What is the purpose for standing up when the judge enters the courtroom?
This I can at least guess at, typically you'd rise for important people to demonstrate that you are interrupting whatever you were doing and giving this person your full attention and respect. I guess that's really just a show of dominance/submissiveness, but in a pragmatic sense I suppose it is a good practice to mandate focus and engagement during legal proceedings.
I meant more that I know there were other protests outside of the Boston area, too, mainly driven by university students with concerns about similar happening in their communities.
I barely know my neighbors, so I don't think I'd recognize one if I saw them, and a lot of folks including myself were masked up, so I don't think anyone would recognize me in a photo either.
Also just need to say that AOC quote is good, but also that "Yankee" is a dirty word here around Boston, haha.
I went to the one in Somerville near the university, was pretty lively. Couldn't stay for the whole thing, but it was helpful to have a reminder that this is a community of like-minded folks who don't take this sort of thing sitting down.
Yep. Protests are just being used at this point to root out dissidents. Mutual aid and sabotaging oppressive institutions where possible can be more effective ways for folks to participate in organized resistance without risking life and livelihood.
Definitely not a good thing. I use Proton VPN, but only because I paid for a license before I realized the CEO is a scumbag. A lot of people are moving away from Proton's platform, so a browser choosing to bundle it in is just privacy-violating bloatware for everyone except for a subset of users who are also still using Proton, and also for some reason don't just have the standalone app installed.
Weird that it would be coming from Americans given how often US media has depicted the importance of the homefront during the various wars that America has participated in.
Militaries still need food and supplies to operate, so someone has to be making/raising/growing all of that stuff. And those workers need to be paid, accommodated, and kept happy, so every other industry like banking, education, healthcare, entertainment, etc. needs to keep running at full steam to prop up all aspects of the supply chain.
Anyway, the replicants as depicted in all incarnations are clearly biological constructs and not mechanical, so while they're certainly artificial the notion of whether or not they're "robots" to begin with is highly debatable.
I would say it's not even debatable, the issue at the heart of the conflict in the original Blade Runner and continued in 2049 is that the Nexus-7 was made so close to humans that they basically are humans, at least in a biological sense. Maybe the earlier models were more android-like, but later they're basically just manufactured people.
This is why in 2049 we see >!Deckard, a human, and Rachael, a replicant, were able to conceive a child, who was otherwise born perfectly normal other than not being able to inherit an immune system from her mother.!<
Guessing the Supreme Court ruling last year against Colorado undid all that. Since they ruled that states cannot make decisions that impact federal elections, it wouldn't surprise me if the fed can now legally demand voter registration records or else refuse to count those votes.
This is also my guess. Nintendo knows the demand, they'll do $499.99 for the launch model and release a cheaper "lite" version like the original Switch in 2 years at $350 or $400 or something.
I'm not sure if The Last Shogun is something different, but if you're referring to the Shogun series recently adapted by FX, I can say having watched it that it features a main character who fancies himself a superior white savior, but ultimately leads to realizing how completely out of his depth he is.
But it's like the Memoir of a Geisha problem: since the original work was written by a white dude anyways, how much value does it have as a cultural work?
Agreed, it's an interesting thing to think about at least. The nature vs nurture debate is practically as old as time itself but it feels like we're no closer to an answer outside of "it's a bit of both." But how much?
This I can at least guess at, typically you'd rise for important people to demonstrate that you are interrupting whatever you were doing and giving this person your full attention and respect. I guess that's really just a show of dominance/submissiveness, but in a pragmatic sense I suppose it is a good practice to mandate focus and engagement during legal proceedings.