Who defines "fundamental human rights". I think once you start poking, you'll easily see that such a definition is frail and subjective.

> Who defines "fundamental human rights".

The United Nations do. Why?

Why do I (or anyone) have to abide by what the UN says?

Because what UN says is voted by member countries and (partly) incorporated into their laws.

And this is why you don't take "google searches" seriously. Anyone can write anything, let alone a clearly anti-Islamic website like the one you linked to. Many many scholars have spoken against the validity of such a marriage, and called it out as what it is.

Java has nothing to do with what you described. Its modern frameworks are extremely productive and performant. Just because you might have had a bad experience with one team that moves slowly (who may very well have their reasons), does not mean that the language or ecosystem caused them to be that way.

You're right, this has nothing to do with Java. Spring Boot and other modern Java stacks are quite great and very productive actually, as you already know quite well.

Do you think it's fair to compare something written in Struts to a modern Java framework like Spring Boot or Quarkus? I'd bet that it would have taken a similar time to rewrite in one of those frameworks as it took to do your rewrite.

Why is warm weather more efficient than cold out of curiosity? I would have guessed that cold air being denser means better efficiency.

> Nobody should have the power to subvert the meaning of time.

Interesting take, but isn't setting an interest rate doing exactly that, whatever that rate is?

This is why, the Islamic approach is the most superior one: no lending money with interest, period. This means at least two things:

(1) Lending money becomes an act of charity, since you cannot profit off of it.

(2) You want to tap into time value of money? Invest it in a proper risk sharing manner that is fair to all parties engaged.

It would be a very different world had we implemented this approach.

Islamic banks still lend money for profit,they just charge a fixed fee. It's arguably less predatory, but also reduces availability of credit.

Time is valuable; holding money for a time has value. Interest is just recognizing that.

Imagining that folks will ignore that is futile.

Quite sad how the whole thing got polarizingly politicized.

That's interesting. Do you have the rationale for why that is the case? What about recovered individuals?

It's still unclear exactly why that's the case, but it keeps turning up unlooked-for in different datasets (including from different jurisdictions which use different methodologies)

So far, the most promising theories involve new variants exploiting the immune effects of repeated exposure to the original spike proteins. In particular, the South African and Portuguese datasets on BA.4 and BA.5 lend themselves to this explanation -- but even with older variants, like BA.2/Omicron, the graphs just keep pointing in this direction. It seems that about 4-6ish months after boost, you're worse off than you were pre-boost.