Because this has been co-opted by the far-right and has already instigated an organised violent mob (including notorious white supremacist Tommy Robinson and leader of far-right party Reform Nigel Farage) to attack police and try to get to the murderer’s family’s home (these same groups tried to burn asylum-seekers alive a year or two ago) and the doxxing of two officers who are falsely being claimed to be the officers involved, let’s have some facts

To preface this: none of this is excusing or justifying the actions of the police. There is an investigation underway, and it’s unquestionably true that there are serious issues which need to be addressed. This is just the facts of the case, as laid out in court, by the coroner, and by the presiding judge in his summation

The police *did* check for stab wounds and when they found them they immediately uncuffed him and started administering medical help. He was cuffed for 1 minute. He was getting help 3 minutes after the police first arrived

The knife had penetrated a vein close to his lungs. There is nothing anybody could have done to save him, even if it had been an ambulance full of surgeons who had arrived instead of the police, because nobody could have found and got to the vein in time

It was dark, and he was wearing dark clothes which, coupled with the internal nature of his injuries, made it difficult to see that he had been stabbed

It is very common for someone who has been cuffed to claim to be ill or injured in order to be uncuffed and to try to escape

The murder weapon had already been removed from the scene by the time the police arrived

It was the murderer who called the police, reporting himself as the victim and his victim as the perpetrator. He had members of his family with him who backed up his side of the story

Again, this doesn’t excuse what happened or eliminate the obvious systemic failures. But before going in all guns blazing, make sure you know the full facts, and be conscious of whose narrative you may be amplifying. Also bear in mind that the family have said that they hold the murderer “100% responsible” for Nowak’s death, and that they do not want this incident to be used to spread division

Useful Idiot says what?

The nursery rhyme Ding Dong Bell is from at least 1580, probably earlier

It’s pretty complicated and it’s been a while since i read the layman’s-terms no-maths explanations, but think of it like driving

You’re in a car looking at another car which is driving at the same speed on s road which is parallel to you. You’re both going to look like you’re driving at the same speed and travelling the same distance

Now say that rather than being parallel the roads are at an angle to each other. Say 45 degrees. Now when you look at the other car, even though its Speedo will say the same as yours it’ll look to you like it’s going slower and it’ll fall behind you. After a while you won’t be able to see it out of the drivers side window and will have to look through the back seat window and then the rear window to see it

And the experience in the other car will be the same - they’ll see you as going slower and falling behind them

Nobody’s speed has actually changed, it just looks different from each car’s perspective

If you can mentally change “difference travelled” to “time passing”, then that’s how to conceptualise it

Iirc, here in the UK it’s illegal to ask a doctor or nurse to work s triple shift. I think it should be for doubles as well, excepting major emergencies which involve a sudden influx of patients

Same as the beam of water, but on a much bigger scale and with the curve being much smaller because the things being emitted are so much faster

I make no prescriptions beyond the first. No objection if they do, but i think “what will the near future look like” is more common and therefore less interesting

I always thought that every 30 years they should reboot back to the future. No connection to the original in terms of production team or cast. The writer and director can’t be old enough to have many memories of the time (Zemeckis and Gale were both 4 in 1955)

Just someone doing their own take on “teenager goes back in time and meets their parents as teenagers”

See how the “past” of 30 years ago compares to the “present” of the previous version

Long term, that could be a really interesting experiment

Think of it like a hosepipe. You’re on the lawn with s long stream of water coming out of the hose. If you flick it quickly it doesn’t stay in a straight line. The beam of water curves as you move.

Because the beam of water isn’t an object. It’s a stream of particles which are constantly being emitted from the tip of the hose

Same thing with a laser beam. It’s a stream of photons being emitted from the laser. If you flick the laser, the photons which have already been emitted will continue in a straight line. Any which are emitted during the flick will head off in a straight line in the direction the laser was pointed. End result:a curved beam

Noita is very cool, very deep, and has a tonne of content. It’s common for people’s first win to take about 100 hours, if they watch/read guides & the wiki

And I say first win, because the community calls getting your first win “the tutorial”. It’s 10% or less of the total content in-game

Two things that make it stand out: firstly, it’s hard. The community calls it “wizard death simulator”. That doesn’t mean that it’s not fun even at the start or that you can’t become ridiculously powerful, just that you will suck when you first start playing

Secondly, it’s not a metaprogression game which gives you the illusion of progressing by unlocking things or bumping up your stats. Killing bosses does unlock spells, but none of them are “if I find this at the start I’ll melt enemies”. They’re more “if I find this halfway through a run it might be fun to experiment and see what weird kind of a wand I can build”

Trailer: https://youtu.be/0cDkmQ0F0Jw

Tell me that doesn’t look sick

Que?

As the law stands at the moment, if you’re building a new non-domestic building or changing the function of an existing building and you have three toilets, each of which is a single room containing one individual toilet and a sink and which can be locked from the inside, then cannot all be accessible to everybody. One must be exclusively for women and one for men. And, as per the new guidence, which one someone can use is solely to be determined by what gender they were assigned at birth

Yes, it’s incredibly stupid, but that’s what the law currently says

I know, right? This government has chosen to go “well, if the Supreme Court says we have to discriminate against trans people, then i guess we do “, rather than ” if the law can be interpreted in that way then it’s obviously wrong or unclear. We have a large majority and a progressive core of voters, let’s change the law “

It’s like come on guys, this is exactly the strength of the UK NOT having a written constitution - you can change the law and thereby change the constitution

I’m far from an expert on this, but my understanding is that that could work, but it could also fall foul of other building regs, specifically the H&S regulations of 1992, which talk about toilets being suitable and sufficient

In my inexpert opinion it’d be enough of a grey area that you could challenge it in court if you were told it wasn’t allowed. In practical terms, no company is likely to do this unless they were specifically trying to take it to court to challenge the law or bring it more public agenda

But it’s s good idea and I’d support any company that tried it

That’s anti-trans bigotry for you

Yes, exactly

Extant businesses may. Your post mentioned planning out businesses and buildings. If there’s space for single-sex toilets then under current legislation it would be illegal not to have them. You can thank the Tories for that. Badenoch even explicitly said that it was done to target trans people, although obviously not in quite those words

Not allowed. I’ll copy from another post:

No, there’s already rules in place from the previous government which says that all new builds and buildings euch are changing their use must have separate, sex-segregated toilets, unless the building is physically too small for anything other than a single room with a single toilet and sink. You can have gender-neutral toilets as well but not instead

No, there’s already rules in place from the previous government which says that all new builds and buildings euch are changing their use must have separate, sex-segregated toilets, unless the building is physically too small for anything other than a single room with a single toilet and sink. You can have gender-neutral toilets as well but not instead

I don’t think you understand how politics works in the real world if you think that tripling your user base in two years is worse than doubling it in the same time

Your understanding of politics is shallow, simplistic, and not rooted in reality