kermitdekikker

If the US feels practices are unfair they can go to the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organisation, or they could do whatever this madness is

Again, the same argument can be made for the other side. Two things can be true at the same time; both Hamas and Israel do/did terrible things and its tiring that people defend one side no matter what.

Their [the Palestinans] story is they didn't have a choice once others violated it and they had to defend themselves, and they make a very strong case. Obviously you find Christian countries in general (and in number, they are the largest faction in the UN general assembly) ... extremely opposed to any enforcement, because they blatantly violated international law again and again and again.

*There are overwhelmingly more Christian-majority countries as compared to Muslim-majority countries. Also non of the Muslim counties have veto power. If you make an argument please base it on facts: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Coun...

The real question, of course, is WHAT TO DO once someone violates this principle. As the Israelis have done time and time again, and again, and again.

Amsterdam is not extremely big but almost 1 million people is not extremely tiny. And even then size little to do with these stats unless you are talking about places with less than a handful of supermarkets.

Flatness is nice (but weather is bad). However, the main thing is infrastructure and mixed zoning. When you build bike lanes, walkable streets and lots of shops, a livable city will follow, not the other way around. Build for the traffic you want rather than the traffic you have.

These stats on supermarkets will be similar in many European cities btw. Many cities in the US are also relatively flat, and you don't see the same thing generally.

Lucky for you there are 254 in a 3 km radius (~2 mile) for you

Indeed. Just to put a number on that, the average distance to a supermarket is 400 meter (~1300 feet) in Amsterdam.

Sometimes bias is important, especially when asking ambiguous questions. Are you asking for IQ scores by racial group regardless of their background or corrected for confounders?

The answers by chatGPT on IQ by race are factually correct by one reading. IQ is for "blacks" can be lower than for "whites" (last answer by chatGPT), but this does not mean that this is because of skin color or genetics. Instead, many studies have shown that when correcting for socio-economic factors (e.g., wealth, quality of education, lead in drinking water) there is no difference, which is what chatGPT hints at in the answers 4 and 5.

Similarly, by asking about the correlation between SAT scores and IQ you seem to hint at the fact that lower SAT scores mean a lower IQ. However, there is no perfect correlation and if you read up on meta-analyses you will find that the other explaining factors are related to socio-economic factors and not genetics.

Precisely because some people on purpose or not on purpose don't consider these confounders, it is best to consider confounders in replying to these questions