16 karma · joined June 20, 2023
Even more tiring are people trying to silence discussion.
> it’s okay to just… not post.
Why not take your own advice?
Why are you here then? Don't read the comments and just read the articles. It's exhausting reading intentionally manipulative comments like yours.
There is a reason why history is called 'his story'. The best and most dramatic story, usually favored by the elites, get tolds. More often than not, historians are commissioned by the elites to write stories. Even today.
1. Because EU isn't a centralized nation. Maybe one day.
2. It is a vassal of the US.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/us-pushin...
> what makes you think India and China can?
Because they have to.
> To develop companies that can threaten the established US ones you need more than educated capable brains, you need massive amounts of VC funding
I don't think china is desperate for funding. And china has already created such companies. That's why china is being sanctioned.
I've always wonder how feasible it was to do astronomy by boat? That way you can chase clear skies. And I'd suspect there is almost no light pollution out in the deep blue sea.
Yes obviously.
> or are they pointing out that a U.S. based company should be more concerned about their investments or financial interests?
What? You think newsweek is looking out for elon's financial interests?
> Really, is this piece "interfering" abroad?
No. Saint media is worried about elon's financial well being.
That's silly london. Our cops are armed to teeth. Also, would drones have stopped all that violence?
Drones are about surveillance and control, not protection. It's inevitable but lets stop pretending it's about our protection.
That's the dumbest shit I've read here. Why would the chinese try to bring democracy to vietnam. I'm talking about the vietnam war where we liberated more than 4 million innocent vietnamese of their lives to bring them democracy.
Also, let the saudis, russians, africans, iranians, chinese, indians, etc protect their own 'values' and let them punish people for 'disinformation' as they fit. The same propagandists complaining about foreign interference sure love to interfere everywhere.
He was talking about objective things that people fail to to intuitively understand.
> In all sorts of places, not least counting things.
So where? Just one. Give me where 1 exists so I can check it out.
> Mathematics is about equivalences;
No. Mathematics is about theorem generation. Going from axioms to theorems via proofs. Though some go from theorems to find axioms.
> it's to say that if you have something that's 2-like and combine it with something that's 2-like in a way that's +-like, then the result will be =-like to something 4-like, in the same sense of "like".
What you are describing is just arithmetic. That's the interpretation or model for one particular set of axioms, theorems, etc. What's objective about 2-like? Feels abstract.
Funny I asked a simple question and yet you rambled on about nonsense you don't even understand.
It worked for iraq, afghanistan, vietnam, etc so it must work for ukraine.
> By my count Japan invaded at least 16 countries during WW2
None of those 16 nuked japan though. You are not as clever as you think you are.
> and occupied a large number of them.
All of those 'countries' were occupied by european colonizers before japan kicked them out. So using your logic, britain, netherlands, france, etc should all have been nuked.
> They were also bombing a number of areas pre invasion such as America and Australia.
Well both america and australia had declared war on japan. Also, america and australia were colonizing powers in asia far worse than japan. You might want to brush up on your history.
But regardless, none of that justify nuking a bunch of civilians does it...
It's unbelievable how shallow and narrow and bad google/youtube search has become. It didn't happen over night. Year by year, little by litte, it got worse and worse.
Such as?
> "but how do you actually know" argument of a college freshman
Epistemology has been studied by some of the greatest thinkers since the ancient greeks ( probably even before ) and not just college freshmen.
> no matter how obvious the impact some people just refuse to accept things as objective simply because they fail to intuitively understand them.
If you have to intuitively understand them, it isn't very objective is it?
> Foundational fields like mathematics and physics are as objective as we can get.
What in math are objective facts about the nature of reality? Where in nature is the number 1? Also do you realize that many mathematicians don't even accept the 'reality' of real numbers.
I think as you think more deeply about these topics, you will change your tune.
History has shown it to be right. All you have to do is look at the soviet union/russia.
> It doesn’t flow that their economic success was tied exclusively to authoritarianism.
No. But it is tied to the crushing of the 'democracy' rebellion.
> One might argue they would have a stronger domestic consumer economy if they hadn’t.
You can argue anything but you can't deny reality. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Well that's not nice.
> and like a dozen more countries, generally over things that happen in Ukraine.
Good? Like a dozen more countries overthrew a democratically elected government in ukraine. Good for russia for protecting democracy in ukraine.
> What war is Russia fighting against an existential threat that is trying to invade them again?.
Either this is the dumbest comment I've read or the most confused comment I've read. Who was japan an existential threat against? Who did japan invade 'again'?
> Why? even if they didn't work we probably wouldn't nuke them, we don't nuke people just because.
Ask the japanese about hiroshima and nagasaki...
> I have serious doubts about all of Russias nuke working given just how hollowed out and non-existent much cheaper parts of their military appear to be.
Then what are you crying about?
Considering they have tens of billions in revenue every year, a lot of people. But what's IBM's niche? I remember they promoted watson a few years back and nothing seems to have come out of that. IBM is such an iconic name in tech but I don't remember them doing anything noteworthy for a long time. At this point IBM is just famous for being famous.
> Then the advertisers, professionals, and hucksters will swoop in, do their thing, and slowly overshadow the old "normal" users.
It's more insidious than that. Corporations demand special treatment, favorable algorithms and censorship. In the past, when breaking news occurred, I checked youtube, reddit, etc to get more raw news from ordinary people. Now it's all censored on these platforms. Similar to how 'you' can't use bad words on youtube, but corporate entities can. The scales have been tipped overwhelmingly to one side. But I guess that was inevitable.
Media: We demand online censorship.
Media: State governments can't resist the siren song of censorship.
Unbelievable.
Also, it's amazing how the article left out the most egregious example of state censorship - anti-bds laws. A few dozen states make it illegal to boycott a foreign country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws
Can you imagine if china or russia was able to get nearly 30+ states to make it illegal to boycott china or russia? Also, a super-majority of americans are against anti-bds laws and yet most states have them. Makes a mockery of democracy and representative government.
Why ukraine? Russia's enemy isn't ukraine. Surely they'll use it on their enemies.
> and they are free to suffer the consequences too.
What were the consequences of hiroshima and nagasaki again?
> If the nuclear weapons actually work that is.
I suspect if their nuclear weapons didn't work, we would have nuked them a long time ago.
Sometimes people get so silly here.
If you read the bible, in particular the old testament, you'll realize that "Man made God in His image". A flawed God that is insecure, jealous, spiteful, greedy, genocidal, vicious, etc like the men who wrote the bible. After all, Man is the author of God.
The US didn't invite china to anything. The US begged, threatened and cajoled china to open their immense and cheap labor force. China had what the US wanted. It was nixon that went to china, not mao that came to the US.
> The thinking was they would move away from communism and Russia and towards an open Democracy.
That's as stupid as saying we helped saudi arabia, kuwait, qatar, etc develop their oil and gas field so that they will become christian. If your assertion was true, we'd be trading with cuba and north korea today. If your assertion was true, we would have been top trading partners with the soviet union. Instead we isolated the soviet union and sanctioned them. Did we only want china to be a democracy? Not the north koreans, cubans and soviets?
> Such as the Democracy movements in the 80s that were ultimately crushed in Tiananmen square.
'Democracy' movement. Right. And look where china is today? I think china made the right decision to crush the 'democracy' movement. Don't you?
It's the same debunked propaganda I've been hearing from the likes of gordon chang since the early 2000s. Morons actually believed we invaded iraq to bring freedom and democracy. So it shouldn't be surprising that morons believe we exploited their cheap labor to bring democracy to china. It's cringe level propaganda.
You can't fix search no more than you can fix social meda because search and social media has grown so big that they are politically important and hence state property.
Once search and social media reached critical mass, the state got involved. The state was probably always involved but they took control when it got 'too big to be independent'. When google and social media showed that they can overthrow governments and affect elections, the party was over.
Even if there was an internet worth searching, google would not showing us that. Google will be showing us what the state wants.
'Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase.' - Dune
What nuclear taboo? I think hiroshima and nagasaki ended any hope for a nuclear taboo.
> It's probably less direct than that though, as they need the North Korean ammo and want North Korea to distract the US as much as possible.
Honestly, it's amazing how people just mindlessly parrot dumb propaganda they watch. Take a minute to think about what you just wrote for a minute and you'll realize how dumb it is. Here's a hint, if you read or watch something about russia or china o iran from news or social media, it's probably bullshit.
Just like bribery in 3rd world is corruption but here, it's called lobbying ( cost of doing business ).
Technically we didn't. One of our ancestor species did.
In a society that doesn't allow monopolies, I guess we are destined to get cooperating duopolies.
More of this 'east vs west' nonsense. The court system exists not for the individual but for the society. This is true in the US, in china, in russia, in europe, everywhere.
> It's better from an individual rights perspective
What individual rights? All rights are given to collectives. Ask the african slaves who got 'special rights' because they belonged to different collectives. Civil rights, women's rights, etc are collective rights.
> but in societies that put far less weight on individual rights,
You mean societies that believe in collateral damage? Where if you think some bad guy is attending a wedding, you kill everyone at the wedding?
If there is a society that values individuals or individual rights, the society wouldn't exist.
"Imagine being in a job where you don’t really know if it’s real or not."
If you have to wonder, it probably isn't real.
Isn't foxconn just a low end mass manufacturer while TSMC is a genuine high tech semiconductor company? I suspect TSMC should have an easier time in the US than foxconn. But who knows. I remember the foxconn news was such a big deal and had such great fanfare. To end like this.