BTW this also works the other way: I find myself to avoid US products more and more because they tend to come with inbuilt obsolescence, or, for digital products, with dark patterns preventing subscription cancelling.
745 karma · joined September 7, 2023
$100 put into gold in 1975 would be about $2600 today, or about $440 in 1975 dollars.
S&P 500 would have had 3x the returns of gold.
Even within the framework of (structural) realism so popular in contemporary US politics there's this well-known problem that the buildup of defense capabilities of party A looks like aggression to party B - and vice versa. See the seminal work Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Or the relations of Britain and Germany before WW1 and WW2.
The FP article I mentioned, "Trump’s Trade War May Make Elite Young Chinese More Nationalistic" [1], illustrates the argument. You have actual empirical data, changing over time, after exposure to the "treatment". So at least a hint of causality.
[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/05/21/trump-tariffs-china-tra...
For the China part: Yes, the "by force" part certainly exists as a position, in competition to the peaceful unification approach. It's important to keep in mind, though, that the confrontative position of the first Trump administration and afterwards the Biden administration significantly helped the "by force" faction. There was an interesting piece in Foreign Policy about that, a social scientist from the US was questioning Chinese students at an elite university on this very topic and thus had the chance to do a time series observing the attitude change following US actions.
Secondly, in Taiwanese politics, Unification is actually a big topic and even has its own party, the New Party, advocating for it (plus the fringe CUPP). Not popular right now, but certainly existing - and evidently falsifying the notion that the all of "Taiwan doesn't want to be part of Beijing's China".
Written by ChatGPT?
(Edit: GB of course, not MB, thanks buildbot)
Sure, China will probably also spy and conduct industrial espionage, just as the US, but they appear to be a rational actor and have never threatened the sovereignty of European countries.
Just as with copilot, this combines LLM's inability to repeatably do math correctly with peoples' overassurance in LLM's capabilities.
And if the source of that framework is not (part of your definition of) science, how do we know whether that framework is true?
That was sort of my point: Poppers criterion is nice, but only works for a small subset of (natural) science - and even there has to face criticism because it is simply too naive for many edge cases.
That has to be a bug. I have a thinkpad with a Ryzen 7 6850U, running debian, and lose at most 3% per day.
GP didn't say that, but educators of course see schools as an important area to address the gap. The literature is pretty clear on this being a complex problems with schools being an important wedge to break the vicious circle.
You sure like that table, don't you? Trying to find the source of that blender numbers, I came across many reddit posts of you with that exact same table. Sadly those also don't have a source - the are not from the notebookcheck source.
Take our color perception as an obvious example: We clearly see different types of color, despite us being unsure at the thresholds in between, and the actual electromagnetic radiation of visible light being a continuous wavelength range.
That is just a fundamental limit of our reasoning. We mentally make models of the world to make sense of it. These models have to be of less complexity than reality, ergo they have to cluster perceptions, ergo we have to categorize.