I checked the news in my country and they say it’s illegal here on the ground that the supreme court ruled “the toxicity is public knowledge.”

Stupidity…

Reddit for reference

I mean, if you argue that way during the interview I’d pass… Nobody thinks you’re asked to do all that in a one-day interview.

No, “should be” as in, it must be reviewed but can be skipped if there’s a concern like revealing the author identity in a double-blind process.

Yes, the Socratic method

Actually, figures should be checked during the reviewing process. It’s not an excuse.

The hearing, entitled “The U.S. Technology Fueling Russia’s War in Ukraine: How and Why,”

I sometimes think US politicians make them sound like high schoolers yet to receive higher education.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is reportedly against sending Taurus missiles to Kyiv because he fears the move will draw Germany into the war.

They’re still arguing that nonsense… Putin won’t care about anything. If Germany doesn’t supply enough weapons, they’ll be dragged into the war in a worse way.

Worried House Republicans are looking to Johnson for plans for keeping their majority after record-low productivity for this Congress. Instead, he is offering thoughts and prayers.

The one time a Republican politician sent serious thoughts and prayers lmao

What an excellent scheme to keep talents away from entering the red states for a job.

Agreed.

Exactly what I feel about HTML after using QML.

Although there are already comments with good libs, you could also look into services like Weebly.

The biggest problem with Frontiers for me is that there are some handy survey articles that are cited like 500 times. It seems that Interdisciplinary surveys are hard to publish in a traditional journal, and as a result 500 articles cited this handy overview article for readers who would need an overview.

The article I checked was in a reasonable quality, and it’s a shame I can’t cite it just because it’s in Frontiers.

It’s how this publisher works. They make it insanely difficult for reviewers to reject a submission.

deleted by creator

I’m from Japan. They don’t even have judges as corrupt as SCOTUS and still don’t allow same sex marriage because the ruling party is conservative. Well, the court ruled it’s unconstitutional, but we learned that a law in this country can stay unconstitutional if the government ignores the situation. And apparently 90% of the people (at least on the internet) support that because they are conservative.

Makes me realize how broken my country is. It doesn’t even count as corruption because it’s lawful. Fucking hell…

Nah, that’s rather what right wingers do.

Sometimes I wonder if POTUS could declare national emergency due to an unhinged SCOTUS.

Maybe even that depends on the judges.

I noticed. What I wanted to say was it can become a battle between the correct belief and the wrong belief. Especially if the law itself is interpreted wrongly and scientific evidence is difficult to acquire (which sometimes is).