@natasha #177200 事實上有研究，拉丁語系母語者以注音學習華語比拼音效率高。
因爲拼音和他们母語的字母发音差别很大。比如 zh, q, j, x, z, c, zhi, ü，有什麼語言以這些符號發與拼音有一點相似的音？
用他們熟悉的字母，表示與他們母語不同的音，反而容易混淆，不易學習。
@刺刺 #177255 液，（口）語音爲ㄧㄝˋ，（文）讀音爲ㄧˋ。
血，（口）語音爲ㄒㄧㄝˇ，（文）讀音爲ㄒㄩㄝˇ。
《重編國語辭典修訂本》中，「血液」的注音是 ㄒㄧㄝˇ ㄧㄝˋ（語音）。大概臺灣國語已與辭典的民國國語有別，「液」語音、讀音都是ㄧˋ吧。我還沒有聽過臺灣人將「液」讀作 ㄧㄝˋ。
居然還真有 volcel 🤣
Related: What do MGTOW think of transgender men (who were assigned female at birth)?
Not that the MGTOW Redditors would be much interested in knowing about trans men, because their existence in large numbers undermines the crackpot theory that trans women are, for the most part, really men seeking an easier life.
Given that the MGTOW Redditors think that trans women are really men, it’s perhaps not surprising that they think these men make better women than “real” women do.
請問您這個語音是怎麼做的？Microsoft Azure?
@NoStepOnSnek #193874 這是關於這個詞的定義的問題。
You shall not commit adultery.
לֹא תִּנְאָֽף׃ ס
Oxford Dictionary of English. Adultery. Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not their spouse.
Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon. נָאַף. Literally commit adultery: usually of man, always with wife of another; with accusative woman, Leviticus 20:10 (twice in verse) (H), Proverbs 6:32; elsewhere absolute.
Wikipedia. Adultery.
Both Judaism and Christianity base their injunction against adultery on passages in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament in Christianity), which firstly prohibits adultery in the Seventh Commandment: "Thou shalt not commit adultery." (Exodus 20:12). However, Judaism and Christianity differ on what actually constitutes adultery.
Leviticus 20:10 goes on to define what constitutes adultery in the Hebrew Bible, and it also prescribes the punishment as capital punishment. This verse, however, defines adultery in very specific and narrow terms, and thus in the Jewish tradition adultery is not less than actual sexual intercourse between a man and a married woman that is not his lawful wife:
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
Significantly, the Hebrew Bible’s definition of adultery and penalty for adultery does not apply to either participant if the female participant is unmarried, irrespective of the marital status of the male participant (he himself could be married or unmarried, it is irrelevant).
This means that, if the man was married to another woman, but the woman he had sexual relations with was unmarried to anyone, both might be guilty of fornication, but the actions of neither of them adulterate or risk adulterating the genetic lineage of a married man, thus their actions do not fall under the Hebrew Bible’s definition of adultery in these passages.
Catholicism ties fornication with breaking the sixth commandment in its Catechism.
Some churches such as The [Mormon] Church … have interpreted "adultery" to include all sexual relationships outside of marriage, regardless of the marital status of the participants.
Wikipedia. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2380. Adultery refers to marital infidelity. When two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations—even transient ones—they commit adultery.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, those who are engaged must refrain from sexual relations until after the marriage ceremony. This exercise of restraint in order to keep the commandment against adultery is also seen as important practice for fidelity within marriage.
The tradition of the Catholic Church has understood the commandment against adultery as encompassing the whole of human sexuality, and so pornography is declared a violation of this commandment. Several other sexual activities that may or may not involve married persons are also directly addressed and prohibited in the Catechism.
Adultery is viewed not only as a sin between an individual and God but as an injustice that reverberates through society by harming its fundamental unit, the family.
The catechism of the Council of Trent (Part III), published in 1566, defined adultery even more strictly than at present, stating "This commandment, then, resolves itself into two heads; the one expressed, which prohibits adultery; the other implied, which inculcates purity of mind and body." Thus linking the commandment against adultery to the sin of lust in general.
John Calvin understood the commandment against adultery to extend to sexual relations outside of marriage.
Matthew Henry understood the commandment against adultery to prohibit sexual immorality in general, and he acknowledged the difficulty people experience: "This commandment forbids all acts of uncleanness, with all those fleshly lusts which produce those acts and war against the soul." Henry supports his interpretation with Matthew 5:28, where Jesus warns that whoever looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
John Wesley believed this scripture and the sure judgment of God, even though adulterers "frequently escape the sentence of men."
Martin Luther observed that there were many more people in his day who were unmarried for various reasons than in biblical times, which condition increased both temptation and sexual activities that are displeasing to God.
Wow. Based.
我从小讀和合本長大的。和合本是譯作「不可姦淫」。我也支持「此誡禁止所有淫慾的不潔、不端」的理解。
「限制言论 1~5」指什麼？前文「不鼓励的行为」第 1–5 條？
Reddit，右狗 TV，MtF+Les 的 Kristalo 的評論：
如果认为胎儿是生命的话，那么堕胎就是对非法入侵的正当防卫（逃
但我覺得有一點不同，就是提琴家得病的例子中，如果什麼都不做，提琴家會死。提琴家死是自動的結果，他人被插管、救治提琴家是主動的行爲。
而懷孕的例子中，如果什麼都不做，嬰兒會出生。嬰兒出生是自動的結果，殺死嬰兒是主動的行爲。
更恰當的例子是：
假设一个著名成人小提琴家（或者爱因斯坦，居里夫人吧）得病。他有没有生命权？肯定的，已经出生了，法律上是毫不含糊的一个人，比起胎儿明确多了。是不是为人类文明贡献？已经表现出贡献的能力，和一个不知是希特勒还是爱因斯坦的胎儿明确多了。这个人得病必须要杀死另一个人，之后会恢复健康。只有杀死另一个人才能让他恢复健康。得病期间，小提琴家身体有一定不适，行动受一定限制，最后还有万分一机率要死亡。那么问题来了，小提琴家可以杀死这另一个人吗？
您自家的草坪，有人未经允许闯入，您说可不可以开枪？
JW 天天上門傳教，鄰居未經我允許，踩著我的草坪來我門前向我問好，你說我可不可以開鎗？
@NoStepOnSnek #185696 一般不認爲婚前行爲屬於 adultery。
@vaaller #185758 支持剥夺杀人权的就不要把人权挂嘴边了，除非您们觉得杀人犯不是人。
我觉得国家权利在任何时候都应该大于个人。
@pkubs #193800 opportunity cost 是增加的，但我尋思你也不可能 24 小時都工作，都用來賺錢吧？除了 opportunity cost，還有教育、用品等直接的開銷。工資低承擔都承擔不起。
100 歲之前吧。再遲就死了。
純經濟角度應該是 30 多最好吧。不然 20 多結婚生子，花費多大啊。
U.S. Constitution
Article I, Section 2, Clause 2
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
Article I, Section 3, Clause 3
No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
中華民國這個規定大致是，不能當直轄市、省轄市、縣、縣轄鄉、鎮、市長、議長、議員，不能當村、里長，但能當區、鄰長。
不過記得 2047 有過一篇帖子是相關的討論，可惜找不到了。
記得是在 2047 有這麼一篇帖子。底下回復討論富人比中產階級更摳門，還有一則回復講認識的一個比較富裕的家庭，番茄醬都是从麥當勞拿的。
城市感覺有些街區，貧民很多，但不至於「流浪汉遍地，满地狼藉」。可能祇有一兩個街道有那種景象。我反正沒見過。
富裕一些的社區主要在城郊。鄉村人煙稀少。
@谦抑 #193609 作者稱白妹「不甚富裕」「家里条件跟我一样」。
「作者说的这些内容核心就是钱。他远比不过人家说明他没钱。」有點繃。我也可以章口就萊：作者说的这些内容核心就是外貌。他远比不过人家说明他長得醜。
@庆丰包子香 是的。我讀清朝的一些書籍，有很多異體字，比如 筭 㐫 㣲 隂 餙 邉 㸔 縁 録 庅 䰟 湏 觧
台 為 裡 都是異體字。
@linda #193439 oplog 之前查，沒看到我被刪的評論啊。是說您修改了，現在能看到嗎？恢復倒不用，祇要我能看到我被刪的評論就好了。我理解是 natasha 以樓主身分刪除。之前是我誤解了，以爲他以管理員身分刪除。
可是可是，就在這裏，怎麼我自己的評論都看不到了？我不是樓主嗎🤯
@NoStepOnSnek #193419 我看到了。但不知道怎麼回事，我的好幾則評論也不見了，而且似乎是後臺刪的，沒有紀錄。
可習不是尼😭
會不會去天堂、見耶穌另說。這不是基督徒評價、論斷的領域。
@NoStepOnSnek #193420 Ambrosia 君是陳述句。希不希望也不是我能說的。真不熟。雖然說 Requiem 終曲有一首 In paradisum。
@natasha #193409 我抗議的並非他的事情，而是我的評論被刪。至於他，「我不支持你的言论，但我誓死捍卫你的言论自由。」 — 反對言論自由的人，比如赤匪、赤畜、品蔥，應以身作則，沒有言論自由。
我對他的過往言論不了解，但就這幾則評論而言，他說的女拳不一定指所有女權主義者。就像支黑說支豬，但不是所有支那人都是支豬，有義人，有脱支，也有獻忠。
雖然我不會這麼說，但確實有可謂「女拳」的人。
剛又查了查你們的管理员守则，令人遺憾，貴站的管理沒有「共識」的說法，祇有「管理員羣體」與「2047 團隊」。措辭也是「管理员看起来更值得信任」，而非維基百科的「管理員受社羣信任」。誰看起來？誰決定？2047 團隊嗎？
那麼請問，您作爲言論是否歧視、是否偏見、是否合理、是否刪除的判斷、決策者，是代表管理員羣體還是 2047 團隊嗎？您代表站方嗎？
牆裂抗議！
各項規則說好的轉水，沒有哪裏授權你刪帖禁平，而且是在別人的帖子下面。原來管理員是法無禁止即可爲，用戶才是法無授權即禁止啊。是我太過愚鈍了。管理員用心良苦啊。厲害了我的 7！
說實在，沖浪 TV 比品蔥自由很多，管理員也不會像品蔥與你站一樣，刪除與自己不同的觀點。當然還是品蔥更壞些，不僅刪帖還封帳。
至於你站，你站的定位是什麼？如果是魔怔人的 jerk circle，如果你站非要變成品蔥那樣的回音同溫沼氣池，那我也無話可說。
沖浪 TV 有沖浪 TV 的規則。他在規則裏大方、明確地說，什麼可以，什麼不可以。你站的規則是抄維基百科的。我當時看到還稱讚過。結果你站現在跟支那、品蔥一樣，規則是廢紙。這就很令人發酵、不齒。
剛又查了查你們的管理员守则，令人遺憾，貴站的管理沒有「共識」的說法，祇有「管理員羣體」與「2047 團隊」。措辭也是「管理员看起来更值得信任」，而非維基百科的「管理員受社羣信任」。雖然說「管理员…是为大家熟知并信任的 2047 成员」，但通篇未提及社羣、共識、民主，遑論確實的辦法、程序。誰「为大家熟知并信任」？「2047 團隊」說誰是，誰就是。
原來如此。我已經完全玩明白了。
@三天不打上房揭瓦 #193388 說實在，沖浪 TV 比品蔥自由很多，管理員也不會像品蔥與你站一樣，刪除與自己不同的觀點。當然還是品蔥更壞些，不僅刪帖還封帳。
至於你站，你站的定位是什麼？如果是魔怔人的 jerk circle，如果你站非要變成品蔥那樣的回音同溫沼氣池，那我也無話可說。
沖浪 TV 有沖浪 TV 的規則。他在規則裏大方、明確地說，什麼可以，什麼不可以。你站的規則是抄維基百科的。我當時看到還稱讚過。結果你站現在跟支那、品蔥一樣，規則是廢紙。這就很令人發酵、不齒。
各項規則說好的轉水，沒有哪裏授權你刪帖禁平，而且是在別人的帖子下面。原來管理員是法無禁止即可爲，用戶才是法無授權即禁止啊。是我太過愚鈍了。管理員用心良苦啊。厲害了我的 7！
一隻鹿兒絕對絕對不是臺灣人。他用詞都是大陸用語，甚至好多字都是簡體而非臺灣繁體。
Commonwealth Citizen 似乎沒有。British Overseas Citizen / British Citizen 確有此事。
@dellalove #193352 但是我覺得赤匪比品蔥更壞。我奇怪，世界上還有比赤匪更壞的嗎？
反對言論自由的品蔥求仁得仁了屬於是。
赤匪反對言論自由。品蔥也反對言論自由。真是不是支那人不進支那門。
最早大概什麼時候？UTC？
@陈士杰 #193307 我引用那段話的意思就是「祇有加拿大公民才拿加拿大護照，不是加拿大公民不拿加拿大護照」。美國也是一樣。
中國身分證號裏有你的生日，他爲什麼還要再註明你的生日？因爲他是一個證明，是一個國家的政府 unambiguously and explicitly 宣告說：這是我國的公民，即使多數國家祇有公民拿護照。
Canadian passports can only be issued to Canadian citizens. However, if you are a permanent resident and cannot get a passport from your country of origin, you might be able to obtain other travel documents from Canada.
护照是持证人的国际旅行证件，也是国籍和身份证明，在资料页标注国籍是非常自然之事，也是国际通行做法。日本、美国、新西兰普通护照的资料页均有国籍一栏。
@natasha #193189 歐洲語言查詞源感覺比中文容易。中文我目前找到的就漢典（滿意外的充分的來源）以及小學堂。卡一個，看風月有什麼推薦的。
By Brian Klaas
Dr. Brian Klaas is an Associate Professor in Global Politics at University College London and a columnist for The Washington Post. Klaas is also a frequent television commentator and political consultant. He was previously based at the London School of Economics and the University of Oxford.Klaas has advised governments, US political campaigns, NATO, the European Union, multi-billion dollar investors, international NGOs, and international politicians.
https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/1525503581801136130
Democracy is fragile. It requires many key features to survive—and I fear that the US has now lost several of those features because of the GOP’s embrace of authoritarianism. Worse, these trends are accelerating, with no obvious brake in sight. So, what has been destroyed?
A shared sense of reality. Without it, compromise—a core function of democracy—becomes impossible. The more that GOP extremists push QAnon rhetoric and lies about elections and other debunked lunacy, how can you compromise? You don’t even inhabit the same political universe.
A commitment to democracy by all major parties. Without that, every election becomes a gamble that an authoritarian party will seize power. That’s where we’re at now, because the GOP has gone all-in on authoritarian lies and devotion to a cult-like autocratic figure.
Shared belief in electoral legitimacy. American vote tabulation is extremely accurate, but Republicans have lied about US elections on Trump’s instructions, which now means the very engine of democracy is not accepted by a large chunk of Americans. Is that sustainable?
Politicians being punished if they don’t solve problems. Again, no longer true. Republican voters are largely rewarding meme trolls and “owning the libs” with meaningless stunts of increasing extremism. There’s some of this for Democrats too, but it’s not nearly so extreme.
Fear of losing general elections. Most Congressional elections are uncompetitive due to gerrymandering and demographic sorting. Most members of Congress need only care about their primary, which means they have strong incentives for ratcheting extremism.
Punishment for politicians who are deranged extremist authoritarians. And yet, the third ranking House Republican just called Democrats “pedo grifters.” What used to be punished is now a way to breakout as a GOP star. It’s therefore going to get worse because voters reward it.
Sadly, this is self-perpetuating, because the worse Republicans behave, the more the GOP base voters are willing to excuse as they get used to it. The only punishments are reserved for those who cross Trump or accept the 2020 election as actual reality (see: Cheney, Liz).
We’re left with a GOP ecosystem that punishes people who focus on policy, compromise, and fight for democracy. It rewards people who stand out most as authoritarian extremists, which creates a ratcheting effect—which is why it keeps getting crazier. And there’s no brake!
There are solutions/reforms that would work. But sadly, all of them are realistically dead on arrival in Congress because of the current power balance (especially in the Senate). To summarize the obvious: American democracy is in serious trouble with no obvious end in sight.
擅長電腦的話，會 JavaScript, Python, SQL, Java, Node.js 嗎？
厂？什麼厂？
我比較關注的是，你是否有足夠的能力 1. 在國內找到好工作，賺到出國留學、移民的錢，2. 在移民申請者中脫穎而出，成功移民。
¿Pregunta?
¡Exclamación!
Syriac 也有一些獨特的標點我記得。阿拉伯語倒沒有左右相反的標點，而是沿用拉丁語系標點。
醫學的話，美國反正不認中國的醫學教育。哪怕在中國讀到醫學博士，到美國都得重讀醫學院。
其他國家不清楚。這是我 5+ 年前了解到的。現在可能有變化。
說實話我覺得美國永居、國籍都比日本、英國好拿。真要移民，英語國家我推薦加拿大、澳洲、紐西蘭，北歐據說挺好潤，不過得學他們的語言。
TCPioneer 不知道什麼東西。存檔
萌娘百科也好久上不去了（海外直連）
2016 年的廣告，你們怎麼神通廣大這都知道。
A frayed knot.
I think knot.
又多了一個看不懂的捏：
驚了。你是洋大人嗎？怎麼都看得出來。
What has 4 letters, occasionally 12, usually 7, seldom 6, but never 5?
這個是我（改）編的。同時有人可能想到 fuck。這個不是我看不懂的。
8 的三個含義我是在想，有 1. 「拉開」的意思，2. 「離開，放棄」的意思，還有就是 3. 你說的。一開始沒想這麼污。
圖 2 找到了。2016-09 廣告：The best part of waking up, is Folgers in your cup.
