I have not seen any indication that Rowling, Musk, or Adams assert that trans people are categorically a "major threat". That said, these folks do view trans people as a "major threat" to those athletes who compete in the category that once was exclusive to humans distinguished by having XX chromosomes. They believe, and rightly so in my opinion, that this athletic competition category should remain exclusive to those humans scientifically established (usually pretty obvious at birth) to have XX chromosomes.
Researchers locate neurons in the brain that respond to '0' is in same region as neurons that respond to '1', '2', etc. The empty set (nothing) is apparently encoded differently.
I always figured that liberal radio, e.g. Air America, struggled and failed because that point of view had too much competition from other media, e.g. newspapers and television. Back before internet, conservatives only had radio to hear what they considered their point of view taken seriously and the other side derided whereas liberals had lots of other options to hear their points of view taken seriously while the other side was painted as rubes.
I don't see it as ironic at all. One way anthropologists studying a society can gauge what that society values is to look at the punishments applied for various transgressions. There are severe consequences for transgressions against things that a society values highly. Thus if a society values each human life as the most precious component of their society, then it is not unreasonable if that society places the most severe penalty on anyone who ends such a life. For that "most severe penalty" to be the ending of the life of the perpetrator, if such judgement is determined with grave concern for all parties involved including the perpetrator, is not ironic. It signals to the members of that society that their very life is the most precious aspect of the society of which they are a member.
I too enjoy reading Tao, but this approach to inequalities did not work for me at all. I am a retired PhD mathematician and I've taught the full gamut of undergraduate math in college. BUT all my life I have struggled with the simplest currency conversion arithmetic when I travel overseas. When I saw Tao's first example I said to myself, if this was how I was introduced to inequalities back in school (long ago) I'd likely have been a history major.
The research and discoveries that are most deserving of a Nobel Prize are precisely the sort that are unexpected and unpredicted in advance. All this "Monday morning quarterbacking" by everyone who now suggest that this discovery should have been obvious 20+ years ago or that the talent of those who made the discovery should have been obvious is rather silly.
Arguably the story of how this researcher was treated and what she still managed to accomplish can serve as inspiration and motivation to persevere to future generations of folks with unconventional ideas or ideas that are disparaged by the 'experts'. Yes, it can also serve as motivation to research institutions to take risks and go out on limbs every now and then as there can be some wheat hidden within the chaff.
"Today, the CRTC is advancing its regulatory plan to modernize Canada’s broadcasting framework and ensure online streaming services make meaningful contributions to Canadian and Indigenous content."
I would ask, who decides what is 'meaningful'? This sounds like an open door to censorship to me. Was not the requirement to make 'meaningful' contributions to society the excuse used by the Soviets and Red Chinese to stifle publications.