B42 is a beta branch like you say, you have to opt in to play it. The current version does do multiplayer, I’m currently running my own server for my friends on the current version

There are plenty of “private” servers that are technically open to anyone. Just follow the rules and enjoy the game.

You’ll see a lot of “B42” or “build 42” being talked about. This is the most recent major update that is still in beta. It doesn’t have multiplayer but does offer A LOT of new and improved features.

Fantastic game that gets so much deeper with every (infrequent) major update

It’s definitely a contender, I’m not sure it’s “much simpler” though. There is no simple option, it will likely be the most challenging linguistic problem the world has ever faced.

Assuming the periodic table will be the same is a huge leap. @[email protected] did a good job of explaining why in another comment. To paraphrase, our periodic table is limited to our perspective of the elements. There could be other even more accurate, and descriptive ways to fully encompass what an element is.

Maths already is a language of sorts, with logic built in. Whereas the periodic table is a technical description of elements.

To call it useless is just untrue. There are many possibilities, Crypto is just a black hole eating the hype and funding that would otherwise go into valuable tech

There are core concepts that are likely to be universally understood.

Maths is probably the best and most common example. If we imagine the symbols have been removed and we work under the assumption that we’re manipulating objects we can show that 1 object + 1 object = 2 objects without any language necessary. From there we (aliens and humans) can work together to build a common foundation of understanding.

Don’t get me wrong, this will not be easy and there will be problems we haven’t thought of but there’s a good chance that a spacefaring civilisation will know enough about mathematics to build a new common language.

I’ve already met you in the middle, I’m not providing any more information until you answer my question because I don’t believe you’re after a nuanced answer and you haven’t even tried to convince me or entertained anything else I said in my previous comments.

Give me a good reason why you’re so interested in Chicago over other, worse cities and I’ll bite

We need to ignore them, they’re obfuscating from the real issue. Payment processors should not have the ability to police content, full stop, end of discussion.

The person who tattled is absolutely irrelevant and a distraction

Yes, you people are asking that to derail from answering the question.

Who people? Do you think I’ve organised a group of friends to all get on your case about this one particular question, or is it more likely that random individuals have the same issues with your question?

It’s not an important piece of information unless you don’t want to admit chicago has a problem with violence.

I think everywhere that has violence has a violence problem. Violence is a problem. Why are you so interested in Chicago’s problem rather than the problem everywhere else?

Are you trying to argue that the crime rates of other cities mean chicago doesn’t have a problem? Just say so if that’s the case.

No, I’ve literally already told you that. I’m simply interested in why you’re interested in the 25th (random number) most violent place instead of the most violent place? What is it about Chicago that has got you so interested?

I’m not sure why you people think that the crime rates of other cities means chicago doesn’t have a problem

That isn’t the point people are making. They are wondering what it is about Chicago that made you focus on it rather than other cities that have a higher crime rate.

It’s an important piece of information you conveniently left out.

If you’re so concerned about skewed results look into per-capita numbers. But it sounds like you already have a reason in mind, you just don’t want to say it

I was going to say there’s also the option of in-between but that is dependant on clothing, but you beat me to it 😅

You’ve convinced me that it’s reasonable that it could effect the outcome. But in that case, we’re averaging out a large variance in size, which as you said (and I agree) could change the outcome dramatically.

This was my original problem with the “anatomically correct” part of the statement. There is no “anatomically correct” male or female, only approximations. This effectively excludes people at the extremes of physical characteristics from these safety tests

so I’m making the fairly safe assumption they put dummies in various different seating arrangements

The source doesn’t use data from crash test dummies but from real life crashes. So we can’t take seating arrangements for granted if it could meaningfully effect the numbers.

The stats apparently originate from the US government, so it’s going to be a pretty big sample size that should average out any differences in seating position.

The sample size is irrelevant if cultural factors exist that could skew the results. Cultural factors like men are more commonly taxi/Uber/bus drivers, men are more likely to drive with their partner as a passenger than the inverse, etc.

I don’t think there are really any conclusive after stats as the product was only introduced to the market a couple of years ago

That’s a fair point, I don’t expect there would be enough data for anything conclusive.

there’s a correlation with male safety improving with advances in the crash test process that aren’t reflected equivalently with women’s safety

That would be an interesting read. I’ll have a look for it.

Ok, I hadn’t considered the differently shaped pelvis and rib cage so I’ll concede that it makes sense.

Even still, to my mind (again, not educated in this area) the breasts themselves are not going to be a factor in terms of a car crash assuming seatbelts are correctly worn

I appreciate your effort to find that data but it doesn’t really address any of my original questions.

Also, from what you’ve quoted at least, there is no differentiation between drivers vs passengers.

Your data absolutely shows there is a problem, it just doesn’t show that the problem is the lack of an “anatomically correct female crash test dummy”.

Has an “anatomically correct female crash test dummy” actually helped? What even is an “anatomically correct female crash test dummy” and how does it encompass all women’s body types in a way that the, assumedly anatomically correct male crash test dummy wouldn’t accommodate?

I am absolutely uneducated on this but to my uneducated mind this sounds like getting riled up over a non-issue.

Can you separate, for want of a better word, “normal” sexual behaviours from those derived from your hypersexuality?

If so, how? If not, doesn’t that make you giving consent a bit of a grey area?

Viagra stimulates blood flow to the genitals. If it is making your penis bigger then either you’re not fully aroused or you might have a circulation issue and probably shouldn’t be taking Viagra without a doctor’s approval.

It’s so crazy to talk about “innocent unless presumed guilty” as a policy that exists in western society, when we are drowning in cases to the contrary.

That is patently false. This really makes me think that you have absolutely no concept of what you’re talking about. The “court of public opinion” often assumes guilt based off of an accusation and that is exactly why “believe women” is so dangerous.

What sets rape apart from, say, immigration violations or illegal drug use or terrorism charges or subway fare evasion or CEO murdering isn’t this sacred commitment to “innocent until proven guilty”.

I agree, and this should stay exactly as it is. It’s is one part that is unquestionably beneficial to literally EVERYONE.

Treat allegations of sexual assault with even a fraction of the seriousness put forward to prosecute minor traffic violations. Maybe we can clear that mountainous backlog of uninvestigated rape claims within the victims’ lifetimes.

I absolutely agree. The lack of investigation is the issue, not the fact that women are implicitly believed when they make an accusation. No one should have that privilege.

Because as far as the law is concerned, they ARE NOT a victim until they are proven to be just as the accused IS NOT a perpetrator until they are proven to be. It has absolutely nothing to do with “trustworthyness”, and all to do with due process.

Destroying this legitimately good and absolutely fundamental part of the deeply flawed legal system will not fix this problem. It will only create more. Rage against the machine all you want, I’m absolutely with you. But do so with some critical thought behind it.