Then it’s not a binary system. It’s a system with two extremely dominant members. Those are different things. You can be more binary in specific contexts e.g., gametes and egg vs sperm.

I’d be very cautious about the healthy description in reference to intersex people. I don’t believe you are trying to say anything nefarious, but there’s a reason it shows up in eugenics arguments.

I didn’t say sex was a spectrum, though perhaps someone else you were speaking with did. I wouldn’t use spectrum for sex, since there are multiple differentiating factors with differing measures.

I’m not quite certain the point you are making here. Is the implication that because humans typically have two hands, those that do not are not a group that can be described? Or that they can be, but only should be as the product of developmental errors?

We don’t generally, where we know exceptions exist, refuse to acknowledge their existence. Saying sex is a binary is saying there are only males and only females. That’s literally what binary means. Like binary notation either uses 0 or 1. If it was possible for sometimes to have a 2, it wouldn’t be binary anymore. That’s a different thing.

This is especially true for something like sex that is based on a grouping of traits, genes, expressions, etc. which are not universally 0 or 1. Sure, we generally agree on a category when some are different, but there’s some points where it’s not so stark. Hence, the binary fails because there can be overlap and grey.

Nobody is saying we have to stop using male and female to describe sex in most cases, especially in a medical setting. But if you had a child born intersex, and the doctor turned to you and said, “Nah, my gut says male. Nothing will be different,” you’d probably ask for a second opinion.

It was pretty useful as a kid for feeding my Gameboy and Game Gear with batteries I rescued from the junk drawers of friends and family. If they were low, I knew I had to save more often to avoid losing progress if they went dead while I was playing.

Maybe if you have a super low cap, high fees, and they automatically close your position at a pretty conservative point. But that’d hardly be worth any broker’s time with that risk/reward, unless they are hosing the borrower with insane fees. Though if that’s the case, putting up collateral would be cheaper (even if you have to borrow it from somewhere).

You definitely do need money. No broker is going to let you short without collateral, and you’re going to be paying interest for the duration of your short position beside any fees/commission.

If you are a homeowner, property transaction records are public information in the US. Plenty of data brokers collate from the numerous city/county databases for those who only know your name.

To be fair, four of the five boroughs have greater populations than multiple states (Staten Island being the exception). I don’t think any other city in the US has comparable subdivisions.

It’s also hard to overstate the historical and cultural significance of NYC in the US. And this is coming from a New Englander who is obliged to say, “New York sucks.”

Amazon literally did this with diapers.com that led to them acquiring the company and shutting it down. I’m sure they’ve done it in hundreds of other product spaces as well.

Many monopolies form by first using a dominant market position to sell at a price no competitor can afford to match. Choice has already been removed before the “competition” folds or pulls out of the market. The consequences don’t happen overnight; you feel the squeeze before the “true” monopoly emerges. Amazon isn’t going to sell at a cheaper price once their competitors go out of business out of the kindness of their hearts.

Further, high consumer price is just one form monopoly power takes. Reduced labor power, wages, and worse working conditions are other important concerns, in addition to removing product variety and innovation incentive.

The shareholders in question suing are a public employee retirement fund. I wouldn’t exactly consider retired sanitation workers and bureaucrats societal leeches, but to each their own I guess.

I’m both chaotic good and lawful neutral, depending if it’s for my job or not. I suppose that’s a fair assessment of the difference between my professional character and home character.