southeastern

I never did. Altho I was a Muslim kid growing up post 9/11 so I think that played into it

>considering natural levels of testosterone vary considerably between humans, couldn't it be considered fairer to allow steroid use provided total levels are below a particular level?

People have varying natural levels of testosterone. What might be low for some might be normal for others. Just making all the numbers match won't equalize the way everyone's unique bodies work

At that point you still have a natural production, it's just less than at your lifetime peak. You can still destabilize your hormone signaling further and get symptoms like hypogonadism and gynomastia-- to say there's nothing to lose isn't quite right.

Part of the reason they've gotten so much heat is because of cases of underage girls selling photos on that site for some time before they're caught. I don't know if they've found a solution to that problem or just come to some agreement with their payment processors

Sorry to hear that, hopefully this can be some consolation

>LB1's height is estimated to have been 1.06 m (3 ft 6 in). The height of a second skeleton, LB8, has been estimated at 1.09 m (3 ft 7 in) based on tibial length.[4] These estimates are outside the range of normal modern human height and considerably shorter than the average adult height of even the smallest modern humans, such as the Mbenga and Mbuti at 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis

They (maybe) really did exist (sort of)

Interesting. There are already a few studies about caffeine and the brain-- while drinking caffeine can decrease the chances of dementia, this effect reverses if you drink too much(over 6 cups day)

>In the CAIDE study, coffee drinking of 3-5 cups per day at midlife was associated with a decreased risk of dementia/AD by about 65% at late-life. In conclusion, coffee drinking may be associated with a decreased risk of dementia/AD. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20182054/

>Conducted at UniSA's Australian Centre for Precision Health at SAHMRI and a team of international researchers*, the study assessed the effects of coffee on the brain among 17,702 UK Biobank participants (aged 37-73), finding that those who drank more than six cups of coffee a day had a 53 per cent increased risk of dementia https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/527517

Death meditations are common in a lot of faiths. In Islam it's mentioned in hadith, Christianity has the practice of memento mori. And even in Time there was a tradition that during a Triumph, a large parade for a successful military commander and one of the greatest honors that could be bestowed on a person, a slave would be tasked to sit by the commanders ear during the celebration and whisper "remember you will die". I think it's naturally something a lot of people could gain from

>Micro plastics are a significant concern but their extreme surface area to volume ratio is associated with a short individual lifespan

Isn't the whole issue that they DON'T break down? Yes they can wear into smaller pieces of plastic, but chemically they're still plastic. And when they get to a certain size, they become small enough to easily absorb into the body.

There have been numerous cases of finding plastic waste in some fish, and because it doesn't decay organically it can form blockages in their digestive tracts. Whatever they're using in 300 years, they'll still be finding plastic in oceans and rivers(absent a massive clean up program)

Well, rather they shouldn't pick a profession dedicated to not doing that thing. Even if they were straight, I believe relationships wouldn't be allowed for them.

That could be a part of it, but there is a documented effect of marijuana "triggering" mental illness in those who are susceptible to mental illness. For a certain portion of the population marijuana use will directly lead to the onset of mental illness

DNP was banned after causing a lot of deaths. Still a fascinating drug, I don't remember exactly how it worked but it disrupted respiration so that less ATP was produced from electrons while their energy instead was 'spent' increasing heat

Plenty of parents push their kids, but due to luck or natural talent most won't make it. In a lot of ways this kid was just insanely lucky

Eh given it's a current issue there's no surprise that someone might connect the two. It's not gonna be productive of course, but at this point it's just about expected in a area with free speech

Not if the slot machine had an insurance company payout for them

Islam also doesn't treat bodies with preservative. Generally now people are buried at most in a wooden coffin. It's somewhat modern that we have coffins made of processed wood and are able to preserve dead people

I don't know about that, these lines of thinking seem dismissive. There are many valid lines of thought I've read right here on HN-- like one was if 75% of the 1800s generation were alive would society be as progressive and advanced as we are now, or would the elites like JP Morgan think we need to regulate the Internet for pushing unamerican ideals? I don't know how actually character, but many from that time weren't a fan of new political or social ideas.

But I can also think of a few others. Will my poor cousin India, me, and the millionaire rapper Lil Jon all have equal access, or will cost 50 million? Or, if giants like Rockafeller could continue to gain experience and acquire more money indefinitely would the economy be the same way it is today? Another thing to consider is; death can be an equalizing factor-- Steve Jobs died and now he's not part of the labor market. But if he were, he'd certainly get hired over any newcomers. Now multiply that times 1000 as more and more exceptional people become common. There will also come a point where the planet will be overpopulated and we have to choose who gets to live forever and who has to die. Ect, ect..

I think these ideas really need to be answered before people will be comfortable with the idea of a technology that allows some to live forever.

I believe the more relevant examples here are the issues facing many low to middle class Americans today. Non-elites are significantly less likely to afford homes, afford marriage at 25, and most importantly in the long run they less power to affect political change. If money is speech, then some people have a lot more capability than others simply based on their bank accounts.

>people will directly care about the future of the planet/environment/global warming

I don't think that's a given. Many people flat out don't believe in human-caused global warming, at least in America. A lot of people would also interpret it as an act of God-- perhaps judgement day coming- over the scientific consensus. Of course some people also hate to take responsibility, and we all know at least one person who avoids taking responsibility of their own life to the point of ruin.

I don't think society as a whole thinks as similarly as many assume they would. I also don't think humans are as rational with their decision making as we think. Once people acquire habits and addictions, they themselves have a hard time leaving them. I don't believe humans were designed to live forever,and all too common selfishness and ignorance proves that

During the civil rights era, there were people that said "yeah I don't like racism but it's people choice to ban blacks from their businesses. I totally empathize with you it's awful, but over turning freedom would be more awful"

I agree. I think one way to demonstrate that is to consider a particularly contentious debate. Say, the Palestine-Israel conflict. If you're on the side of Palestine, agreeing with Israel only leads to more death and hate. If you're on the side of Israel, agreeing with Palestine only leads to more death and hate. The center doesn't know what to think-- it's complicated but it definitely needs to end. So the centrist point is almost pointless. If your on either end, then they are simply protecting injustice. Same thing with people who were lukewarm about civil rights. The ones who said "yeah blacks should get rights but there are a lot of people against it that deserve a say" we now look at as wrong. In a task life scenario, necessity sometimes demands a choice be made

What's that phrase? 'Capitalism will sell the rope used to hang itself'..? It's kinda like that IMO. If the country has a big enough economy they can indeed break the rules and even the most principled people will shrug and say there's nothing we can do. In practice these principles are a lot more pliable than people make it seem

I don't think it's the ui that bothers people, it's the accusations of workers rights issues

Is it though? Do these companies regularly pay out thousands because they're fools? Most business decisions are made with some return in mind; they must feel in the grand scheme it's worth it-- that they'll make more back. I think it's more foolish to dismiss the very real possibility of bias if she holds this meeting, solely on the basis of 'she makes so much money why would she even care about 700k?'

The much more obvious and likely reason is it's because she was fearing rape and possibly murder just a few weeks ago, when the Capitol was stormed. As it was later revealed, there were people targeting AOC and Pelosi specifically. And those extremists are constantly egged on by Cruz and his ilk. Blaming this on cancel culture is just.. Odd

This is a simple yet brilliant idea. Now for an analog version...

I don't know where you got this-- I saw a lot of people who were investing not even for a profit but simply 'to be a part of a movement'. Yes I'm sure there are plenty of naive fools in the mix, it still is the stock market after all. But the complaint here isn't that a bunch of misinformed people thought they'd be millionaires-- it's that a bunch of people made a conscious decision to invest and now brokerages are manipulating the markets. Ironically some of them justify it as being BECAUSE 'retail investors don't know what they're doing'. There's a lot of condescension towards retail traders, which is weird when 12 years ago the 'smart' institutional investors and hedge funds managed to crash the global economy. Looking at the whole picture, I don't see why it's so ridiculous that people get a piece of the action when the majority are acknowledging they might not make any money at all on this

>Difference is, I didn't run to Reddit to display my ignorance to the world.

Erm isn't the point of communities like Reddit to discuss? The implication that there's a certain class of people who are suited to stocks and a certain class that isn't is exactly why people are so impassioned about this right now.

Censoring speech and regulating stock trading are categorically different. This doesn't cut across political lines as much as it does lines of class

>though it's just as likely as anyone calling anyone.

That's a stretch. I think the point here is that some parties can save billions of dollars in losses, and makes them a little more likely hypothetically. Im all for dealing with the facts, but the facts are just looking at the '08 crisis a lot of Wall st funds have a track record of bending rules for profit. It's not out of this world to imagine 12 years later that the same culture exists