"It remains unclear what standards Khelif and Lin Yu Ting of Taiwan failed last year to lead to the disqualifications.
The IOC, which is overseeing the boxing competition in Paris, does not test for gender, and there never has been evidence that either Khelif or Lin had XY chromosomes or elevated levels of testosterone. They have competed for years, including at the Tokyo Olympics and several world championships."
So, none of that is true. She may have high testosterone (which isn't even confirmed), but none of what you said follows. That isn't even how that works.
There is no trans woman in this case. A female boxer, born and raised as a woman, is being attacked and called a man. What OP is saying is that it's basically because they don't see her as attractive, and that's definitely a major component of it.
What it comes down to is that they're so obsessed with the idea of trans women that they start seeing them everywhere, and it usually comes down to someone not being quite feminine enough in some way, though there have been cases of people trying to claim some of the most conventionally attractive women in the world were secretly trans.
Honestly wouldn't be surprised if the GOP still tries to run Trump even after he's dead.
Nobody here is saying it's a cure all. It's a step in the right direction. It's better than doing nothing and continuing on the course we've been on. Do you think an "all or nothing" approach has any chance of working?
Diesel engines have nothing to do with what we were talking about.
And even if you want to call it a "band-aid", that's still better than letting the wound continue to bleed. It slows us down and gives us a chance to course correct, rather than barrelling ahead over the cliff at full speed.
You seem to be forgetting that wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, and nuclear power exist.
Not to mention that, even with coal generating the energy for the cars, EVs still have lower lifetime emissions than any ICE car.
I was calling out the (mostly conservatives) who repeatedly say that we shouldn't make any effort to reduce emissions because "China is worse".
Oh no, who are we going to blame our refusal to lower emissions on now?
/s
You misunderstand. You take a picture of, say your dad at a family reunion, and in the background the rest of your family is just milling around. That's not the subject, and so the AI model saves it as "people doing stuff" or whatever. When you load that photograph, the people in the background will be generated, and they won't be your family.
This is all beside the fact that the AI may decide your subject is different from what you think it is.
This is just an extremely unreliable form of data compression, and extremely unnecessary. Phones and cameras can currently save hundreds or thousands of photographs locally, and cloud storage can save millions for free, and even more for extremely cheap. You're solving a non-existent problem by shoehorning AI image generation in where it's not needed.
The pitch is that everything surrounding the subject is extra, and so it doesn't matter if it's the same every time. It's literally throwing that information away in favor of a simplified description. It's extremely processor-intensive data compression.
I'm sorry, but no. Not only does that invoke a ton of extraneous processing on both ends (when saving and when recalling the image), but the rest of the image is still important, too! Can you imagine taking a photo at a family gathering, and then coming back later to see randomly generated people in the background? A photograph isn't just about the "subject", it's often about a moment in time.