Most people don't mind unions as a concept, and like what unions got in the past, but don't like how some unions behave now. They don't like being forced into a union, paying for political things the union leadership decides to do (they say you can get out of that - and you can, but in practice it's very time-consuming and a lot of effort), and they don't like labor law.
Just because you did good things in the past doesn't mean you're doing good things now, and nobody has to keep liking you just because you were good previously.
And they are working on glioblastoma - it's just a much harder target. It doesn't share a single common antigen like ALL does, so you'll need specific CARTs for each antigen, which means you'll have to spend the money on R&D and clinical trials for each one. It's also much harder to get the T cells into the brain (blood-brain barrier and immune privilege) and solid tumors don't respond as well to CART therapy, for reasons that aren't clear yet but probably partially involve the tumor microenvironment.
There are a few reasons; first, ALL in adults is significantly worse than it is in children, and the drug should (and does, in clinical trials so far) work well for them too. Second, relapsed ALL is pretty much impossible to get rid of except for this; it's not a huge population, but there's not much else you can do for them. The 83% response rate is definitely better than historical controls, in the relapsed patients. Lastly, it's an easier target. Solid tumor cancers seem to be harder to attack using CART therapy, so it makes sense to focus on easier targets first, learn from them, and then apply that knowledge to the harder targets.
The diseases themselves won't go away. They'll resurface, slightly mutated - sometimes not enough to fool the vaccination, but sometimes enough.
Yeah, like how smallpox came back and kills lots of people again.
We can eliminate diseases where humans are the only carrier with vaccination. New ones will pop up by jumping to us from other species, but we can completely eradicate some existing ones like we did to smallpox and we're about to do to polio.
Bullshit. You gloss over one of the key transition steps in your comment - "After they were finished fighting the Bolsheviks" yeah, and if the communists hadn't been attacking them in the streets, the SA wouldn't have been tolerated by the non-Nazis. The SA was founded because the Nazis were being attacked, and people accepted it because yeah, sure, if communists are attacking you in the streets then it makes sense to defend yourself.
If you don't want armed Nazis, don't attack them at their rallies or in the streets. The alt-right (which, while mostly not Nazis, certainly has some) wasn't going to marches armed until "antifa" (sarcasm quotes) started showing up and beating, macing, and stabbing them.
The alt-right is actually pretty different from the far right in several areas. The alt-right embraces identity politics much more than the far right does. Alt-righters tend to be more in favor of ethnostates, while the far right would prefer those darkies to just not be around, or at least much farther away. The alt-right is also extremely protectionist on trade, and somewhat isolationist on foreign policy (although that does have more variation).
Your counter to "our economy is doing quite well" is a dropping labor force participation rate (we have an aging population), a report that shows declines in virtually every population of homeless people (absolute numbers, which means the rate per capita is dropping even more), and a report that says young people are staying with their parents more, but also says that lack of jobs isn't the problem? Hmm. I would have looked for more convincing evidence myself, but you do you.
That was part of it, sure, but saying that's the main reason is a huge oversimplification. The violence against the Nazis during the early stages of their growth, as well as the (very unpopular) state's attempt to suppress them, definitely helped them out.
The person you replied to was literally just complaining about corruption in current unions, and how in some cases they don't represent the workers well or don't have their best interests at heart. But keep lying that it's general anti-union FUD.
How sure are we that they haven't gotten or developed better artillery since then? It's not totally implausible that they've made something better, or gotten it from the Chinese.
I guess it depends on how much infrastructure they have there - if it's one huge tunnel complex, or even multiple small tunnel complexes, deliveries could be made to fewer locations than there are gun batteries. I'm sure the locations of quite a few of them are known, and if they start firing then the rest would get taken care of fairly quickly, but maybe not quickly enough unless you can evacuate Seoul or get them to shelters somehow.
Not originally, no, and you certainly didn't limit it to the 18th Dynasty originally. In fact, both Ramses I and II were part of the 19th Dynasty, not the 18th, and even the Wikipedia page for Ramses II says he was a light-skinned redhead. Obviously, that could be wrong, but it's certainly true that your original claim "the great empires, including Rameses, were all Nubian (black)" is false.
Did you really post two very similar comments with the same, incorrect points in response to me? I'm flattered, AC.
On the off chance you're a different AC, there's a consistent trend that sex differences are smaller in countries and cultures that are less egalitarian, like Iran, which accounts for the apparent disparity there. The more affluent and free a society is, the larger sex differences tend to be. Funny how in one of those tribes, men are better at the task, while in the other tribe they're equal. You'd normally expect a complete reversal if society was the only cause.
I disagree; it certainly wasn't easy back then, but the things you needed to do were often less complex.
No, it's not irrelevant. He says bias is a partial cause, but biology likely plays a role as well. There's plenty of real science out there, not just anecdotes.
70% of STEM students being female in Iran is consistent with observed trends that sex differences are larger in freer, more developed countries and smaller in less egalitarian ones.
What you had to do was often easier back then too, as was the office culture. Different cultures in different fields is consistent with the evidence that on average women like people more, and men like things more. He even suggested trying to make programming now more collaborative where possible.
He was saying that biology is part of the explanation, and lamenting that Google's culture didn't allow a frank, honest discussion of it, and instead made people feel unwelcome or ostracized if they tried to talk about it.
Well, for one, the group averages being talked about are far from dubious. Secondly, just because Google hires people who are non-average in some regards doesn't mean they're non-average in all regards. Thirdly, the memo was talking about some potential reasons why Google's demographics don't match up to population ones - and it seems like you'd have to look at population averages for that.
Slashdot Mirror
Most people don't mind unions as a concept, and like what unions got in the past, but don't like how some unions behave now. They don't like being forced into a union, paying for political things the union leadership decides to do (they say you can get out of that - and you can, but in practice it's very time-consuming and a lot of effort), and they don't like labor law.
Just because you did good things in the past doesn't mean you're doing good things now, and nobody has to keep liking you just because you were good previously.
Why are you listing statistics about American native people when the GP was talking about Canadian ones?
Complaining about American aggression on a story about WWII? Hmm. I wonder which side you'd have been on.
And they are working on glioblastoma - it's just a much harder target. It doesn't share a single common antigen like ALL does, so you'll need specific CARTs for each antigen, which means you'll have to spend the money on R&D and clinical trials for each one. It's also much harder to get the T cells into the brain (blood-brain barrier and immune privilege) and solid tumors don't respond as well to CART therapy, for reasons that aren't clear yet but probably partially involve the tumor microenvironment.
There are a few reasons; first, ALL in adults is significantly worse than it is in children, and the drug should (and does, in clinical trials so far) work well for them too. Second, relapsed ALL is pretty much impossible to get rid of except for this; it's not a huge population, but there's not much else you can do for them. The 83% response rate is definitely better than historical controls, in the relapsed patients. Lastly, it's an easier target. Solid tumor cancers seem to be harder to attack using CART therapy, so it makes sense to focus on easier targets first, learn from them, and then apply that knowledge to the harder targets.
Is Novartis, the company who licensed it and is producing it, not considered a big pharma company?
The diseases themselves won't go away. They'll resurface, slightly mutated - sometimes not enough to fool the vaccination, but sometimes enough.
Yeah, like how smallpox came back and kills lots of people again.
We can eliminate diseases where humans are the only carrier with vaccination. New ones will pop up by jumping to us from other species, but we can completely eradicate some existing ones like we did to smallpox and we're about to do to polio.
Bullshit. You gloss over one of the key transition steps in your comment - "After they were finished fighting the Bolsheviks" yeah, and if the communists hadn't been attacking them in the streets, the SA wouldn't have been tolerated by the non-Nazis. The SA was founded because the Nazis were being attacked, and people accepted it because yeah, sure, if communists are attacking you in the streets then it makes sense to defend yourself.
If you don't want armed Nazis, don't attack them at their rallies or in the streets. The alt-right (which, while mostly not Nazis, certainly has some) wasn't going to marches armed until "antifa" (sarcasm quotes) started showing up and beating, macing, and stabbing them.
The alt-right is actually pretty different from the far right in several areas. The alt-right embraces identity politics much more than the far right does. Alt-righters tend to be more in favor of ethnostates, while the far right would prefer those darkies to just not be around, or at least much farther away. The alt-right is also extremely protectionist on trade, and somewhat isolationist on foreign policy (although that does have more variation).
Your counter to "our economy is doing quite well" is a dropping labor force participation rate (we have an aging population), a report that shows declines in virtually every population of homeless people (absolute numbers, which means the rate per capita is dropping even more), and a report that says young people are staying with their parents more, but also says that lack of jobs isn't the problem? Hmm. I would have looked for more convincing evidence myself, but you do you.
How was this drivel modded up so much?
That was part of it, sure, but saying that's the main reason is a huge oversimplification. The violence against the Nazis during the early stages of their growth, as well as the (very unpopular) state's attempt to suppress them, definitely helped them out.
Country lanes that are lined with walls and buildings?
The person you replied to was literally just complaining about corruption in current unions, and how in some cases they don't represent the workers well or don't have their best interests at heart. But keep lying that it's general anti-union FUD.
Well, that and female birth control also lowers the risk of some cancers and has other benefits - typically related to menstruation - as well.
Ah, those are good points. Thanks for the info! Agreed, hopefully we don't have to learn this the hard way.
How sure are we that they haven't gotten or developed better artillery since then? It's not totally implausible that they've made something better, or gotten it from the Chinese.
I guess it depends on how much infrastructure they have there - if it's one huge tunnel complex, or even multiple small tunnel complexes, deliveries could be made to fewer locations than there are gun batteries. I'm sure the locations of quite a few of them are known, and if they start firing then the rest would get taken care of fairly quickly, but maybe not quickly enough unless you can evacuate Seoul or get them to shelters somehow.
Not originally, no, and you certainly didn't limit it to the 18th Dynasty originally. In fact, both Ramses I and II were part of the 19th Dynasty, not the 18th, and even the Wikipedia page for Ramses II says he was a light-skinned redhead. Obviously, that could be wrong, but it's certainly true that your original claim "the great empires, including Rameses, were all Nubian (black)" is false.
I was under the impression that the border was mountainous enough in places that we know there's artillery there, we just don't know where it is.
Have you asked any South Koreans how they feel about this?
Did you really post two very similar comments with the same, incorrect points in response to me? I'm flattered, AC.
On the off chance you're a different AC, there's a consistent trend that sex differences are smaller in countries and cultures that are less egalitarian, like Iran, which accounts for the apparent disparity there. The more affluent and free a society is, the larger sex differences tend to be. Funny how in one of those tribes, men are better at the task, while in the other tribe they're equal. You'd normally expect a complete reversal if society was the only cause.
I disagree; it certainly wasn't easy back then, but the things you needed to do were often less complex.
No, it's not irrelevant. He says bias is a partial cause, but biology likely plays a role as well. There's plenty of real science out there, not just anecdotes.
70% of STEM students being female in Iran is consistent with observed trends that sex differences are larger in freer, more developed countries and smaller in less egalitarian ones.
What you had to do was often easier back then too, as was the office culture. Different cultures in different fields is consistent with the evidence that on average women like people more, and men like things more. He even suggested trying to make programming now more collaborative where possible.
He was saying that biology is part of the explanation, and lamenting that Google's culture didn't allow a frank, honest discussion of it, and instead made people feel unwelcome or ostracized if they tried to talk about it.
Well, for one, the group averages being talked about are far from dubious. Secondly, just because Google hires people who are non-average in some regards doesn't mean they're non-average in all regards. Thirdly, the memo was talking about some potential reasons why Google's demographics don't match up to population ones - and it seems like you'd have to look at population averages for that.
Nope, I saw that. I also saw that people reanalyzed the data and found that the analysis was faulty. Here is another explanation of the topic.