Japan has been in the year 2000 for the past 50 years.

And how do you differentiate between this and say, a shop, or a doctor? Do LGBT people not "have the right to the labour" of those services?

I disagree with that framing entirely. But I'm curious to know how you would differentiate.

These are critical chemistries that enable modern day life

Then maybe we need to examine "modern day life" with a more critical eye. Some sacrifices may need to be made, because they are worth being made.

There are also measures that lie between "ban" and "use freely". If we cannot eliminate the use of these chemicals in chipmaking, then we need to reconsider the disposability of these chips, or we can even consider if less effective processes result in less damaging chemical use, and accept a bit of regression as a trade-off.

She shot her shot. No regrets.

This is the consequence of the hatred that transphobes, garden variety conservatives and TERFs alike, have stoked. And the narrative that the media has gleefully ran with.

Being visibly trans or gender-non-conforming nowadays is genuinely scary in a way I think a lot of people don't fully understand. And of course when femininity is being policed, women of colour tend to suffer too, even if they are cisgender.

Remember, we know how to address many of the world's problems, including poverty, homelessness, and climate change.

But those with capital in society choose not to.

I would have thought that such a feature would be completely uncontroversial. Really weird that some people seem resistant to it.

Weirdly enough, it might be. There are videos of people deliberately testing hypoxia. I've seen one where the person controlling the test told the participant "you know you are dying right now, right?" and the participant responded "Oh" with a big smile. Now maybe the participant was more chill because they knew beforehand that they weren't actually going to die. But they were still completely non-phased watching their brain shut down in real time.

I'm opposed to the death penalty. But if I had to choose my own way out of this world? Hypoxia is probably top of the list.

Bloody hell yes. I have to select text on my phone all the time and that little hovering Android context menu is utterly atrocious. How that passed any UX process is completely beyond me.

1. It hovers over text, rather than appearing in a predictable location like every other context menu in the OS does.
2. The menu just doesn't appear sometimes. Usually when the selected text is large or near the edge of the screen or the screen is zoomed in.
3. It's unstable. Every time you bring it up, the context sensitivity might add additional options. That context sensitivity is good, but it also means that one has to scan the menu for the desired option every single time, no matter how proficient one gets.
4. It's uncustomisable. One of my most-used options requires me to select the text and wait for the menu, tap the three-dots to open the second layer of the tiny little context menu, scroll that tiny sub-list past a bunch of less-commonly used options to the option I use all the time, then tap on that. The menu is sorted arbitrarily, not even alphabetically, and is completely unmodifiable.
5. And what is given sort-priority over my actually used context menu items? "Share". I can share text with two taps, which I will never do, but the action I use dozens of times a day requires three taps and a scroll to find it.

I feel like the BBC's "aura" of impartiality makes it all the more dangerous when it does occasionally engage in propaganda. A lot of regular folks put a lot of trust in the BBC.

Oh it did make everything crystal clear. If one isn't gullible.

The line dividing working class from owning class is not their monthly salary. It's their relationship to capital. Do they work for their living, or do they own for their living?