This is a lie, and OP is repeating a blatant piece of marketing material.
The models were, in every single case, specifically prompted with the option of blackmail. And then other options were specifically not allowed. It chose the option from a presented list, it didn't "resort to blackmail".
That is like presenting my cat with two types of food, asking it a political question, then putting a glass over the food on the left, and acting shocked when it goes for the food on the right. Clearly, my cat is resorting to a far-right political option!
You shouldn't confuse the number or cost of the Russian Navy navy ship in the Black Sea with the quality of the Russian Navy ships in the Black Sea. They've given an obviously pathetic showing, with the sinking of Moskva especially.
But weapons like these aren't really going to work against a prepared navy. If the Russian fleet did more than sit in port, they could probably escort convoys and protect against these weapons pretty easily.
The fact that they're not, says a LOT about the Russian navy.
Lets remember this poor child though. It's all well and good that MTG is a terrible person, but lets not forget how terribly her son is suffering from having her as a mom.
Being different made Rudolph unworthy of basic respect for his entire life, according to Santa (who is the ultimate authority on what is naughty or nice).
It only changes when Rudolph became useful.
So, we can really only conclude that bullying people for being different is morally neutral at best. Feel free to keep doing it, until that person shows you they can actually contribute something. Only then do you have to stop.
People need to stop thinking about Russia as a single country.
You've got Moscow and Saint Petersburg, which are "Russia", and then you've got eeeeeverything else, which they see more like colonial holdings to be used than as a country.
Everything outside those cities exists purely to provide labor and resources for the capital in the main cities. As long as Russia isn't sending conscripts from Moscow into the war, they're not really at war in the eyes of everyone who matters.
Two million corpses in Siberia or two million dead from northern Africa are pretty much the same thing to Moscow. Both are preferred to 20.000 dead muscovites.
New towns are areas are ALSO designed poorly. It's not just existing areas that have been made wrong, new areas are still being designed by idiots with blinders on.
Because of how so many American towns and cities are built, you'd have to bulldoze entire cities to do things like eliminate small traffic lights from residential neighborhoods.
Weird how other countries manage just fine without bulldozing. What they actually do is switch up road lanes and on-street parking, and it fits just fine.
Having multiple lanes in between level intersections adds pretty much nothing to the capacity anyway, so you may as well use it for something useful.
We're not going to tear down the entire fucking nation for some retards on bicycles.
Terminal carbrain: not realizing that getting more people on bikes means fewer cars, less traffic and a nicer trip for literally everyone, including cars.
Your parents didn't even try to educate you, did they?
I have a bachelor's in civil engineering, and that's part of the reason why I'm able to pierce through the deep coating of carbrain induced status-quo thinking.
You're making all the wrong assumptions right from the start.
At a small stop-go light, like you might find in a residential neighborhood
These shouldn't even exist. A residential neighborhood shouldn't have traffic lights, and it should have a low enough speed and low enough volume of cars (only the people who live there should be driving there) that accidents should be rare and low risk.
The fact that you assume there's a traffic light here starts from the basic assumption that there is so much car traffic that it needs managing. You've already designed your residential street wrong then.
A more medium size intersection
Skipping this, because these intersections shouldn't have ANY bicycle interactions at all. If bikes are crossing your 4-lane divided highway, you've already designed your roads wrong. I would argue if you're putting a full streetlevel crossing in, you're also not doing great unless you get paid per traffic jam.
Note that these are two different environments; at an intersection in a city center, the speed limits are often 20mph, and frankly, bicycles should not have their own lanes there. By law they're vehicles, they should be in traffic behaving the same as cars and have the right of way that cars do. Where they get themselves killed is trying to weave in and out of traffic, or insisting on putting in a parallel bike lane pretending it turns off friendly fire. "Just add to every driver's cognitive load and make them responsible for my safety." Fuck off.
A protected bike path and protected intersection REDUCE everyone's mental load because it makes it practically impossible to hit a bike. And it separates bikes from traffic too, so they can't weave.
The problem with American bike gutters with painted lines is that cars enter them constantly, by design. Cars cross the bike lane to park, they cross it to turn right, and something they just drive in it because the drivers are idiots. Or cars park in it because they're idiots. And every time a car enters the bike path, the bike needs to move or die. So they move, creating more risks.
All of those problems go away with a raised barrier between the bikes and the cars. You can just stop thinking about them, because they're in an entirely different lane that you physically can't even get to. And if you turn right, you can treat them like any other vehicle again, where they'll have the right of way or there's a traffic light.
Meanwhile, back out on Some Road and Another Street, these have 45 and 55 mph speed limits, you're traveling from town to town here, and these places pretty much should not see bicycle traffic.
Depends. A 20km bike ride is totally fine, an 80km one isn't. But if there's cars going 55mph right next to me, I won't be taking a bike because that's super dangerous. There should be a seperate bike path there as well, removing all risks.
Of course, only if it's actually inhabited in that distance.
Bike lanes as I have seen them implemented are a lot like sidewalks; slower traffic is placed to the right of traffic lanes...except they do not expect to treat every intersection as a stop sign, and they interpret green lights for straight through as for them, even in conflict with right turning traffic.
Why the fuck would you have right turns on the same signal as straight? Why the shit wouldn't you make protected intersections.
Your argument is basically "poorly designed roads are dangerous". Yeah, they are, stop making them
Edit:
Also, Dutch pedestrians have the right of way over cars in the same road. If you're turning right, and someone is walking there, the car stops. This works fine, because we actually know how to design roads.
The study also found that Black women are diagnosed younger than white women, with more than 50 per cent of breast cancer cases in Black women diagnosed before the age of 50, compared to about 14 per cent in white women.
Black women are also more likely to be diagnosed with more aggressive subtypes, like triple-negative breast cancer, that don’t respond to certain treatment, the researchers found.
They face up to 21 per cent higher rates of triple-negative breast cancer, compared to about 9.9 per cent for white women.
I wonder what causes this. Genetics? Lifestyle? Both? Neither?
Edit: the paper pretty much gives the answer in the abstract
Breast cancer characteristics and outcomes vary substantially by ancestry within Canada’s Black population.
Since power setting works by turning the element off and on quickly, having a really thin pan with little thermal mass will result in some really weird uneven heating (basically just a hot circle).
Selling off the gold reserve is a pretty fucking Desperate Move, yeah. It's not quite "give pistols to 12 year olds" desperate, but it's getting there.
This is a lie, and OP is repeating a blatant piece of marketing material.
The models were, in every single case, specifically prompted with the option of blackmail. And then other options were specifically not allowed. It chose the option from a presented list, it didn't "resort to blackmail".
That is like presenting my cat with two types of food, asking it a political question, then putting a glass over the food on the left, and acting shocked when it goes for the food on the right. Clearly, my cat is resorting to a far-right political option!