I don't care at all about DE, as long as it is not gnome. I run vanilla kde with minimal configuration. I tried many DEs through the years, tiling wm and so on. Now I just want something that works and that I don't worry about. But gnome, I don't get it. I did try it a couple years ago and my colleagues at work use it, it feels like it is hindering me. I don't like how the application switcher works, the software launcher and so on. When I use it it feels to me I'm fighting the UI in order to do very simple things.

I had to stop: it was becoming an expensive vice. In the end cocaine is much cheaper than eating high quality tomatoes every day.

If you have a healthy life style and eat well, it does not matter what you place into your salad. Not that I ever did put anything too caloric in a salad, I guess there was a period in which I added yogurt, but I wouldn't feel bad if I wanted something caloric in there. Hell, I'd like to be rich and afford various types of nuts to throw into a salad.

Friendly reminder that Parmesan generally refers to an American counterfeit product. Please refer to the cheese as Parmigiano.

I Say this because the US seems very proud of producing counterfeit products and wants to maintain a monopoly on such goods https://en.edairynews.com/us-blasts-eu-for-monopoly-on-south-america-dairy-meat/

I don't understand. I'm pretty sure raising a child depends on the choices of the parents. What do you mean, that in areas with higher population density it is easier to get fresh food? And that thus the parent's choices are not influential or only possible because of the environment? In my experience fresh food is more accessible in low population density areas, thus I don't really follow.

So what? Everyone who understands how things work knowns that dogs meow when placed inside black holes.

You can spend your entire life thinking about it and you Will never reach a definitive answer. Or, you can spend a day to set up an experiment and throw a party.

While I do agree in general, Open ai is not a public company. Valuation logics of private companies are quite different than stock market.

I guess if I were an artist I'd look at this and feel justified suing Spotify for 1 billion dollars for the lack of protection of my music.

Not only genius mathematicians, we have good examples of genius biologist with Kary Mullis. Though to be fair I'd much rather live in the same city of Kary Mullis, I'd probably enjoy a beer with the guy every once in a while.

Thank you for the resource. I'm unsure as to why my comment above was removed as I received no notification about it and nobody gave me an explanation. I'll start by saying that my field of research is quite different from social sciences and that I am absolutely not an expert regarding transgender people: I am not one and I only have few friends that are. I have not read the articles from the authors mentioned in this thread, I do not know whether their research is sound or not, @daannii above was saying their research is sound and I take it at face value; but the following stands even if that is not the case.

The review you linked does not appear to address these issues that are being discussed in here. They do find that gender transition tends to be positive and that in most cases people do not regret doing it.

4. Regrets following gender transition are extremely rare and have become even rarer as both surgical techniques and social support have improved. Pooling data from numerous studies demonstrates a regret rate ranging from .3 percent to 3.8 percent. Regrets are most likely to result from a lack of social support after transition or poor surgical outcomes using older techniques.

However this does not seem to address differences across demographics, such as could be transitioning when minor vs transitioning when adult. It would be interesting to know whether people who transition as child tend to have higher regret rates than adults.

We eliminated studies, for instance, that did not assess the outcomes of gender transition, that investigated minors instead of adults

In fact they specify in the methodology that they specifically did not address research involving minors and they excluded any paper that investigated minors.

Littmans research aims to discover which trans teens will continue being trans and which will flip back to their biological based gender.

This statement from above does make sense to me. I would not see one such research as damaging towards anyone. I don't see how that is bias. In the review you provided is stated that some people, a vast minority, do regret transitioning. I don't see how identifying those people before they do transition would be bad.

It’s not science. It’s bias, wearing a veneer of science

That could very much be, as I said I did not read the articles from the authors above. But the review you refer to does not disprove any of their findings. Moreover it is an article that I would never myself reference. I am from a different field of study and probably we do systematic reviews in a different way, but if I was one of the peer reviews I'd be asking a major revision. This is not a scientific publication: it is not reviewed by anyone for what I can tell. They do at the very least show the methodology on how they selected the papers, which is nice, but they do not explain at all how they analyzed and reviewed the papers. This would at most classify as a review article and not a systematic review in any authoritative journal. They have no quantitative analysis of the papers, besides number of papers with negative results and only give some qualitative analysis of the aggregate results without justifying how they got to such conclusions. I'm not saying the results are incorrect or that their research is wrong, but there is also no way to verify it is, since they do not provide that fundamental information which would be required in any peer review process. It is nevertheless a good read as a piece of diffusion, to inform people who are not actively working in the field.

Here’s what the science actually says

Given that, this statement feels a bit out of place.

I am unsure on what was your point. It is very possible that the authors of this survey are not doing a good survey or that they are manipulating results, but then you should point that out rather than another (bad) piece of research which does not address the main point of the conversation.

I mean, I used to hate Microsoft way more when I was using Windows. Now I mostly do not care. Except when I have to open office365, then yes, I really hate Microsoft.

I'd like to meet the person responsible of designing that webpage and present him some very sadic friend.