Your first link is broken.

Your second link doesn’t immediately have that data but there is a dynamic form to get some data. I don’t see public suicides in it. Since it’s a dynamic form, a genAI system won’t see the data either but will see people reference the site when making arguments. I’m assuming the genAI is just doing that.

Your last two links are the same report for different years. One says this and it contradicts your numbers:

Among all suicide decedents, the most common location of suicide was a house or apartment (71.3%), followed by a motor vehicle (5.5%), a natural area (4.4%), a street or highway (2.8%), and a hotel or motel (2.3%).

Also, I’m not convinced that these would be even across all modes of suicide so I’m not convinced by the simple math. (ie. Maybe people use guns to kill themselves outside a lot more than at home, or the opposite. I don’t see a great reason to assume they’d be similar rates.)

Oh, I simply don’t trust genAI. I sometimes finish a project, then see what genAI has to say. It’s usually pretty misleading. They sometimes give sources though. Any links to those?

That ruling is worth taking a look at:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69784731/261/american-association-of-university-professors-v-rubio/

From page 148 the ruling begins a section titled “Justice in the Trump Era” and beginning page 155, also in that section, begins to list the ways he uses retribution including targeting free speech.

Other quotes are:

• “this Court finds as fact and concludes as matter of law that Secretaries Noem and Rubio and their several agents and subordinates acted in concert to misuse the sweeping powers of their respective offices to target noncitizen pro-Palestinians for deportation primarily on account of their First Amendment protected political speech”

• “I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected. Is he correct?”

Usually with a comment like that I wouldn’t reply like this but you’re very, very active in this thread.

Any statistics on public suicided by hanging? Ideally per capita grouped by race.

I had a look myself so I know this is a tall order but I thought it was worth seeing if someone has the info

Didn’t they start doing this really early one? At least moving them around state lines and not telling lawyers or family so it was hard for them to file suit?

Yeah, I was think there is easier momentum for non-hardware tech. Social media is mostly its users so if they leave there isn’t much. Disney showed some of the weaknesses of streaming services but they’re aren’t many non-US alternatives. There are YouTube alternatives but there most of the content creators are entrenched there. Most of the rest of Google’s offerings have European alternatives.

I wish there was momentum to boycott US tech companies

What specifically in the original post did you have issue with? There’s not a lot too that post, and you have agreed with part of it, so it seems like it would be faster to list out the issues

Here’s a review focused to some extent on how accurate the science in that book is:

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/how-not-to-die-review#TOC_TITLE_HDR_2

The author seems pretty focused on pushing a single message so I’d be careful with that message myself. (As someone who aspires to have a diet that’s mostly vegetables with a few cheat days for meat.)

Fruits tend to get listed as low GI supporting the poster’s statement.

Also, you’re simplifying the chemistry and metabolic pathways to the point they sound the same when they’re obviously different. I’m not an expert but I as I understand it table sugar is short chain and good to go, fruits (if they’re not pre cooked) tend to be a bit more complicated and have a few more steps along the way (and I assume each requires some energy to unlock and also result in some chemical energy that isn’t completely digested). Also, what you’re saying goes a lot against what I understand from the carb count on the packet from fibre vs. what your body unlocks. That said, I’m very ignorant and far from an expert

Are you both from the US? It was rough getting used to how much you all like to drown out the food with various sauces

When did Ukrainian come into it? I went back to the article but half of it was behind a paywall

Oh, I didn’t say I had a preference. And I see your point that one is just a conjugation of the other. I’ve just seen capitalism as a term used more for explanation and when I’ve seen capitalist said it tends to have a negative connotation at best but more often it is half spat out

The question says capitalism (not so loaded term) your answer said capitalist (more loaded term and you’ve taken time to use the loaded part of the term).

That said, I accidentally replied to a question in lemmy.ml so the person asking the question is probably more aligned with your way of thinking and explaining than I am. Sorry about that

An economic model that includes capitalism explains a lot of the world including having some close process analogs in nature.

A capitalist sounds like a label you’re trying to apply in an attempt to label someone as being maximally for profits. A lot of companies admittedly work that way and it’s important to include that concept.

By my reading you’re taking the use of the first term and then saying they are using the second term. I think this is called equivocation.

And remove any need to offer them security from China

I’m amazed at how many people found rogan authentic. Is it the same sort of podcasters playing off people’s intuitions, like the fact checker used to?

I’d add “mania” to that list of terms that need defining. They seem to have a specific meaning that’s probably misaligned with most people reading the question:

https://lemmy.world/comment/19666332

Does anyone have a good breakdown of this 1.5 trillion number?

Everything I saw while searching was pretty right wing and it would be nice to have an idea if some of it is pessimistic, or even to have some of the numbers explained rather than solely demonised.