190 karma · joined April 17, 2020
Some argue we are still feeling the effects of this today. It certainly didn’t help with social attitudes towards being miserly with money (which we very much are).
St Andrews? Elie? Lovely. Methil? Granton? Pass.
Are there examples of “it’s alright” seaside towns above some threshold size?
15 YOE down the road and you are making $80k as a good senior SWE. You are absolutely bewildered that your American friends who you studied with make comfortably double that.
Make it make sense.
At first I thought “~100 days, so what?” - but that was before I knew this was an 8088 managing to hold up to even just the background noise of the modern net (portscans, etc). It’s surviving being slashdotted by HN. Very impressive.
Europe is of course (to state the extremely obvious) no stranger to its own imperial adventures. We might do well to stop that if we don’t want to trigger refugee flows and other outcomes we don’t want.
There was a deep-seated aversion to rearmament owing to the memory of the Second World War, which is fading away, cajoled by events in Ukraine.
I see Americans make this comment a lot. Putting aside whether or not it is true that it enables higher domestic social spending, the comment never seems to come with the realisation that many Europeans deride the “need” for higher defence spending. This is due to Europeans’ perception that American military adventurism is what creates the instability from which Europe requires American protection in the first place.
Many Europeans will say: “America, please stop bombing the mideast or continuously expanding NATO; this will stop creating problems that result in you demanding we spend more.”
In other words, many Americans presuppose the validity of their military adventurism and assume Europeans agree with it, and thus think they should want to participate in funding the defence of blowback from it.
By contrast, many Europeans would rather America did not try to play global policeman, or if it’s going to do so, then happily accept paying for European defence as the price of Pax Americana / US hegemony.
“We apologise that this train has only 2 carriages today. This is because the additional carriages failed to enter service.”
Well, yes.
The ability to socialise with others and form connections with people is of maximal importance when it comes to convincing someone to employ you. There is no textbook for this. Interact with different groups of people and you will soon become a very good communicator, as you will be able to talk confidently and amicably with anyone.
Beyond that, a couple of projects that you can demo in an interview is a nice idea.
There is still so, so much innovation that the flights travel industry is ripe for.
[1] There are codified degrees of formality for written communications. Formal, demi-formal, and others used more operationally. I am talking about first-tier formal letters to senior officers in this case.
One wonders why a country (SG) which professes extreme economic liberalism (well, until it doesn’t…) cares so much about social illiberaism like this. It’s not like the PAP needs to appeal to tubthumping angry populism for votes, is it? (Genuinely asking. I assume that people vote for them on the basis of administrative competence. Wrong?)
Perhaps it’s more a case of “rocking the boat on this topic can only harm us, and gain us nothing”.
My enthusiasm was powered by the ability to do good by using my cable internet connection to download ISOs in trivial time.
I cut a strange figure at the post office every Saturday sending packages to places like Macedonia.
The tragedy of the commons is that nobody cares about the maintenance of the common good: I posit that the common good ought to include shared myths. Historically, this meant shared worldview and religion. Today, we are challenged to find other bases for trust in one another.