Contramuffin

In organic chemistry, there's a concept called delocalized pi orbitals. The exact reason why it works is complicated and outside the scope of organic chemistry, so I'm not sure if I can really explain it anyways. But the takeaway is that when you see a double bond, single bond, double bond pattern, that generally indicates that the bonds are actually being shared across the entire motif. ie, it's not really a double bond, it's more like... a 1.5-bond.

Having the bonds be shared across multiple atoms gives that region of the molecule special properties, the primary of which is that it tends to be really stable. The reason for that is that any disruption toward that region (eg, adding an electron) gets distributed across the motif, so that each atom is only minorly disturbed.

And the bigger the motif is, the more stable the region is because it's able to distribute disturbances better.

Benzene (the hexagon motif circled) is made exclusively of this double bond, single bond, double bond motif. And as a result, it's well known for being extremely difficult to modify or destroy. You really have to jump through hoops to do any sort of organic chemistry with benzenes. The motif circled in testosterone still has delocalized pi orbitals, but it's not as extensive as a benzene, and so it's less stable

To summarize: paper got published last year that had this as a figure. It got widely ridiculed because there's no way that this figure passed peer review. Turns out the reviewers did point it out but the editor ignored it

They spread and are really really hard to fully kill

Source: I have no idea why my mint is still alive. It's waterlogged for half the year and neglected the other half

It's very simple:

1. Learn about primer design
2. Forget primer design
3. Use a primer designer online
4. ???
5. ~~Profit~~ Primer fails
6. Cry

I would like to know how modern day OSHA feels about this picture

Acetone evaporates quickly. You just let it sit for a minute and it'll dispose of itself

You need to press x to cancel the search. That prevents the keyboard from popping up. But yes, it would be nice if this were fixed

That's because there are 2 general schools of thought in ethics - relativism and absolutism. Relativism (the idea that morality is intrinsic to the person's experience and understanding) is the one that seems to be the most talked about in general society. I believe in absolutism, the idea that there is a set of guidelines for moral behavior regardless of your experiences or past.

Your example (more formally known as the paradox of tolerance) is what convinces me that absolutism is the better school of thought

Going to repost a comment I made on another post, since it seems like people are misunderstanding the situation:

My understanding was that this game was not covered by the strike, and so the voice actors decided to withhold their work for essentially no reason and with zero union protection. I saw on another article that the voice actors involved knew that the game was not covered by the strike and decided to strike anyways. I'm not entirely sure what they expected.

I'm not saying that the union or Mihoyo are bad, but this issue seems to stem from something else entirely (individual voice actors going rogue and doing an unofficial strike)

You know how there's a ton of subreddits on Reddit that do the exact same thing and like literally all them except 1 or 2 are dead?

Yeah, so that's what's going on here. Those communities just simply haven't been around for long enough to completely die out yet. Just go for the top 1 or 2 communities that have the most subscribers and/or most activity

So I can pitch in here. I was a juror on a trial where jury nullification was talked about. Multiple potential jurors did bring up jury nullification and the final jury contained some members who openly stated that they believed in jury nullification.

The judge and the prosector actually didn't really care that much - the judge just asked the juror something along the lines of "ok, but do you think you can stay impartial for this trial?", and if the juror said yes, they were on the jury. And the prosecutor didn't dismiss anyone.

My understanding is that both the prosecutor and the defense get 10 freebie dismissals - they can dismiss up to 10 potential jurors for any reason. If the prosecutor wants to maximize the chances of getting a guilty verdict, they may potentially try to use those freebie dismissals to get rid of jurors who know about jury nullification. But it seems like, at least in my case, knowing about it (or even openly stating that you believe in it) doesn't automatically disqualify you.

The defense started talking jury nullification halfway through the trial (it was a wild trial), and that was where the judge drew the line. His reasoning was that the it was the judge's role to instruct the jury on their job and role, so the defense cannot instruct the jury on their own about what to do. So it seems like you can talk about jury nullification, just not if you're the defendant.

As for why jury nullification isn't commonplace, the prosecutor will try to convince the jury that the defendant deserves punishment. It doesn't matter if you believe in jury nullification if you also believe that the defendant deserves to be in jail. If the prosecutor doesn't make a convincing argument, then you'd just vote innocent and that's not really jury nullification. So there's really quite a long criteria for jury nullification to occur:

1. The jury knows about and believes in jury nullification
2. The jury disagrees with a particular law or case but also isn't emotionally charged enough about it so as to remain impartial
3. The prosecutor doesn't use their freebie dismissals to get rid of jurors who might be willing to do a nullification
4. The jury believes that the law was broken, but is also unconvinced that the defendant deserves punishment

That's a really interesting insight. So in other words, when they say that they're the party of law and order, they literally mean that they want authoritarianism