It is not a Christian cross, the symbol is the dagger † which is also often used for adding post-scriptum information or challenging parts of a text.

People often mistake it for a cross, given the look, but there’s no actual preference towards any religion here.

The cross is an entirely different unicode character: ✝

I’m Brazilian and I don’t know what a Brazilian butt lift is

It’s so sad such illiteracy means people like you associate the dash with AI

You can repeat “no harm done” at the end of every comment, and it wouldn’t change any of the data we have proving it does, in fact, a lot of harm

You can’t compare prohibition in a broad context to restrictive usage.

You can’t drive a vehicle in the sidewalk either, doesn’t mean you’re forbidden to have a car.

Have your phone - download TikTok, Canva, Wikipedia, WhatsApp, go nuts… Outside of a classroom.

Other Sunni schools of jurisprudence rely on early Islamic scholars who state that a fetus can “sleep and stop developing for 5 years in a womb”

Glad to hear this justice system is so smart, well developed and based on ground realities!

Maybe not directly for “being too Western” but certainly it’s the one providing the moral framework for allowing murder for ideological and behavioural differences.

That’s a fantastic question… which is exactly what I’m pursuing in my master’s degree right now :). The goal will be to have a full metabolic map showing all the involved genes and how they interact, when they’re triggered (and by which signaling pathways) and how it all comes together for placental development.

Basically, yes. Viruses came up with the syncitins to fuse with host cells, then when they infected us and integrated their genome we had the code for making these proteins… and turns out “invading tissue” was a really useful tool for the embryo.

For pretty much the entirety of ancient history “sugar” and “cheaper” do not belong together in a sentence.

And we used lead in our paint, gasoline and water pipes.

Happily! Basically, the true placenta we mammals (Eutheria) have is what allows such a long gestation period. Unlike our closely related marsupials, that quickly deplete their resources and must give birth, our placenta allows for a continuous exchange of nutrients. This involves a quite complicated process of embryonic tissue invading the uterine wall, so you can imagine the kind of immunological regulation that must be taking place for that to work.

So you’d assume we have several genes highly specific to our placenta that appear when we Eutherians first appeared… right? No! Turns out the vast majority already existed in jawed vertebrates (our common ancestor with sharks), then quite a lot show up in bony fish (our common ancestor with most things you call fish), and just one shows up in Tetrapoda (our common ancestor with amphibians).

So most of the framework for developing an organ such as the placenta already existed for millions of years, so what exactly was missing before it could finally show up in evolutionary history? The two genes that are absolutely required for this whole crazy “let’s invade the mother’s uterine wall tissue but NOT trigger her immune system” part: CSF2 and a group of closely related genes called syncitins.

Syncitins are the star here, because they’re actually a gene that came from ancient retroviruses. In the virus, they were expressed in the envelope and controlled the fusion between the viral particle and the host cell. These viruses got integrated into our genome, and this “fusion with the host cell” mechanism became extremely useful and crucial for the placenta, basically allowing it to exist.

Works fine on Proton, it even creates the mod folder in the correct place

Mammals wouldn’t have a chorioallantoic placenta at all if not for a virus integrated into our genome. Mapping when in evolution the genes responsible for placental development first appeared was my first participation in scientific research, so I love this topic.

I don’t conform to societal norms.

Perhaps, but we would need to put the idea in practice to determine what’s the cause/effect relationship here.

Are people more addicted to their screens because the real world became hostile, or is the real world becoming hostile because people are glued to their screens?

I’d bet on the first option, but I could be wrong.

deleted by creator

Honestly, 90% of the need for dating apps would vanish if people had more free time away from work and well-kept public spaces for entertainment that didn’t expect you to purchase anything.

So rather than a government-run dating app, how about a government-sanctioned 4 day work week and well kept public parks?

Well, my first kiss was around 2011 so that kinda evens everything out

I can’t really stand behind and defend boycotting every defense tech investor.

I can. Easily.