There seems to be a couple of people keeping the lights on at the project zulip but they are presumably busy with other things.

Sorry, I was thinking of other features covered by the Const Generics Project Group, like generic_const_exprs.

Thin line between opinion, free speech, and a lie.

And yet, it's there. Just as it is in defamation law.

Who defines truth, hate speech, and opinion[?]

A jury of your peers and the Public Order Act 1986.

The US has free speech. Apart from all the exceptions it carves out and designates not protected speech, including but not limited to incitement, threats and harassment, sedition, and obscenity. Obscenity in particular was famously 'defined' for a while as "I know it when I see it". So why draw the line at hate speech?

Is it not a weird state of affairs when saying "X is a paedo" is legally actionable but saying "trans people are all paedos and X is trans" isn't, even week when X's house gets burned down either way?

When the other side wins an election are you now the criminal?

Sure, the UK parliament could pass a law saying criticising the prime minister is now illegal. The courts will inevitably issue a declaration of incompatibility with human rights law, but the government, in theory, could ignore it. If the public swallows it. But there's nothing really stopping that happening in the US either. Congress could pass a law making it illegal to criticise the president, and since the president gets to pick the judges, it could almost certainly come under the sedition exception to the first amendment if the president really wanted it to pass. If the public swallows it.

And that's what it comes down to at the end of the day. Whether or not the public swallows it. For all the US right wing likes to harp on about freeze peach that sure doesn't seem to apply if you want to say something bad about America or use the word cisgender. Do you really think the American public is much less likely to support authoritarianism than the British public?

Rust probably stabilise some of its experimental features before we can rewrite the world with it. Const generics for one. (I'd help out with the implementation if I could...)

Dragonborn have to come from somewhere.

Just to add on to your TL;DR (not that any of it is wrong)

The boxers had been competing and passing all eligibility requirements for years until suddenly last year, a few days after Khelif defeated a Russian boxer, the Russian-run IBA announced they had failed sex eligibility tests. Also they refuse to go into specifics about what tests were run and what the results were.

England is currently having a bunch of race riots while simultaneously throwing a shit fit over two women's boxers who aren't even trans, so I'm not feeling great about that.

Now scientists think they know where it goes.

Twitter, mostly.

OwO

Rob Schneider peaked literally last century with Deuce Bigalow. As if that were not bad enough...

I've never tried making jokes about Catholicism before, but I'll do vatican.

Joanne Rowling has released books under the name Robert Galbraith, and the poster above has mixed up the names for humourous effect.

Also Robert Galbraith Heath was a psychiatrist who was a big proponent of conversion therapy for queer people. Probably nothing to do with why Rowling chose that name...