deur

Nope, can't see it at all.

Ok, still wrong

You can also just mark a guideline using a rope tied to a pole and then drive the line painters per the guidelines.

Perhaps, some day, you will actually go figure out what Eugenics is and prevent yourself from posting stupid comments like this :)

This is just a more complex version of shared dictionary compression which I think one of the web compression algorithms does. Stupid LLM fuckers at it again with dumb garbage.

Awww you're too afraid to actually be consistent with your point in the presence of a percieved mistake from someone else.

It should be mentioned that nobody is allowed to decide to have the opinion that "since medication x is removed, we should advocate for the removal of more popular medication y"

So remember, you fight for both medications as an individual. This article only points out that it makes no sense to attempt to justify excluding care for transgender people. Don't make it about excluding care from your "enemy" or "other" in retaliation if you can help it.

Probably depends on the kid. In the right house with the right mindset I bet parents could use first names. Otherwise it will probably be a special word to all of them, maybe something the kid calls them one day that sticks.

Maybe the parents will look to the internet or peers for answers and get stuff like "guardian" "my other parent" etc but ultimately the real question you should ask is how a child addresses their two same-gendered parents, maybe there's something to contexutalize there.

English is not "constructed" nor does its development to the point reflect high levels of intent like someone sitting down and deciding they decide what the best language is.

You will be writing JavaScript. You will not be avoiding JavaScript. WASM is still glued to the DOM with JavaScript, if you are lucky and your idea isn't that novel you won't need to write any JavaScript, I guess.

If you suppose a multiple choice test MUST ONLY have one correct answer:

1. Eliminate duplicate 25% answers

2. You are left with 60% and 50% as potential answers to this question.

3. C is the answer

If you were to actually select an answer at random to this question while believing the above, you would have a 50% chance of answering 25%.

It is obvious to postulate that: for all multiple choice questions with no duplicate answers, there is a 25% chance of selecting the correct answer.

However as you can see, in order to integrate the answer being C with the question itself, we have to destroy the constraints of the solution and treat the duplicate 25% answers as one sum correct answer.

Do you choose to see the multiple choice answer space as an expression of the infinite space of potential free form answers? Was the answer to the question itself an expression of multiple choice probability or was it the answer from the free form answer space condensed into the multiple choice answer space?

The question demonstrates arriving at different answers between inductive and deductive reasoning. The answer depends on whether we are taking the answers and working backwards or taking the question and working forwards. The question itself forces the inductive reasoning strategy to falter at the duplicate answers, leading to deductive reasoning being the remaining strategy. Some may choose to say "there is no answer" in the presence of needing to answer a question that only has an answer because we are forced to pick one option, and otherwise would be invalid. Some may choose to point out it is obviously a paradox.