How??
Unless they're wearing rubber boots, you shouldn't get any shock. You're standing on the same ground (usually)!
yetAnotherUser
joined 10 months ago
Why is no one talking about Trump recently saying he wants to ban voting booths and have 100% paper ballots?
Alibaba doubles down on RISC-V architecture with a new secretive 'server-grade' chip that will put AMD and Intel on alert
Alibaba doubles down on RISC-V architecture with a new secretive 'server-grade' chip that will put AMD and Intel on alert
Anyone can design and sell little circuit blocks and on chip peripherals, even proprietary ones, for use on any chip.
What's the likelihood of a dominant player emerging and implementing patented, proprietary RISC-V architecture changes which turn out to be necessary for high-performance? And if such a company gains sufficient market share, they could turn RISC-V into basically another x86-64 with many proprietary extensions. Sure, others could create their own RISC-V base processor - but if their performance is 500% lower than processors from the proprietary vendor who would purchase them?
Do you believe segregating a minority group making up 1-2% of the population will not have discriminatory effects? That there will be equal access to funding, scholarships, competition and sport leagues?
You can't seriously believe this. Isn't it plainly obvious that this would be an excuse to ban trans people from doing any sports? That any sports club will just argue there aren't enough trans people to allow them to be members?
And I'd seriously like to know how it is unfair for cis women to have to compete against trans women in chess. Right now trans women are barred from competing in any women's leagues regardless of when they started transitioning by the way.
How do trans people have any advantage in hundreds of other sports, from gymnastics to ballet to competitive diving - all of which have a more or less significant artistic element?
By the way, there are already discriminatory regulations barring certain cis women in the name of "fairness":
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone_regulations_in_women%27s_athletics
Also, what a coincidence:
At the 2020 Olympics a number of athletes, all from African countries, were withdrawn from their events because they did not meet the eligibility regulations.
Sure sucks for these Africans that they "randomly" happened to not meet these criteria. It couldn't possibly be that certain ethnicities are more or less likely to have certain genetics.
Women's routines tend to be more artistic and dance-like, sometimes telling a story, whereas a priority for men's routines is to display strength. (The women's score also includes a spot for artistry on the balance beam.)
The men's and women's floor exercises are fundamentally similar, but the artistic performance aspect of the women's discipline is missing from the men's.
Not only that, but women's floor routines tend to include dance moves (often to music) in order to showcase their artistry, while men's floor routines are typically about showcasing strength.
Men’s events typically emphasize upper body strength and powerful acrobatics, while women’s events highlight balance, grace, and artistic expression.
I can't vouch for the quality of all these sources, they are literally the first results on any search engine.
Isn't that common knowledge though?
Women's gymnastics: artistry > strength
Men's gymnastics: artistry < strength
Both still require a lot of artistry and strength respectively. They just have different priorities.
Also, thank you for ignoring 99% of my comment and nitpicking two lines. You argue like a politician.
The weight classes allow anyone to find well-matched competition regardless of their biology.
That's true. In professional boxing there are 18 weight classes from 46.3 kg (103 lb) to 101.6 kg (224 lb) plus the unlimited weight class. Only very few adults are excluded as the vast majority weighs more than the lower bound.
But with sex-based roles? Two don't really make a fair competition, do they? I mean, otherwise there wouldn't even be a need for per-sport subclasses.
Trans people and people with certain genetic mutations are very, very common though. We're talking about more than 1% of people here. Shouldn't there be a need to ensure they too can compete fairly?
Imagine if in the early 1900's it was discovered that left-handed people are on average slightly better at math than right-handed people. As a reaction, all left-handed people are excluded from math scholarships as they have an unfair advantage over right-handed people. Would you consider this fair? After all, they only made up ~2% of the population and we have to draw the line of who gets a scholarship and who doesn't somewhere.
Source? Why should there ever not be enough time, we don't have less time today than 50 years ago. And even for a rising population it doesn't take meaningfully more time considering the rate of volunteers is likely to remain constant.
I am happy that our constitutional court ruled electronic voting to be unconstitutional. Election transparency cannot be guaranteed without a paper trail.