It’s not meant to be a stereotype applied to all men, just the a thing that some men do. It happens when a man assumes, perhaps subconsciously, that the woman he is speaking to is his intellectual inferior and would surely benefit from his opinion on whatever topic without any regard to her possible expertise on the topic, or even his own lack thereof. I’ve rarely witnessed it myself, but know women who have had to put up with it. Stereotypeing all men as “manslainers” would be rude, but mocking the men who actually behave that way is cool with me.

Oh yeah, rub my face in those gorgeous technicalities. You want to mock my logical fallacy? Do it. Point out my fallacy and laugh; I can take it.

They are paid both taxpayer and private money to put things, including people now, safely into orbit. A thing they do frequently and reliably, without any explosions. Yes, their dramatically destructive development method of launching unproven prototypes and pushing them to the limit does seem wasteful, but it actually has allowed their engineers to very effectively identify the weak points in their systems and remove or compensate for them, resulting in designs that are redundant only where needed, but still reliable. Despite a lot of competition from international and the older American aerospace companies, they remain one of the most cost effective and reliable options for space launches in the game.

Now, I’m all for some Musk mocking these days after how much of a jackass he’s revealed himself to be, and I am now convinced that Space-X succeeded in spite of him, but it is successful.

Damn, this brought back a memory. I was squarely in the their target demographic in '99 and I hated the new design. Not that Mom ever shopped there anyway. I was aware of the '01 redesign, but was too teenager to care. Not having kids of my own, I never even noticed the current version.

Jesus: I came not to enforce the law, but to fulfill it.

Paul: Well, what he AKSTUALLY meant is blah blah ceremonial law vs moral law blah blah sex is yucky, I mean sinful!

I mean, it’s more complex than that, but Paul wrote like he understood the necessity of reproduction, but didn’t really comprehend what sexual urges actually feel like. He also wrote such long rambling sentences that he makes Charles Dickens look concise and clear.

As a Millennial, I’m now too old to tell the difference.

Domestic worker isn’t exactly a euphemism here. It refers to the type of work done, ie someone who does house-work. Slave refers the situation the work is done under.

I completely agree that the word slave accurately describes their situation and is conspicuously absent from the article.

Thanks, that is a better word there.

I can see the argument that it has a sort of world model, but one that is purely word relationships is a very shallow sort of model. When I am asked what happens when a glass is dropped onto concrete, I don’t just think about what I’ve heard about those words and come up with a correlation, I can also think about my experiences with those materials and with falling things and reach a conclusion about how they will interact. That’s the kind of world model it’s missing. Material properties and interactions are well enough written about that it ~~simulates ~~ emulates doing this, but if you add a few details it can really throw it off. I asked Bing Copilot “What happens if you drop a glass of water on concrete?” and it went into excruciating detail about how the water will splash, mentions how it can absorb into it or affect uncured concrete, and now completely fails to notice that the glass itself will strike the concrete, instead describing the chemistry of how using “glass (such as from the glass of water)” as aggregate could affect the curing process. Having a purely statistical/linguistic world model leaves some pretty big holes in its “reasoning” process.

Now I want to know if DeVinci had any rivalries with other artists that we could bring back.