some kind of personal slight. It’s not, and you should really examine where those feelings are coming from.

He shouldn’t, and the fact that that idea doesn’t even cross most men’s minds is an enormous privilege.

I don’t know about you, but I generally take a little time getting to know someone before I decide to trust them. Why on earth would you not?

What you don’t seem to consider is the risk involved. When the consequence of misplaced trust is potentially rape or death, a small amount of caution is plainly warranted.

Nobody is out here assuming all men are rapists, that question is as irrelevant as it is idiotic. The point is that any man could be a rapist, and those odds sure as hell aren’t small enough to just roll the dice on some rando you’ve never met.

It’s easier for us (I’m assuming you’re male too). I don’t really have to care. The worst consequence we can reasonably expect is what? A too attached girl who won’t leave you alone? When was the last time you went on a date with someone who could physically restrain you? It’s not the fucking same, no matter how much you want to pretend it is.

If you look for something on social media, you’ll find. Any fucking thing you want. That has nothing to do with reality.

Why should they trust some random dude they met on a dating app?

You act like that’s some crazy fear, but it happens all the fucking time.

If you’re that dismissive of other people’s concerns, maybe you shouldn’t be online dating at all.

Most women don’t make a habit of going out to bars alone, for good reason. It’s a very real risk.

As a guy who’s been roofied (presumably by accident, still don’t know what happened) I sure as hell don’t blame them.

What results? Being wealthy? Tons of people before him have accomplished the same thing. There’s always a wealthiest man on earth, Musk isn’t the first.

He hit a new high number for wealth, which is a normal expectation with continued economic growth and higher than expected inflation.

To me, results would be Telsa or X actually being profitable and having fundamentals that would support their wildly overvalued stock prices.

Buy or print a contour gauge: https://www.printables.com/model/57209-lockable-contour-gauge

Get the contour you need, trace it onto paper, then get whatever measurements you want, or take a pic and bring it into your modeling program.

It’s not exactly the same, but I would set it up so that once the players hit 100% doom, the final boss encounter happens. The big bad puts his final plans into motion, and the players have their one shot to stop it. Then the game is more about how much they can prepare, figure out, and break the BBEG’s plans before that final confrontation.

Also, I’d roll for how much doom accrues each session, potentially with a variable die depending on how much the players accomplished. That way it’s rolling dice and affected by the players actions, but ultimately you can still influence the the pace as you go.

That’s my point. There’s absolutely no winning for the Democrats here, no matter the outcome. They’ll be blamed for shutting down the government and all the subsequent shit Trump breaks in the aftermath, or they’ll be blamed for ‘giving in’ and letting Obamacare die.

Well it’s sure as shit not democratic politicians, so what exactly is your point here?

So what’s your point here exactly? Samsung is bad so it’s fine that their products explode? They have a shit reputation, so they should be exempt from basic safety regulations? It’s pointless to try holding companies accountable for bad designs?

You’re being an asshole and arguing against consumer protections. Why?

The problem is that the ‘blame’ is determined by the media. The Dems can blame Republicans all they want, but if the big media players frame it as their fault, all the idiots not paying attention will fall right in line.

Good to know there’s some context available if you want it. Thanks for taking the time to reply!

Is there though?

I know this sounds sarcastic, but I’m genuinely curious as I have never used TikTok at all. It there any way to verify the stuff that’s being shown? Do news accounts link to articles or any supporting information?

All I’ve ever really seen from people sharing stuff has been new typical meme stuff and AI generated crap that people keep sending me thinking it’s real.

How can you tell if what you’re seeing is real?

What came to mind when I read this is a question: how are we getting more efficiency out of eating plants than ruminants are, when they are animals that have expressly developed over eons to do so?

We aren’t, that’s just a general trend in biology. On average, consumers only receive about 10% of the energy that goes into growing the organism they eat. To be clear, I’m not saying the consumer is getting on 10% of the nutrition they eat, but that the amount of energy in the food when it’s eaten is only about 10% of the total energy that organism needed to grow.

You shouldn’t belittle people on the internet, especially since you don’t know me very well at all. But we are civil here, so I’m going to let that pass :)

That’s a fair call-out, I’ll do better.

Even considering usage of pesticides, chemicals, and the loss of topsoil and biodiversity? It is estimated that we only have 90 harvests or so remaining. What happens then?

All of these things are worse with farming animals. 60% of the cropland in the US goes to feeding cattle. Those cattle proved a tenth of the nutrition that that cropland could produce otherwise. Eliminating cattle farming would double our available cropland and make regenerative farming practices actually possible.

To be clear, I certainly don’t think cattle farming needs to be eliminated, it’s just not feasible to be such a massive part of our diet.