protl

Extremes? Are you joking? The US "Left wing" is most other countries right-wing.

There is absolutely zero overhead for the person messaging to simply add more context to their opening message regardless of the situation. They're going to have to give the context anyway. If it's an emergency, just say "Hello, there's a fire", if it's informal say "Hello, you heard about Eddy?".

Isn't that because they don't have a more effective alternative? They're forced to rely on the security by obscurity of camo (ignoring the guns).

If you had an indestructable soldier, you could paint them bright pink and have them live stream their position, it wouldn't matter they're indestructable.

Sure, give them the right to seek medical treatment and don't take that right away, I agree.

> People have 1 head. There is at least one case that this is not true.

> Forcing radical viewpoints on all of society over extreme outliers is ridiculous.

"Don't take away basic human rights from people with more than 1 head" doesn't seem all that radical to me, but maybe I'm out of touch.

> how many XX people have you mistaken for XY people, and vice versa?

I have no way to know, that's my point.

Most of us have a basic biology education to drawn on that allows us to look back and in hindsight say "The men I know probably have XY and the women XX chromosones" but it's never part of the process any of us actually use.

To me, chromosones just seem like a distraction. It promises to replace all of the messy, political, social uncertainty with a polite, clinical, objective answer if only everyone would realise it's just about the biology.

The trouble is, the biology can't seem to answer the questions that are the most contentious. I have no idea what my chromosones are in reality, but I know how I'd like to live my life and mostly there's no problem, no one checks, no one asks, and if they did, how would that knowledge justify overriding my autonomy?

> Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now?

This is a really common response, and I do honestly empathise with it because for most people (me included most of the time) in everyday life there's not really any need to think about it too deeply. Like you said in another comment "A child can tell you what a man and woman are."

But can they? Or can they just point at people and guess, with about the same accuracy as you or me? They probably can't _actually_ tell you what a man and woman _are_ in any useful way any more than most grown-ups.

Like you agreed in that other comment too, there are some "extremely extremely rare" cases where a child would probably say they're a man or woman but their chromosones aren't what you'd expect.

That highlights that chromosones aren't really a deciding factor though right? The child isn't using chromosones when they decide, and I've never been asked about my chromosones, or heard of anyone else being asked about theirs outside of a hospital.

So to answer your question, I don't think anyone is denying biology, it's just that biology isn't as relevant as it might seem at first thought.

You've spent the time evaluating a candidate enough to make a decision not to hire them, you know why you aren't going to hire them, the only extra work is passing that information on to them.

One problem that comes to mind is that people who would choose not record themselves would be looked on with suspicion, having the police do the recording would eliminate this problem.

Personally life logging is something I'm personally quite interested in, but mandating it, even socially rather than legally, is highly problematic in my eyes.

So I get to pay you $30/m to work for you on projects and I get to talk to the other developers you have locked up in your forum and to listen to you do a screencast of unverifiable quality. Sounds amazing, sign me up!