But right would also be wrong, because the torso is elongated instead of the neck.

I suppose a giraffe centaur would be considerably shorter than either of these images suggest.

I think the point was that "biological sex" is a legal term, not a biological one. Hence the application of the law here, irregardless of what this kid's actual situation is. It's a demonstration of why this law is stupid, and what stupid things a school board has to do to remain compliant.

They're almost certainly not grouping the kid with the girls out of spite, but to avoid being liable for not doing so if someone were to find out this kid is, according to the law, "biologically female". The school has to protect itself from this liability, and thus we get this extreme example of the law being stupid.

I'm fairly certain it's easier in Croatia than in most countries.

The idea that A42(7) is stronger than A5 is not that broadly supported. A42(7)'s wording implies a stronger commitment to "assistence", whereas A5 seems to rely on states militarily retaliating when one of them is attacked, as if they themselves were attacked.

So even if A42(7) implies a greater obligation to assist, the kind of assistence is left nebulous, so there may not be an obligation to militarily assist. With A5, military assistance and the use of armed forces is explicitly mentioned, even if the exact length of the obligation to provide it is less clear.

Regardless, from these debates we have seen that most countries seem to believe that A5 should be used for military defence in case of a military attack, whereas A42(7) can be used for other types of attacks, e.g. terrorist attacks.

Remember there was a pretty big uproar when Greece merely suggested that they could invoke A42(7) against Turkey. So even if in theory you end up concluding that A42(7) is stronger, reality might disagree.

Wasn't it Ted Cruz originally?

EDIT: ah it was Mitt Romney.

Yes let me just write an entire election manifesto whilst I'm taking my morning dump.

These are just examples of policies that actually do something for the majority of Americans, and that seem to be popular across the board.

It's not AI. The oldest version of this image is from May 11th 2020, and the first widespread text-to-image model DALL-E came out in January 2021. That makes this image too old to be AI-generated.

It also doesn't show any strange AI defects the early models had, in case you may think it's from a very early proprietary unreleased model or something.

I mean, inflation is mostly down (still high compared to other nations but it's not monstrous anymore). The big issue is that poverty rates have skyrocketed. The big question is how he is going to address that (if at all).

Nobody is pushing nuclear? Strange, I wonder why in my country numerous parties have been pushing for nuclear then (mostly right-wing pro-corporation parties with fossil fuel donors).

Here's an article if you don't believe me: https://www.dutchnews.nl/2023/03/let-the-state-build-new-nuclear-power-stations-vvd-and-cda/

There's plenty of parties pushing nuclear. The fact that it's hard to actually build doesn't mean that there's no lobbying effort being made. And even then, a lobbying effort now will only really result in a net nuclear gain in 10-20 years time when the reactors actually finish.

And for the record, "big oil" , does invest in nuclear. Chevron, Duke Energy, Eni, Shell and BP all investments in some nuclear research or nuclear company. The reason they don't really invest much more is simple: it's barely profitable, if at all. And renewables threaten the financial picture even more.

It could perhaps turns a fan due to the air current it generates by spinning?

The 24h cycle with subdivisions in 60 is easy for dividing them up though. 60 divides by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20 and 30.

It's literally how adversarial training works.