Mohamed

joined 4 years ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

It is accessible, but it is made for people with accessibility issues?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I assume the Saudi plant will be staffed with grossly underpaid labourers.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hindutva... is that India's Modi's brand?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

Oooh coffee!!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think this misrepresents the conversation that actually happened. Paraphrasing, it was something like this:

R: The constitution says you cannot deport people without due process. Do you agree? Trump: No, I'm not sure... R: It says so in the Fifth. Trump: I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. R: Do you agree that you have to follow the constitution? Trump: I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Due process for millions of people does not sound possible.

While it could be taken from that convo that Trump did say he doesn't know if he should follow the constitution, I think that it is clear that he was probably saying something like "I don't know where the Constitution stands on due process."

I'll say though, it is crazy for him to say he doesn't know what the Constitution says. I know he probably does that for legal reasons. Anyway, for a president who swore to follow the constitution seemingly not knowing anything about the constitution is preposterous, to say the least.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

I think it's more that placebo studies of vaccines could be unethical. Vaccines are preventative treatment. A placebo study would mean that, say, we give the vaccine to 50, and a placebo to 50, and then wait some time (or, for much more unethical, deliberately inject people with the virus), and compare the results.

For something like the common flu, this might be fine, but for something as dangerous as measles, this can be deadly.

I am interested to hear from someone knowlesgeable how vaccines are supposed to be tested.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Or what "most popular" means

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

The extremism is from one side, but there is a risk that, to protect against that extremism, a polar opposite comes (Liberals most probably). Also, maybe im misunserstanding the word "polarisation", but i understand it to mean "two polar opposites", neither of which is necessarily extremist. For instance, I would argue that the US is polarised, but only the Republicans are the extremists, while Democrats are a defensive response to the Republicans.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Omg thats hilarious.

"“We should have expected something like this,” said one Trump ally who would only speak off the record as she’s currently the premier of a western Canadian province."

Hahaha

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Yep, it was really perfect for the liberals. I wonder if choosing Carney was a calculated choice to benefit from the turmoil in the US, or if it is just ridiculously good luck.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yes, they are. There is also an instinct giant awawa.

view more: ‹ prev next ›