Generally no, probably because many males when they end up in physicality make it some kind of dominance thing (playfully violence that's just a little too much, "higher position" touches like hand on top of shoulder or physically leading other people and even the good old "measuring somebody one the firmeness of their handshake"). It's not casual and friendly when there's measuring and testing of others involved.

Outside close family, the only environment I've been in were things like hugs were normal was the Theatre world.

Coming from a country which had a Fascist dictatorship until the 70s, I've started calling Zionism ethno-Facism, because it's a far more rabidly racist strain than most Fascist dictatorships and unlike almost all of the others which were mainly Nationalist, claims to represent an entire ethnicity and justifies even their used of the most extreme violence as some kind life or death fight for the defense of their ethnicity.

Fascism as seens in places like Spain, Portugal, Greece or even Italy was mainly Nationalist (still authocratic, repressive and violent) and never anywhere as racist or violent as the kind of Fascism that includes claims of racial superiority and representing a whole ethnicity.

Amongst Fascists in Europe it's only the Nazis that claimed, like the Zionists do, that they represented an entire ethnicity, who similarly committed extreme genocidal violence against specific ethnicities whilst claiming it was all in defense of their own ethnicity and who in the same way claimed than critci sm of their acts was being against that ethnicity.

Any Fascism is bad, but ethno-Fascism adds to it the whole layer of ethnicity and hence is far more cold, calously violent and genocidal when it comes to other ethnicities - think Ku-Klux-Klan crossed with Fascism.

Pretty much the entirety of the Zionist propaganda follows the same ethno-Fascist lines as the Nazis stuff, from the "chosen people" and them claiming to represent a whole ethnicity to their claims that their agressive murderous violence along ethnic lines is "defense" and even calling anybody who criticizes their violence as being against their race, in the case of Zionists by calling the "anti-semites" whilst the Nazis would say that such critics were "against the Arian Race".

Most of what the Zionists say is just Nazi propaganda with "Arian Race" replaced by "Jewish People" and "against the Arian Race" replaced by "anti-semite".

So one kind a member of an ethno-Fascist ideology - a Zionist - directly quoting the leader of another ethno-Fascist ideology such as Hiltler, is not at all surprising.

The work is almost all done by integrated circuits, so what they did was basically supply the necessary crystal and caps to get the integrated circuits to work, add what looks like a voltage regulator to regulate supply and route the whole thing on what's almost certainly a 4 layer board.

Also at the speeds we're talking about we're not yet in the domain of having to worry about stuff like the impedance of lines and the signals in absolutelly normal circuit board lines bouncing or getting distorted due to things like impedance mistmatch.

What's impressive here is not the size of the thing (you would be surprised at how stupidly small even very complex functionality is nowadays - stuff like the Blackberry Pi-Zero is only as big as it is because of making available so many pins to connect to not because of the actual hardware), it's that this is pretty advanced electronics for high-schoolers even with good teachers, as figuring this stuff out generally involves a lot of datasheet reading unless you're starting from somebody else's design.

Back when I last worked in Tech Startups, at the point in my life when I was already a salty old dog of the programming world, Founders were all about wanting to hire "enthusiastic" people, which I found hilarious.

"Enthusiastic" was me at the age of 12 in the swimming pool not really knowing how to swim properly because I hadn't been taught how to properly swim yet, so basically my "swimming" throw water all over the place to move very little, which metaphorically also describes my mode of work as a developer in the first couple of years of my career.

Whilst "motivated" isn't the same thing as "enthusiastic", it's quite often used almost as a synonym by the Tech Bro types in the Startup world when it comes to the kind of employee they want, so that meme made me think of this.

Further from the ruling class: "You peasants should be greateful that we're not as shit as those other guys *points at the worst possible example in the World*"

It's almost like there are these great big nasty sides effects for the act of being the first nation in the modern era to use nukes for anything but self defense ...

From Nazis to Zionists all ethno-Fascists claim their violence along ethnic lines is for the defense of a specific ethnicity and that any violence is justifiable to defend their ethnicity, hence for them anybody who condemns that violence must be a racist: just like 80 years ago they said those who criticized them were "against the Arian Race", now they say critics are "antisemitic".

Further, this worldview extends to everything and sees everybody as first and foremost a member of an ethnicity: all actions of anybody out there are for the ethno-Fascist due to those people's race or to the race of others, both at the level of why people do things and the kind of things people can do, and that includes not just actions but words too - voiced criticism or approval and even lack of criticism or approval are all seen as due to race. Even inaction is seen as due to race.

Everybody looks like a racists to an ethno-Fascist since they're the biggest racists around and couldn't possibly imagine that other people would not have race as motivation for what they say or do.

Oh, it's absolutelly cultural, probably derived from empathy (check the Vulnerability chapter in the paper in my second link), and it seems to be almost universal at least in the modern Western World.

And indeed, going back to the very beginning of our discussion, I was giving emphasis to the killing of children by the Zionists as an especially abhorrent crime because I do share that feeling as I am part of that culture just like I expect are the majority of those that would read my post. I don't write comments to convince the tiny subset of people who find it easy to have a very detached view on the purposeful killing of human beings, I write my comments to convince most people and I wasn't even being manipulative because the take I have on the morality of child killing is based on the feelings I have on which deaths are more abhorrent which seems to be the same as most people likely to read my comments.

That said, a purely logical and as objective as possible analysis would still yield that the murder of children is generally a worse act than the murder of adults, simply because children have in average a lot more years as a productive citizens ahead of them than adults: in pure, emotion aside, almost Accounting terms, targetting children in a war is targetting the Future of a nation by taking out their Future productive capability.

In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's exactly the calculation that the Zionists made - if one has no empathy and hence no sense of added abhorrence when it comes to child murder and one has as a strategical objective to weaken now and forever an entire enemy ethnicity, it makes logical sense to target the children of the "enemy ethnicity" in order to further that strategical objective and the absence of empathy guarantees there are no pesky feelings like guilt getting in the way.

Well, I can see many people in there who are not perfect representatives of the Arian Race (people whose hair is not blond enough or whose eyes are brown rather than blue), so they should be counted as black, thus making this a mixed race audience, most of which are black.

/s

First a note: The third entrance you found has a minimum sentence of 10 years in jail for child Manslaughter and no minimum sentence for adult Manslaughter, hence is nor the "same sentence" - per that law even if the Juri finds reasons for a sentence lower than 10 years in prison, the sentence cannot be less than 10 years in prison if the victim was a child.

The paper in the second link covers sentencing guidelines (which is formal guidance for prosecutors but not actual law, so they can disregard it) and how jurors actually decided (i.e. derived from de facto results), both of which as far as I can tell are much more common way sthan "by way of formal law" in shaping the sentences for killing of children are different than others.

Quite independently of all that, even just that first link (first result in the Google search) disproves that notion of yours that Murder is Murder.

Zionists are ethno-Fascists who happen to ethnically mainly be Jews and who claim they represent their ethnicity even against the denials of lots of Jew who are not Zionists.

Being a Jew does not make one be a Zionist just like being a white person with blond hair and blue eyes does not make one a Nazi, no matter how much the ethno-Fascists - Zionists and Nazis alike - claim: contrary to ethno-Fascist claims, the relation is entirelly unidirectional.

Being against the kind of actions of ethno-Fascists - mainly the violent calous mass murder of people of different ethnicities than the one the ethno-Fascists claim to defend - has no racist component at all, no matter which ethnicity the ethno-Fascists claim to defend, because the abhorrence of their acts is quite independent of the race of the perpetrators or their victims.

The only race/ethnicity thing here is brought by the ethno-Fascists themselves who incessantly go on an on about the ethnic group they "represent" and how anybody criticizing the ethno-Fascists' actions must be against that entire ethnic group rather than merelly the ethno-Fascists. Nobody else cares which are the races involved, only about the nature of the actions of the ethno-Fascists and that they are justified using racism and racist tropes.

Your incensant desperate attempts at framing everything as being about the race of the people involved is a perfect example of ethno-Fascist argumentation and way of thinking.

Once again you're showing that in your worldview everything is about race just like all ethno-Fascists.

The very first link in a Google search - several states have explicity sentences for the murder of children, either with higher maximums, higher minimums or transforming things which would otherwise be Manslaughter into the same as First Degree Murder. (Just search for "Child" in that page to find those).

Also check this paper. Even though it's about gender rather than age, you can find the point I made earlier about "vulnerability" for example at page 435 section B.1 as well as explicity references to children in the various Sentencing Aggravatory Scales under Apending I (from page 464) explicitly under scale I and IV and implicitly in other scales (i.e. Scale 3 - Heinousness) which whilst they don't prove that child killing explicitly is deemed more heinous than others, does prove my point that society has Heinousness criteria for Murder, disproving your "Murder is Murder" take.

Ah, yeah, Ethiopia, that self-proclaimed nation with "Western Values", which has the "Most Moral Army In The World" and is supported militarilly by the US in the specific actions causing death and starvation amongst the children of the targetted ethnicity.

What you're saying is that in reality Israel is pretty much a Fascist authocracy, like Ethiopia, hence having the same disregard for human life, especially children. That does make sense.

As for the rest of your bollocks, given that the blocade of Gaza for food, water, fuel and energy has been openly decreed by the Israeli Government, all that disassembly of yours pointingly ignoring the primary cause of it and throwing all the the excuses you can think of at the wall and see if something sticks, is just another technique straight out of Himmler's book of tricks, in order of appearance:

• "there is really no starvation" (even though the UN says there is)
• "we're actually trying to help them" (even though Zionists created the problem in the first place and could instantly stop it right now by letting aid in by land, but refuse to)
• "other people aren't helping" (even though it's not their fault and the ones who did and still now try to help, such as the UN, had and still have most of their help blocked from entering by the Zionists)
• "it's really all their fault and they're the ones killing their own children by not agreeing to our demands" (an almost perfect example of the "why do you make me do this to you by refusing to do what I want?" of sociopaths).
• "it's really all their fault and they're the ones killing their own children for political gain with the world's public opinion"
• "you only criticise the purposeful starvation of children in Gaza because you blindly support Hamas" (basically, "if you don't support us, you support our enemy")

It's amazing how you ethno-Fascists haven't really evolved much from the 1930s.

Every single Justice System in the World has a range of sentences for even the same kind of killing crime (for example for Murder) and even different crimes for the killing of another human being (such as Murder vs Manslaughter).

So even the various Justice Systems in the World recognize different levels of blame and deserved punishment for different situations where a human being kills another.

Justice Systems, even if containing plenty of unfair or ill-drafted laws, at the high-level encode what Society finds acceptable and unacceptable - you might have some countries with the Death Penalty and others without, and different minimum sentences for Murder across the World, but there isn't a single Justice Systems in the World with a single fixed sentence for Murder, which would be what matches your "Murder is Murder" position.

Meanwhile your argument on this is "the law makes no difference". Full, unadulterated, 100% personal opinion of the denialist kind.

Denialism is not Skepticism and it's the very opposite of "academically inclined" and putting forward and holding a theory entirelly on what you believe without in this entire thread even once putting forward even the most basic piece of supporting evidence that the rest of the World thinks like you (everything has literally been what you think and what you disagree with) is about as anti-academic as it gets.

Granted, for you it is as you say - Murder is Murder - (that's pretty well established by now).

For everybody else there are only two logical possibilities:

• Most other people don't think like you
• Most other people do think like you and the discrepancy between everybody thinking like you but setting some of the most important formal structures in Society in a way which is completelly inconsistent with that, is that everybody else but you is a moron.

Occan's Razors is a pretty straighforward way to determine which of the two possibilities is the most likely.

The Constitution of Israel literally says that every Jew in the World has the right to Israeli Nationality, so Israel absolutelly is an ethnostate, with an ethnicity which is not defined by race but by religion.

The rest of your argument is the usual racist bollocks:

• By claiming that criticism of Israel is anti-semitism you're logically stating that Israel is the same as the Jewish ethnicity.
• Claiming that Israel is the same as the Jewish ethnicity means that you believe all members of that ethnicity believe so, a claim that is anchored in the most racists taking possible of the Jewish ethnicity - that they're all the same and hence all feel and want the same, a.k.a. pure racist prejudice.
• Worse, in light of there being Jews who do not feel represented by Israel and even who do not think Israel has a right to exist and are vocal about it, a belief that Israel represents all Jews logically means that you believe these specific members of the Jewish ethnicity are not "true" Jews (because if they were, then Israel would not represente all Jews, hence would not represent the Jewish ethnicity, hence cricism of Israel would not be anti-semitism), which is the most rabbidly anti-semitic things possible (the same "good" Jew and "bad" Jew shit as the Nazis).

In your defense of the Nazi-like ideology of Zionism you're using Nazi-like prejudice about the Jewish ethnicy and, thus end up, like the Nazis, implying that those Jews who to do not fit you prejudice are not good/proper/real Jews.

Your entire building of argumentation is predicated on the most racist possible take on Jews - that a young country with a specific political ideology could possibly represent an entire ethnicity spread all over the World, with thousands of years of History, Religion and Culture, and, worse, do so even though there are Jews who openly deny that such country or ideology represents them (so you're basically claiming you know better what it is to be a Jew than those Jews), all to the point of ethnicity, country and ideology being indistiguisheable, hence criticism of said country and ideology amount to being against that ethnicity.

It's ironic that you hold and spread rabbid anti-semitic beliefs which betray that general racist view of the World of yours which I've already pointed out, whilst accusing others of being anti-semitic.

Then again it's not surprising, since the Nazis used the exact same kind of "argument" you are using when they claimed to represent the Arian Race, and Zionists just replace "Arian" with "Jew" and "against the Arian Race" with "anti-semitic" in Nazi arguments to create their own - the whole thing is straight out of a Himmler speech with just the ethnic group replaced.

Anybody who has actually paid attention to the evils of Nazism and the Holocaust immediatelly recognizes the Zionist "we represent this race" argumentation structure as the same shit as the Nazis used in their speeches, not just in general terms but often even in of detail.

The vast majority of people in this World see the killing of other human beings as something that covers a moral range, with something like self-defense when in direct danger for one's life being at the more acceptable end of the scale and the killing of the young children at the more unacceptable end of the scale.

This moral scale within murder also applies to the murderers themselves, which is why - as I pointed out earlier - in murder statistics and deaths in wars, children form a far smaller proportion of the deaths in comparison to the total of children, than people of other ages for in proportion to the total of people of those ages.

So even if you yourself haven't a heightened sense of revulsion for some murderes versus others (which, by the way, is not normal), even people who kill other people generally find the killing of children harder or even unnacceptable.

In practice child murder is pretty well correlated with the highest levels of sociopathy and psychopathy, so a military which practices high levels of child murder has higher levels of psychopaths and sociopaths in their midst and leadership, and they have freer reign to act in psychopathic and sociopathic ways with no punishment - there are always some psychopaths and sociopaths in the military, but there being so many that child-murder is a generalized practice including specific targetting children - for example snipping children or bombing playgrounds - is incredibly rare.

We saw this with the SS and the Nazis, and we see this with the IDF and the Zionists.

Almost 30 years into my career as a software engineer, I'm now making a computer game that takes place in Space and were planets and comets follow Orbital Mechanics, so I'm using stuff I learned at Uni all those years ago in Degree-level Physics, since I went to university to study Physics (though later changed to an EE degree and ended up going to work as a software developer after graduating because that's what I really liked to do).

I've also had opportunity to use stuff I learned in the EE degree for software engineering, the most interesting of which was using my knowledge of microprocessor design during the time I was designing high performance distributed systems for Investment Banks.

(I've also used that EE knowledge in making Embedded Systems - because I can do both the hardware and the software sides - though that was just for fun)

Also, pretty much through my career, I would often end up using University-level Mathematics, for example in banking it tended to be stuff like statistics, derivatives and integrals (including numerical approach methods) whilst game-making is heavy on trigonometry, vectors and matrices.

So even though I never formally learned Software Engineering at University, the stuff from the actual STEM degrees I attended (the one were I started - Physics - and the one I ended up graduating in - Electronics Engineering) were actually useful in it, sometimes in surprising ways.

At the very least just the Maths will be the difference between being pretty mediocre or actually knowing what you're doing in more advanced domains that are heavy users of Technology: I would've been pretty lost at making software systems for the business of Equity Derivatives Trading if I didn't know Statistics, Derivatives, Integrals and Numerical Approach Methods and ditto when making GPU shaders for 3D games if I didn't know Trigonometry, Vectors and Matrices.

And this is without going into just understanding stuff I hear about but are currently not using, such as Neural Networks which are used in things like ChatGPT, and Statistics are invaluable in punching through most of the "common sense" bullshit spouted by politicians and other people played to deceive the general public.

Absolutely, you can be a coder, even a good one, without degree level education, but for the more advanced stuff you'll need at least the degree level Maths even if a lot of the rest of your degree will likely be far less useful or useless.

Well, it massivelly depends on social class - the higher it goes, the worst it gets - plus it's more of an English thing.

Even in England, for example a working class scouse (somebody from Liverpool) is unlikelly to be a two faced bastard:

Somewhat violent? - possibly.

Prejudiced, maybe even racist? - quite likely.

A bastard? - you can ask his mom but you'll probably get punched.

Two faced? - not likely.

IMHO it's unsurprising that back in the days when social mobility was still decent in Britain and young working class lads actually had a real chance to make it in the Arts, the country made some of its best music and had its most iconic bands - you're not going to get something like Punk from kids born with a golden spoon in their mouths.