Absolutely - if anything, there’s a reluctance to use formal titles in the UK in general.

I used to teach at university - students and staff alike just use first names when addressing each other. When signing emails, we just use our first name, no letters, job title, anything.

It’s even something specifically touched on in our orientation guide for foreign students.

As for newspapers and Prime Ministers specifically, one of the biggest newspapers, The Guardian, has a cartoonist who has always drawn David Cameron with a condom covering his head. There’s absolutely no deference shown to Prime Ministers here.

Primary sources? No, but there are independent secondary sources by people with no skin in the game.

Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus (circa 93–94 CE).

Annals by Tacitus (circa 116 CE)

The earliest Christian writings are also more about the teachings of a disruptive Jewish preacher who was then crucified, than they are about magic.

Let’s not do the ‘every Christian’ thing. It’s worth remembering the US has a very ‘unique’ type of Christian.

This. There is evidence that a preacher called Jesus existed, was crucified, and was well-regarded enough to start a following that persisted even after his death.

There isn’t, however, strong historical evidence for any of the magical parts of it.

Is that actually true? I suspect not.

Most people start “enjoying their own company” years before getting to try for real.

If there was a question of insensitivity, then surely problems would be much more prevalent at ages when people are enjoying themselves more frequently. But it’s not the case at all.

deleted by creator

Also, at the time, in the west, Al Qaida were a largely unknown terrorist cell operating in far-away third-world countries. It seemed incredible that such a devastating attack could be carried out on US soil by a small group most people had never heard of.

You’ve have some examples, but in case they are not clear enough:

If [you have AIDS] then [you are unwell]

[You are unwell] if and only if [you have AIDS]

The first one is not the same as the second. Why? There are plenty of ways to be unwell, without necessary developing AIDS.

The first statement only defines one possible path to B, not all of them.

Yikes - and I thought I overanalyzed my text messages

This is what I do too. For double letters draw a tidgy little circle on the key - that should be enough to let the text recognition know what you want. It’s a useful movement just to have as part of your swipe-typing technique.

This. It’s less to do with religion, and everything to do with human nature.

From Ancient Egyptian Priests and Medieval Christianity, to Donald Trump and Boris Johnson - when in times of uncertainty, people will turn to anyone claiming to have all the answers.

“Us Vs Them” is the oldest tactic when it comes to gaining and consolidating power.

“300 m/s ought to be enough for anybody”

If you’re talking about the final digit of a number, it’s the last character.

For example, In the number 8765, ‘5’ is the final digit.

The romans called the area Judaea…land of the Jews.

Just a quick correction here. Judaea is actually named after Judah, son of Jacob.

The word ‘Jew’ comes from the place name Judaea, not the other way around.

I’m only going to tackle the tech side of this…

How difficult would it be for AI photo apps to filter out words, so someone cannot make anyone naked?

Easy. The most popular apps all filter for keywords, and I know that at least some then check the output against certain blacklisted criteria to make sure it hasn’t let something slip through.

But…

Anyone can host their own version and disable these features, allowing them to generate whatever they want, in the exactly same way that anyone can write their own story containing whatever they want. All you need is the determination to do it, and some modicum of ability.

People have been been creating dodgy doctored photos long before computers. When Photoshop came out, it became easier, and with AI it’s easier still. The current laws about creating and distributing indecent images still apply to these new images though.

‘Enterstela’ is an anagram of ‘Arse Nettle’, if that helps.

Authenticity.

Totalitarianism is usually easy to identify. A corrupt democracy still has a veneer of legitimacy in a way that an out-and-out totalitarian regime does not.

Seems that a lot of people have said something similar, but FWIW…

I’ve been able to move my left eyebrow by itself for as long as I can remember.

I taught myself to move the right eyebrow in 15 minutes standing in front of a mirror. This was about 20 years ago and I can still do it.

For anyone interested, as people have said, it’s about isolating and learning the ‘instruction’ that does it. In this case, seeing as I could raise both eyebrows together, I just did that repeatedly whilst holding the left one in place with my fingers. Fifteen minutes later, and I could do it without needing the fingers.

I feel like the analogy of the camera would be more valid if Nikon designed a camera that was specifically designed to cater to the needs of child molesters.

Almost all guns are designed as weapons first and foremost. That’s it.

Fencing is a sport that allows people to duel each other. The foils are items of sports equipment - they have specifically been designed to not be lethal.

Guns, on the other hand, are not items of sports equipment. They are weapons that some people use for sport.

In the US, gun companies are quite happy to produce these for supply to the untrained, unregulated masses. And actively promote this as totally normal. I’d say they hold some of the blame.

There’s a couple of things to consider when thinking about this.

Firstly, dividing the total by the number of tax payers and concluding that everyone should pay £569 is misleading. Wealthy people pay far more tax than most people (still not enough IMHO!) and as such the per-person cost is wildly different for everyone too.

Secondly, consider your position - your chances of success, and the possible range of success, depends hugely on your parents’ circumstances and those of other close people in your life.

So we have this clear chain of success breeding success - wealthy people can afford to give their children the kind of start in life that us poor spuds can only dream of.

A huge number of wealthy families used slavery to amass and increase their wealth massively. These families are still wealthy, still benefitting from the leg-up they were given on the backs of slaves.

These families are the ones who, ultimately through tax, would end up contributing the most. Us plebs would be paying relatively little.

Even if your family didn’t own slaves, or exploit them directly, they’ll almost certainly have benefited from their existence. I live in a mill town north of Manchester - the very reason for this town’s existence is cotton, ultimately picked by slaves abroad. The money came from businesses and trade that relied on slavery.