I mean, Chevron wants to be a corporate state unto itself, so this makes sense.
1.) If you spend more time and resources looking for crime in one population than in another, then you are likely to find more crime in the scrutinized population.
2.) If it is about preserving a culture, there is no need to bring up crime rates.
I can't seem to access the first, so I will focus on the second.
1.) It is a study of Norway, not Sweden.
2.) The categories all kinda fluctuate, but the specific rates that are higher appear to be non-violent and the largest increase is traffic violations.
3.) This does not show an increase in crime rates overall as a result of immigration.
4.) Immigrant communities tend to be overpoliced which may explain increases in non-violent crime rates amongst the immigrant population (see this link detailing how Norwegian police purposefully focused on immigrants over the native population as an example of over-policing: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1362480619873347).
I likely missed details in this report as I do not read or speak Norwegian, but if I missed something vital, feel free to highlight it.
I can't find any figures showing an actual crime wave in Sweden (excepting a sharp spike in 2020 followed by a significant decline in 2021, but 2020 had other circumstances that contributes that are distinctly different from immigration). What are you talking about? Right-wing parties always talk about how much worse the crime rates are due to immigrants, but data never seems to appear which supports this.
Given the way conservatives have already used the judiciary to do this to an extent at state levels, yes. They used the Judiciary to strip Democrat governors of power in Wisconsin and North Carolina while using the judiciary to grant Republican governors those removed powers and more. The current federal judiciary would not grant a Democrat president dictatorial powers, but would grant them to a Republican preaident.
This sentiment ignores that there is more to the government than the president and that the president is not (currently) a dictator.
(The conservatives in the judiciary seem primed to make the presidency a dictatorship, but won't do it while a Democrat is on office)
I mean, they supposedly used an algorithm that payed the voice actors for contributions to the training set and gives them royalties when it is used.
I mean, the Casimir effect was initially derived as the result of two infinite values having a finite difference.
According to the dossier, he might like that.
They had just forgotten about the Pauli effect. No wonder their experiment went wrong.
If my net worth is negative, does my debt increase or decrease?
The fact they spin and the bits interact gravitationally makes them symmetric. There are almost certainly some asymmetric galaxies as we know galaxies collide and they will be asymmetric for a bit afterwards, but the spinning and fiction of gravity will make them symmetric again fairly quickly on galactic time scales.
You get neutronium. Basically, what happens is that as you squeeze the electron closer to the nucleus (with gravity, for example) the electrons can combine with the protons (and an antineutrino) to make more neutrons. This is what happens when neutron stars form (and why I used gravity as the example force)
From my time playing it, the looting wasn't satisfying nor was the combat. In looting, the drop rate of things good or useful for your class seemed too low. For combat, it kinda felt like there were wild swings in difficulty that made level progress kinda disappointing. Some of this may have been fixed more recently; I have not played in at least two months.
Money laundering isn't really for getting money into the bank. It's purpose is to legitimize the money with a paper trail so it doesn't look too suspicious when you are spending large amounts on things where the source of the money may be scrutinized.
Laws aren't better than theories; they are generally statements about a narrow range of phenomena which can be expressed mathematically while a theory covers a wide range of phenomena. For example, theory explains the origin of all conservation laws in physics as being the result of symmetry. Each law covers a specific thing (i.e. conservation of momentum) while the theory covers all conserved quantities.
Given that 70-80% of people in the US will inherit nothing under the current system, any inheritance tax largely only affects those that have generations wealth to begin with. The exceptions might be things like the family farm as small farmers trends to be rather can poor, but with our current healthcare system, I don't think it is likely they could hold onto the farm until death unless they die by suicide or farming accident.
As a disclaimer, I have not watched the video due to being on a phone without headphones. Anyways, here is what I am getting from the thumbnail.
It looks like the argument being presented is that one observer sees light travel along a longer path than the other. The problem with saying this is that both people will measure the speed of light to be the same. This requires time to 'tick' slower in the frame observed to be moving relative to the grave that is stationary. The really fucky part of special relativity is that both observers see the other observer moving slower (general relativity will describe how the two frames reconcile when they stop moving relative to each other).