Leaderboard

Uhhh, it only mentions one aspect that could be a liberal policy and that would be I mean, if trying to get folks equal rights results in autocracies, I would imagine that the democratic principles ain't that strong to begin with. Also I find it very interesting how that is phrased. Right-wing conservatives have worked very had to undermine democratic principles ranging from spreading blatant misinformation to incite culture and race wars, forming think tanks and societies that undermine checks and balances and putting anti-democratic forces into key positions, sowing mistrust into systems and also attempting the odd coups. And yet it is somehow liberal policies that caused all that? I mean come on, at least try to find Ockham's razor here. I will also note again that part of the autocratic playbook is to blame others for their actions. "Look what [they] make me do? Because of them I just had to overthrow democratic principles and build concentration camps. And taking away your rights is the only way to protect you from [them]." This has been best explored in fascism, where fascination with victimhood served as justification for the committed atrocities (and it is a common element in the identification of the rather diffuse characteristics of fascism). Also, how about I cite a few points from the book you mentioned and see if you can spot some overlap (BTW the book was published sometime around the first Trump administration): Why do we have something as stupid as the culture wars? Because some kind of enemy had to be found. And in recent times our lives have to be become so comfortable that folks decided to make up enemies and/or revive old tropes, such as immigrants. Again, there are no new ideas here.

There were a couple of thoughts behind my post. “The Coming Storm” was a popular catch phrase of the QAnon conspiracy theorists in USA, as documented in a book by British journalist Gabriel Gatehouse who was the former International Editor of the BBC Newsnight program. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/453235/the-coming-storm-by-gatehouse-gabriel/9781785948152 But I was also thinking of another quotation attributed to the philosopher and cultural critic Walter Benjamin (1892-1940) who wrote ”This storm is what we call progress” when discussing Paul Klee’s ‘Angelus Novus’ (1920) - a haunting painting which Walter Benjamin owned - in his final essay “On the Concept of History” (1940) shortly before he committed suicide when facing capture by the Nazis. https://hyperallergic.com/829171/whats-behind-the-angel-of-history-annie-bourneuf-paul-klee-angelus-novus/ The phrase seemed to capture the nihilism of the current right-wing extremism at work in US politics, which having spent years decrying ‘The Deep State’ now seems determined to instantiate the profoundly undemocratic despotism it once pretended to denounce.

Yes indeed, my pleasure! Your remarks about childhood ideas about God and Pavlov's dogs are uncalled for. (I can't speak for other contributors but I happen to be a practising Catholic.😊) What I and others have been objecting to is that @Luc Turpin has been firstly misrepresenting abiogenesis research and secondly using that misrepresentation as an excuse to introduce very ill-defined concepts, without any indication of how they could be relevant to scientific study of abiogenesis. In one of my posts on this thread I took the trouble to say I see value in considering aspects of human experience beyond the physical world. What I object to - in line with Cardinal Newman's sound advice from over a century ago - is the attempt to look to things in nature that science currently can't explain as evidence that only something beyond science can explain it. That is bad logic, because science progresses. Furthermore, it is utterly pointless to witter on about "the holographic principle" and suggesting "complexity emerges from information encoded in the universe" without explaining WTF that means, what evidence for it might look like and how it could actually be applied in abiogenesis research. Science works by clarifying - demystifying - what seems to be going on in natural processes. Trying to get all mystical, woolly and vague in a discussion about abiogenesis is the polar opposite of a scientific approach.

TIL how to "chain" animations together in Blender. Just to explain bit:. When you animate, there are times when certain actions, ( like walking) is a simple repetition of the same motions. And rather than have to manually assign these motions over and over again, Blender allow you to automatically cycle them. So once you've animated a particular set of motions, you can have Blender just repeat them over and over again. So example, left foot forward, then right foot forward, left foot forward... The problem is that unless you tell Blender to stop, your character will just keep walking forward forever. And if you do put a limit on how many times to cycle the animation, After it hits the limit, everything jumps back to the beginning. What if you want the character to stop walking across the floor and begin to climb some stairs? You just can't add a new set of motions, as Blender treats them as part of the original cycle. (instead of walk forward 10 steps, then start the stair climbing cycle, you get: Take two steps forward, then climb two steps, take two steps forward... ) This bothered me for quite a while. There are way to get around this but they can be tedious, And I knew there should be an easier way. Today I found it, and its been there all along. It turns out that there is a editor you can open that will turn any animation sequence into an "Action". So you can take your "walk 10 steps forward" and convert it to an action in this editor. Then, when you go back to the animation editor, you are back to a "clean slate". While all your objects are still there, all the motions you gave them are gone, and they are where they would be at the end of the the action. In other words, if you had your character walk forward 10 steps, it will be where it would have ended up after doing so. You can now assign it an animation set (climbing steps, for example) using the same cycling trick as before. This can then be converted into an action and appended to the end of the previous action. Repeat as needed. Here is a simple example: The first action is a descending stairs animation cycled until it reached the floor, then an action to bring the trailing leg to floor level, then a repeated forward walking forward cycle action, an action to lift one leg onto the first step, and lastly a repeated stair climbing cycle. It may not look like much, but learning how to do this opened up a whole new world of animation possibilities for me. (BTW, the color pattern on the floor is due to optimizing the animation file to make it as small as possible.)

In the course of the Enlightenment, the world was increasingly better understood and God was increasingly pushed back as an explanation. At first he was said to be responsible for the weather, today we know better. He was said to be responsible for health but also illness, today we know better. He was said to be responsible for natural disasters, today we know better. He was said to be responsible for the creation of the earth, today we know better. The more we discovered and the more we learned, the more God became superfluous and we began to understand that the universe functions without him. Therefore, modern theologians no longer try to use God as a hypothesis for scientific phenomena such as the phenomenon of the origin of life that you described. Instead of having God carry out scientific tasks that are not necessary from a theological point of view anyway, modern theology is more concerned with the philosophy of religion. What place it can have in our everyday lives, which questions religion can answer and which it cannot. There are less serious religious movements such as creationism, which still tries to make God do unnecessary scientific work, but most serious theologians no longer want to push God into the gaps in science. This came to an end in the 19th century. One should therefore be very cautious with religious movements that want to connect God with science. Here the focus is often more on making money than on an intellectually productive communication of faith.

The Einstein tensor describes a certain aspect of overall spacetime curvature, in the sense that it determines the values of a certain combination of components of the Riemann tensor (it fixes 10 out of its 20 independent components). But unlike the Riemann tensor, it is not a complete description of the geometry of spacetime. Thus, the Einstein equations provide only a local constraint on the metric, but don’t determine it uniquely. Physically speaking, mass and energy have of course a gravitational effect, but neither appear as quantities in the source term of the field equations - there’s only the energy-momentum tensor field \(T_{\mu \nu}\). Here’s the thing with this - the Einstein equations are a purely local statement. So for example, if you wish to know the geometry of spacetime in vacuum outside some central body, the equation you are in fact solving is the vacuum equation \[G_{\mu \nu}=0\] which implies \[R_{\mu \nu}=0\] There is in the first instance no reference here to any source term, not even the energy-momentum tensor, because you are locally in a vacuum. During the process of solving these equations, you have to impose boundary conditions, one of which will be that sufficiently far from the central body the gravitational field asymptotically becomes Newtonian; it’s only through that boundary condition that mass makes an appearance at all. Only in the interior of your central body do you solve the full equations \[G_{\mu \nu}=\kappa T_{\mu \nu}\] wherein the energy-momentum tensor describes the overall distribution of energy density, momentum density, stresses, strains, and shear (note that “mass” is again not part of this). By solving this equation along with boundary conditions you can find the metric. You can work this backwards - you can start with a metric, and calculate the energy-momentum tensor. But here’s the thing: if the tensor comes out as zero, this does not mean that there’s no mass or energy somewhere around, it means only that the metric you started with describes a vacuum spacetime. If it’s not zero, you’re also out of luck, because the energy-momentum tensor alone is not a unique description of a classical system. Knowing its components tells you nothing about what physical form this system actually takes - two physically different systems in terms of internal structure, time evolution etc can in fact have the same energy-momentum tensor. That’s because this tensor is the conserved Noether current associated with time-translation invariance, so what it reflects are a system’s symmetries, but not necessarily or uniquely its physical structure. There’s no unique 1-to-1 correspondence between this tensor and a particular configuration of matter and energy, since all it contains are density distributions. IOW, a given matter-energy configuration will have a unique energy-momentum tensor associated with it, but the reverse is not true - any given energy-momentum tensor can correspond to more than one possible matter-energy configuration. Thus it is not useful to try and define matter-energy by starting with spacetime geometry. Yes, they are of course closely related, but the relationship is not just a trivial equality; there’s many subtleties to consider. A zero cosmological constant does not imply a static universe, only that expansion happens at a constant rate. Matter and antimatter have the same gravitational affects, they are not opposite in terms of curvature.

Today I visited the minerals gallery at the London Natural History Museum. I was struck by the intense blue colour of the specimens of lapis lazuli, which was very valuable, both as a pigment and for decorative objects, in the Ancient and Medieval worlds. I recall the Arabic word for the colour blue is azraq (m) or zarqa (f.), from which we get "azure", so presumably lazuli comes from the same root. (Lapis is just Latin for stone, obvs.) I had assumed the colour would be due to copper and was a bit shocked to find the formula is: Na₇Ca(Al₆Si₆O₂₄)(SO₄)(S₃).H₂O , i.e no Cu in sight! Turns out the clue is in the S₃. This is present in the form of the trisulphide radical anion, S₃⁻•, a curious species that breaks the school-level rules for stability and bonding - and so is automatically interesting to me. This radical anion apparently has an absorption band in the orange region of the visible spectrum, and thus reflects mainly blue light. I haven't managed to find a molecular orbital diagram for it on the internet but presume the odd electron may be in a relatively high energy orbital, from which it can be promoted to another one that is only slightly higher, i.e. with relatively little energy and this will be why it absorbs in the visible rather than the UV. S₃ itself is regarded as having a similar bonding scheme to ozone, i.e. the centre atom sp2 hybridised with one lone pair, but I presume the extra odd electron must go into either an sp2 hybrid antibonding orbital or else something involving participation by d orbitals, which obviously is possible in sulphur, unlike oxygen. I suppose one should expect this ion to be paramagnetic. From what I have found on the internet this radical anion has some applications in synthesis of organosulphur compounds. There seems to be a guy called Tristram Chivers at Calgary (now retired and emeritus) who has done a lot of work on it. If anyone knows more about this anion I'd be interested to learn more about it, especially the bonding and electronic structure.

What's the difference between Elon Musk and a lemur? Elon made an electric car. The lemur Madagascar. (sorry) But not sorry enough to stop from trying another one: Why does Musk want to make Europe great again? Because he's a MEGA lomaniac.

The Pope is discussing the Christian belief of God with a non-believer. After several hours of the Pope trying to convince the non-believer of God's existence, the exasperated Pope tells the non-believer "I give up. You are like a blindfolded man, in a dark room, searching for a black cat, that isn't there. How can I make you see ?" The non-believer respectfully replies "We are very much alike, your excellency. You are also like a blindfolded man, in a dark room, searching for a black cat, that isn't there. The only difference is you've found it."

Trump's negotiation Team: Hegseth:"So we'll agree to keep Ukraine out of Nato...if Putin agrees to keep all the land he stole..."

You didn’t supply any scientific, clinical , or other medical evidence to support your own characterisation of ketamine as a “very helpful and viable treatment option for many millions of people”. Absent that, I would refer you to: https://www.oxfordhealth.nhs.uk/ips/ketamine-trd/risks-benefits/ Right up front this document says: It concludes: Under the sub-tab ‘Less Common side-effects' it lists: vivid dreams, hallucinations , and also adds this warning: Under 'Long Term Theoretical Risks' this paper lists: dependence, tolerance, bladder damage, cognitive impairment and personality change - all with reference to recreational nasal doses of over 1g daily. Given these caveats I don’t think I’m being remotely flippant or dismissive about the risks of self-medicating with ketamine - especially in the case of an absurdly wealthy and over-powerful oligarch like Elon Musk who has openly admitted that he is microdosing with ketamine to treat a significant personality disorder.

Exactly, we have historic precedence and much of it is appealing to base human nature. If folks are afraid and feel that they are victims of something, you can make them to do virtually anything. Up and an including genocide. There are many, many books on fascism and other authoritarian systems and one can use those as a framework to describe the current situations. It is certainly not new. The only thing that really changes is the various mechanisms (e.g., social media). But the dismantling of protective (democratic) structures is very similar- erosion of power separation (Gleichschaltung) control of public narratives and so on. The issue is mixing up terminologies and methodologies from other areas really just obfuscate matters. And where things go is fairly simple, either the structures hold up and resist further erosion, or it doesn't. We have seen that cruelty is really only relevant to a minority of Americans at this point (and to be fair, same can be said in Europe, potentially Canada, too). So rather than thinking we are in unprecedented territory with only guesswork available to us, I would argue that we are stepping in very precedented territory and can draw hypotheses from there.

I hereby propose Gulf of Chicxulub. In memory of the most significant event that took place thereabouts. We primates owe a great deal to cosmic happenstance. Much more than to presidents --either lippy or sleepy.

The suggestion of good faith feels misplaced.

Making assumptions about why someone uses the DV is prone to error. I mean, how do you know what someone is thinking when they push that button? Some surly rabbit may have objected to Peterkin's very first sentence where he told LuckyR without any qualification whatsoever that they were wrong about what they liked. It turns out that something tasting good is not an individual preference but a universal constant. LuckyR has just learned his whole life was a fraud because while he THOUGHT meat tasted good, Peterkin just informed him that in reality, meat does NOT taste good. How is LuckyR to deal with that? He's going to have to reexamine all his likes and dislikes. Does he actually hate ice cream? Was kale really a tasty snack all along? And what about the rest of us? Was I mistaken when I thought smoked chicken wings were a gift from god? Did I waste my money when on my wedding anniversary I ordered a filet mignon? Oh, the humanity...

Perhaps some musician could slip a nasty note into a record sleeve? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_Stalin On the night of 1 March 1953, Joseph Stalin calls the Radio Moscow director to demand a recording of the just-concluded live recital of Mozart's Piano Concerto No. 23. The performance was not recorded; not wanting to anger Stalin, the director hurriedly refills the now-half-empty auditorium, fetches a new conductor to replace the original one, who has passed out, and orders the orchestra to play again. Pianist Maria Yudina initially refuses to perform for the cruel dictator, but ultimately is bribed to comply... ...When the concert recording arrives, Stalin finds a note Maria slipped in the record sleeve, admonishing Stalin and expressing hope for his death. He reads it, laughs, and suffers a cerebral haemorrhage. Despite hearing him fall, Stalin's guards, fearful of being punished for disturbing him, do not enter his office.

I do love the sort of mental tickle it brings when arrogant condescending (that means talking down to people, btw) asshats so brazenly and proudly reveal their ignorance for all to see. It’s not short for anything. It’s the 21st letter of the Greek alphabet used in numerous ways across mathematics and science. I’m sorry about your cancer fight. It’s a damned shame it’s not made you any more tolerable nor any less insufferable.

This is Caine's account of it: And this is Sellers' account:

I think he just had a thing against birds.

Well, the scale is just crazy. Somewhere (if anyone asks for citation, I will do my best) I've seen estimates that if we humans were to live as hunter-gatherers, the carrying capacity of the planet would be somewhere between 200-500 million - at most 1/16 of today's population. And pre-industrial revolution, the population stayed under 1 billion, which is probably a reasonable guess at a ceiling on low tech agri, with animal-powered cultivation. A regression to anything like that now would likely be even fewer people, given the prevalence of depleted soil, fisheries, aquifers, etc. Politically, culturally....yeah, I have no idea if any current society is really going to exert maximum consumer force on agribusiness to do humane and sustainable meat production. Right now, it's just a niche, among many. Probably won't change until there's a crisis, or society evolves towards some kind of post-capitalism, post-oligarchy. Or there's massive eco catastrophe, wiping out 9/10 of the population. That tends to get attention towards sustainability issues. If they don't eat all the historians before they can remind people how they got into that reduced condition.

There are no superluminal jets. The effect in question was simple motion more or less towards Earth, and it only requires a velocity in our direction of > 0.5c. So let's say a space ship begins a journey to Earth from a point 3 LY away, at a constant speed of 0.6c. At time 0 (years), it departs, to arrive at time 5, but we don't see that departure for 3 years since it takes 3 years for light to get to us from that far away. So at time 3 we observe the departure from 3 LY away and at time 5 it gets here. So to us it looks like the ship took only two years to go 3 LY, superluminal, right? No, since time for light travel was not taken into account in that calculation. Ditto for the jets, which only appear fast due to this sort of Doppler compression.

Just like that, eh? 😀 Aside from the sheer impracticability of anything so complex, one basic difficulty is that Si is less good at catenation, i.e. forming long chains. Wiki has a nice discussion of catenation here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catenation. You will see that although Si can be made to form chains, these tend to be unstable relative to other compounds at higher number of catenated atoms. The valence p orbitals of Si will be more diffuse than those of C because of the higher principal quantum number. This not only makes the Si-Si σ-bond weaker than the C-C bond, but will be especially an issue when it comes to forming π-bonds. So, for instance, any protein-like molecule made from Si in place of C would almost certainly be less stable, not more, than the C-based original. Carbon really does seem uniquely suitable for developing a viable biochemistry.

Abiogenesis involves the search for a 'scientific' explanation for how life may have begun. If you 'challenge' it, you are suggesting an explanation other than one that is 'scientific'. If the mechanism is not natural, supernatural seems to be the only alternative. That is why you are getting so much pushback, despite your claims you are not suggesting some supernatural mechanism.

I'm a pure hobbyist, so just do it for fun. I mostly stumble around trying to figure things out for myself. Of course, this often leads to my doing things the hard way, simply because I don't realize that there is a simpler, quicker method. Kudos to your son, I don't think I would ever try to take on a project that big. About the longest thing I've attempted was this recreation of a sequence from a "Lost in Space" episode, and most of the work involved was with the models, since the animation was pretty straight forward.

JohnDBarrow has been asked to leave for consistent use of bad faith arguments.

Space alien turns up in the US and says "please don't take me to your leader".

If an extraterrestrial spacefaring civilisation actually exists, and decides to visit earth over the next four years, I hope they won’t choose to land on US territory, because Trump is going to deport them as illegal aliens… I’ll see myself out.

How long until his leavings are sold or auctioned to doting fans? A new currency called $hitcoin

That could be an important job if the rumours about TFG's lack of bowel control have any substance. Perhaps @JohnDBarrow can tell us more?

Not taking that bait, chum.

i learned from the newest member of the Vat household that five week old kittens will eat unscented cat litter, even when high quality food is available. (the mom cat's human had a baby last night and, due to circumstances, the adoption we were going to do at 7-8 weeks was moved up; fortunately the weaning process was well underway, so the litter snack didn't displace dinner too much)

Andrew Coyne a columnist for leading Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail had this to say on the eve of Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration - (quoted in full because of a paywall): https://www.theglobeandmail.com/.../article-trumps.../

A list of my fav time travel shows and the premise of the shows time traveling. Outlander - Straight up magic, no technology, and the protagonists alternate between trying to change history and trying to lie low. Timeless- Straight up technology with the intent to change or repair the past time line. Travelers- Technology with the intent of changing the past through major acts of intervention Terra Nova- Technology with the intent of escaping the present by moving to the extreme past. Primeval- Natural occurrences used to time travel and trying to prevent changes to the past and present. Feel free to list your own favs in the poll and I'd like to discuss the differences in the premises of he shows and how well they do in consistency even if the premise is fatally flawed. I'll start out with my fav time travel show which is Travelers, the show is reasonably internally consistent, the main premise is that no material objects can be sent through time only information. Nothing can be sent through time without a T.E.L.L. Time Elevation Longitude and Latitude of the person it is sent to. The main reason I liked the show was... I hate to ruin the show for anyone but while the time travel is portrayed as almost omnipotent technology ultimately they fail to make a difference in the future. The idea they fail is what ultimately makes the show so powerful. Anyone else want to step up and explain their fav time travel show feel free to do so!

Why does that matter? It’s not the matter under discussion. The point is that you don’t have to be judged by a supreme being. If you ask about my criteria, do you question yours? There are other religions out there, with other gods. Did you shop around? Are you like so many religious folks, who pick and choose what parts of their religion to follow (e.g. a-la-carte Christians) and somehow justify ignoring other parts of religious doctrine? But you are acting like a troll. Sealioning. Textbook example. And here we are discussing belief in gods. How do you tell if you have uncovered reality? Is there a way to test it? If science is trying to understand reality, why are there so many parts of physics just mathematical constructs, that are identified as not being real?

The “topic” is seeing how long he can keep people engaging, how long before he can make them emotional and lash out, and how long it takes staff to shutoff his account

But they are not on their own, right? They are part of a larger structure? And the larger structure is alive? And the structure will not be alive without those molecules? Sure we have. We eat the apple, the apple is digested, the molecules are used to build proteins, the proteins are incorporated into the body, the body is alive. In a similar way we have discovered how molecules transform into a building. The ore is mined, the iron is smelt, the girder is manufactured, the girder is installed in the building.

For too long, many of these issues have been pushed on us as political, where a vote can decide, but whether you respect someone as a human enough to use non-hurtful terms is a moral issue. Persecuting fellow humans for the color of their skin or who they love or how much money they have isn't a right vs left, liberal vs conservative decision, it's a right vs wrong matter.

Eh? That is what I wrote:”NaCl is progressively converted to NaOH”.

Regarding a "king", it seems to me the majority of US voters are yearning for someone to rule like a king: capriciously, without regard for the other institutions of the state: an absolute monarch. Certainly it seems to me that the USA in 2025 is a lot closer to an absolute monarchy than, say, the UK, Denmark or Spain. I gather from my son this happened in the Roman Empire, when Julius Caesar was adopted as dictator, after the people got tired of the arguments and political gridlock in the Senate. What is for sure is that American political culture and traditions are being destroyed - by the impending new administration of oligarchs.

If you consider it “fun” to mock minorities within your society and events in history that caused a lot of suffering, then you are clearly lacking an appropriate moral compass. The point of this whole movement is fundamentally to raise awareness of those social dynamics that perpetuate suffering and inequality, thereby hopefully working towards a more fair, just and equitable society. This is an important and necessary self-correcting function within all civilised and developed communities, and the sad part is that this needed to take on the form of an “-ism” at all in the US. Any society that does not have this function will over time fracture, divide, degrade, and arguably fail as a last consequence. Unfortunately all “-isms” have the potential to also be misused and/or pushed too far on occasion, so it isn’t ideal that it had to take this form; but honestly, I think you’ve got only yourselves to blame for that. Just my own personal opinion as an uninvolved outside observer.

But this is entirely irrelevant to Dark Matter. The mathematical relationship we are talking about here (Tully-Fisher relation and Faber-Jackson relation) are statistical statements; they relate the average rotational velocity of a large collection of stars in a galaxy to their total combined mass. Notions of simultaneity for an arbitrary observer as to the position of a single star at any given time never come into this at all, so this entire discussion is pretty much mood. The other thing of course is that DM is needed for a lot more than just galaxies’ rotation curves; you cannot just ignore all the other evidence we have for its existence when discussing this subject.

This was conservative writer Bethany Mandel who had just published a new book on the subject, attempting to explain what ‘woke’ means to interviewer Briahna Joy Gray on 14 March 2023. Her new book was called "Stolen Youth: How Radicals are Erasing Innocence and Indoctrinating a Generation". https://www.youtube.com/shorts/W7iWEEcPKoQ

Of course there are. You have size of the context window and how many tokens are allowed. You have how many billions of parameters the model was trained on. You have metrics on different efficacies of training type like RAG or RLHF. There’s lag between query and response and how many hundreds of milliseconds it takes to receive audio responses to voice prompts, or how many modes can used to engage it. On top of that, most releases have a model card which lays out how the system was setup and what to expect in the results. There’s human rankings based on how capable the model is, and ranks that are calculated based on tests designed for PhDs or mathematicians. You can determine how good it is as writing and repairing its own code. https://huggingface.co/learn/nlp-course/chapter4/4 Details matter here, but assume fancy Google for now with most goods available today to consumers

Solved. The leak found and fixed. Thank you to all for participation. If you wonder how I have found the leak, the hint is here:

Hydrogen should still be liberated at the cathode, though.

Well yeah, but that's super concentrated brine. Ordinary seawater would still mostly liberate oxygen, with only a small percent staying in solution as NaOH. Oceans are what, 3 pct solution?

The heritage you're talking about is pretty sick and twisted. America, home of the free and brave, give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free, all people are created equal, and all of it meaningless to hypocrites like you. You don't care that many of the words you use on people who don't look like you are hurtful and disparaging. You just want your childhood back, when people didn't complain about your racism and inhumanity. It's a shame you've rejected humankind. What we have today is a whole lot of people who don't want to be hypocrites like you anymore. We want the USA to actually be the home of the free, free from white nationalists and religious zealotry, a place where everyone can pursue dreams (unless they're dreams like yours, where you dream of using hurtful words and phrases on whomever you like). The only thing we can't tolerate is your lack of tolerance. You diminish our society with your pursuit of criticism and mediocrity. Wake up and smell the diversity. You should watch some David Attenborough docs. He'll convince you that diversity is the key to the survival of life on this planet.