Yes but you still need to implement that change. You have to change millions of people's houses to switch their type of heating And replace cars, etc It will require huge changes for individuals, you can't just turn off the big oil companies as nice as it would be to have a simple fix

Only if the price is actually increasing. Otherwise you'd just sell cheap petrol and put them out of business

I believe the idea of a puberty blocker is to block puberty until 18 pretty much, or early 20s. Then as that person is an adult they can choose to transition, by going through hrt, which is more effective as they haven't experienced any puberty yet Or they can choose to stop taking the blockers and go through puberty as they would have before

No I saw. I'm just under the impression that it's a lower likelihood that women in the IDF are serving in direct combat roles. I mean maybe they are, maybe all of Hamas' hostages are highly trained combatants, although I doubt it

I think it's just the lower likelihood that they will end up as combatants. If you're in a military conflict you're generally more likely to hand over hostages that are less likely to come back and fight you

Ah yes the UN famous Western media outlet

LLMs don't "understand" anything. They're just very good at making it look like they sort of do

They also tend to have difficulty giving the answer "I don't know" and will confidently assert something completely incorrect

And this is not generation 0. The field of AI has been around for a long time. It's just now becoming widespread and used where the avg person can see it

So material waste can be directly tied to cost. If you're trying to bring down cost then you're going to try to reduce waste correct? That's why there is so much work being done for reusable launch vehicles

For space debris and pollution I don't think we can squarely blame capitalism. Under a purely communist economy there's no guarentee that anyone would care any more about it than currently And you can attack that issue by a combination of penalising companies that create debris and rewarding those that remove it under a capitalist economy

As for it not being entirely comparable. Sure the government spent a lot of money on that early R&D. But do we think that if we banned companies from doing this kind of work that govt agencies like NASA would be necessarily more cost effective, cause less pollution, and less debris?

The only thing I can think of is if a significant portion of people self diagnose as autistic and they really aren't. Say they're convinced by some silly stereotypes they've heard

That won't impact that person. But it could mean other people starting to take it much less seriously in others which may be harmful to them I don't pretend to know if that would happen. But just a thought

That might be the case right? Let's say there a percentage chance that would have succeeded call it 10%

Now your first attempt fails, maybe because of some miscalculation or lack of engineering precision

Even if the older way more expensive version had a 100% success rate you'd probably still rather the cheaper version right?

Also not sure how this is about capitalism, replace the above for material cost and it's the same thing

Not really no. It's not often that a stock is short sold really hard when there isn't an underlying reason Otherwise large investors could regognise this and just take a long position. The short seller is then screwed if the price doesn't drop far enough and fast enough before their options expire

You don't need to pay dividends to shareholders if it isn't in the companies best interest. I don't see how simply being publicly traded means you can't hold a cash reserve