Maybe. Hopefully not. All the more reason to follow every little process for new executive regulations flawlessly when enacting it, like the 6 month comment period. A lot of people are saying just do it immediately. But that'd just be giving the pharma companies and republicans an easy out to strike it down in the courts.
Ranvier
joined 1 year ago
This is the specific law Biden is trying to derive the authority from if you're interested in more:
It's not toothless. There is an existing law that allows the government to issue their own licenses for drugs still under patent developed using at least some amount of tax payer money under certain circumstances. It's pretty broadly worded in the law when this can be done, so previously regulations were made to define the circumstances more precisely. The administration is issuing a new regulation that says one of those circumstances will now include if the drug is high priced limiting its access. Because new regulations issued by the executive branch have a mandatory public comment period after they are proposed before they take effect, its not active quite yet but will be soon (that's why every headline about this is using the dumb vague word of threaten). The drug companies are already promising to sue to try and overturn the new regulation. So yeah it's got teeth.
I can add more, we don't only have five senses. Elementary school propoganda that is. Here's all the ones I can think of while driving.
- Vision
- Hearing
- Tactile feedback from wheel, pedals, you could break this down further into skin tactile pressure receptors, and also receptors of muscle tension, though muscle tension and stretching receptors also involved in number 4
- Proprioception, where your limbs and body are in space
- Rotational acceleration (semi circular canals)
- Linear acceleration (utricle and saccule)
- Smell, okay this might be a stretch but, some engine issues can be smelly
And that doesn't even consider higher order processing and actual integration of all these things which despite all it's gains with Ai recently can't match all the capabilities of the brain to integrate all that information or deal with novel stimuli. Point is Elon, add more sensors to your dang cars so they're less likely to kill people. And people aren't even perfect at driving, why would we limit it to only our senses anyways? So dumb
The headline is so hyperbolic it's basically a lie. It becomes a little tricky because autism spectrum disorder is kind of a broad category. There are certain diseases that have clear genetic causes, other features to their phenotype besides just autism like features, but may share some aspects of autism spectrum disorder symptoms. So often these get lumped in with autism and patients with those disorders also get a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. For instance people with fragile x syndrome commonly get an autism diagnosis, but there's many other features to it as well.
This article stub if following a link at the end is referencing a gene called shank3. It's not involved in most people classified as having autism spectrum disorder. Mutations in shank3 causes a distinct disorder called Phelan-McDermid syndrome that causes severe intellectual disability, dysmorphic features, autism like features, motor issues, and abnormalities across multiple body systems. Shank3 mutations have also been linked with some cases of schizophrenia. A small minority of people with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder have shank3 mutations that may be responsible or pre disposing. So they are testing a gene therapy in mice engineered to have shank3 mutations. Which in humans can have a broad array of phenotypes depending on the mutation, many devastating and severe, some phenotypes of which include autism like features. This will not be very applicable to the vast majority of people classified as having an autism spectrum disorder.
Nononono, you're doing it all wrong. The dude in regards to kissinger wrote something like, "when will that bastard finally die?"
Any source that he advised Obama? I'm curious because it sounds like Obama wasn't a particular fan of his:
"We dropped more ordnance on Cambodia and Laos than on Europe in World War II, and yet, ultimately, Nixon withdrew, Kissinger went to Paris, and all we left behind was chaos, slaughter and authoritarian governments that finally, over time, have emerged from that hell.”
Mr. Obama noted that while in office he was still trying to help countries “remove bombs that are still blowing off the legs of little kids.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/us/politics/kissinger-biden-trump-nixon-presidents.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/04/the-obama-doctrine/471525/
True, thank you for pointing that out. I still disagree with the idea that you should have to pay to link to another web site. If they're rehosting content from that website, like an article summary or picture, than absolutely. A link alone makes no sense, that's driving traffic to that website. In any other business you'd be paying for referrals/finder fees for new customers, not the other way around.
Obligatory fuck Facebook.
But reminder that laws like this would require link aggregator sites like Lemmy (or instance owners more specifically), to pay money simply for hosting links to news sites. Terrible law imo.
I think it's reasonable to require fees for rehosting an article or pictures on your web page, but charging just to have a url link is totally antithetical to the structure of the internet. If anything those links drive traffic to news websites, where they are free to host advertisements or require subscriptions.
Edit: as below this particular law won't affect lemmy servers. I still disagree with the idea that posting a hyperlink alone to a website should cost money.
This is real. It's also one reason why laws against gay sex were on the books in many states until finally overturned by the Supreme Court in 2003 in Lawrence v Texas. Sometimes police would use the laws directly, but more commonly since gay sex was considered a criminal activity, landlords would use it as an excuse to deny lgbt people housing or evict them.