There is a useful edge case to this. In my case I was searching for a specific bit of content that had too few results in English so Google started returning results based on similar search terms in another language. It took a bunch of quotes and some specific strings to get into that state in the first place though.
Language is used to convey meaning. The difference between my wife and Google is that Google tries to interpret language in the lowest common denominator which leaves all people who try to use language properly feeling like they need to learn a new one just to be understood by their search engine.
You can train a skill and improve on it. You can't train your head shape or arm length nearly as much. The brain is more malleable than some of the other body parts.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting then - we should train all pilots to be uniformly brilliant at everything so there's no variation and we can use any pilot to test, before we test any more aircraft?
Right, but my point is there may not actually be any pilots who are merely competent at all skills. The distribution of skills may be more complex than that. You may be making things safe for someone who does not exist, which is pointless, and you'd be better off making things safe for something other than a simple mean average.
You're going off on a tangent based on semantics and speculation. Pilots who are competent at every basic skill, but don't have years of combat or test pilot experience or extensive experience on the plane in question absolutely exist and that's what we're talking about.
You're getting hung up on this, like looking for the individual in a population who exactly matches an average, while ignoring the normal distribution that surrounds it. Don't obsess over the point, just center your window function around it.
"Ideal state" is inserted by your own bias. There are plenty of changes made by humans to the planetary system and some of them will be undone once humans are not around to maintain those changes.
There are plenty of exclusive communities on the internet because it's just as useful of a tool for any illegal activity as it is for corporations trying to drive more profits.
Sure, but that also has never been practically the case in any communist nation of which I am aware. Getting into No True Communist discussions isn't meaningfully productive, but there might at least be something to be made from looking at other self-declared communist states and teasing out the differences.
And I don't want to start that discussion. I just think it's easier to call China a totalitarian capitalist state, without torturing other labels to make them fit. It's not unthinkable for a state to miss represent it self when it comes to names or labels.
You'd need to specify an age group since it shouldn't be too hard to find supoort for Russia from the older generation that grew up under Soviet Union and is now feeling nostalgic for their past.
