peterfirefly

Somalis are usually not spread out among the natives. They tend to clump together in ethnic enclaves where it is very easy to learn Somali (and where life is unpleasant for the unfortunate child who doesn't learn it).

That's very close to arguing that Communists aren't on the (far) left.

Vocabulary will be tough. There are surprisingly many Germanic loanwords in Finnish, both new and very(!) old, but most of them are not obvious until you've studied the language for some time.

Grammar will also be tough. It's not just "a bunch of suffixes".

Some people can communicate really well without being good at the language they are using. I bet you are one of them!

I disagree. They should learn the language of their own accord or get kicked out.

> C1.

Yes! And I would expect immigrants in citizen-facing jobs in the public sector to be at C2.

That won't last long among the young in Sweden, actually. Not if the current immigration policies continue, that is.

Montessori kids tend to have parents that produce better kids (both in the genetic sense and in terms of how they are raised).

It's a selection effect (also on the teacher side), not because they have a magic way of turning disruptive/dangerous/criminal kids into little angels.

They already do that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope

There are very good (and well-documented) reasons to believe a large part of the recently immigrated foreigners in Sweden are exactly such bad actors.

Your arguments don't really work the way you seem to think they do.

> is that any individual is able to pour millions into a political party of any persuasion.

It's an even bigger problem that political parties are heavily subsidized by the state, which favours the establishment.

This goes beyond purely monetary subsidies. Some people employed by the state have an essentially political function or have a large political influence over the population and they have been hired (and incentivized) by the established parties over decades.

Seriously? It's not like the Somalis have been in Sweden that long.

A less flamebaity response is that the Soviet Union ended up as one of the winners of the second world war. They lost a lot people (Stalin didn't care) but almost all of that was because of Stalin's incompetence (having killed most officers shortly before the war + sent millions to war without proper boots, uniforms, weapons, and ammo).

Probably a lot more than just a few months. You underestimate how similar Indo-European languages are to each other -- and that you already have a background in English and French.

Maybe a year or two. I don't doubt you would have learned Hungarian/Finnish but it would not have been as easy as you seem to think.

In the mid 2000's, before the Big Crash, we suddenly had lots of work immigrants from Africa in Denmark. They were such a breath of fresh air in comparison to our Somalis. They actually spoke English before they came, they behaved civilized, and a lot of them managed to learn some Danish -- on their own, similarly to what you did with Swedish but without the Open University enrollment, so they did it even more on their own than you did.

That's what proper immigrants do, even if they are only here temporarily.

  * we want to stay 16-bit
  * we want to make porting extremely easy
  * we want to make gradual upgrading of people's programs to >64K easy
  * we want to work well with really small memories (so don't force people to use fat pointers all the time)
  * we don't want the typical (or max non-redundant) instruction to get too long
  * we don't want an MMU
  * we don't want complicated bank switching
  * we don't want long carry chains for all address generations
  * -- but we still want a gigantic address space (for the time it was designed)!

The operating system/DOS extender could choose to let tasks (programs) run with the highest privileges, which would turn off some of the checks but not all of them -- you still needed valid selectors into valid slots in the descriptor tables.

The segment register solution does both almost for free in most cases. Code gets a segment, data gets a segment, stack gets a segment... and you are free to use all of memory if you bother to use the ES register. In many cases, that could be isolated to a small piece of the program so that was also quite cheap.

As someone who wrote code in assembler, Pascal, and C for those machines: it wasn't at all a nightmare. It was quite easy and simple.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Address_Windowing_Extensions

*: not actually 4GB, because that makes the kernel code harder to write and tends to lead to bad performance and lots of bugs. They could get 2GB max with the default settings and 3GB with a special configuration.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20040812-00/?p=38...

In retrospect, they seem so useful and obvious but apparently not. I guess the type of person who thinks near/far/huge is extremely complicated found segment pointers even more complicated.

Turbo Pascal 3.x always had a single code segment, a single data segment, a single stack segment + a heap. Heap allocations were paragraph aligned (ofs=0). All pointers were far pointers.

Turbo Pascal 4.0 and up had one code segment per module (that they called units). It still had a single data segment and a single stack segment + a heap. Heap allocations were still paragraph aligned and all pointers were still far pointers.

Turbo/Borland Pascal 7.0 also supported 16-bit protected mode. I don't know if heap allocations had ofs=0 there.

None of them had "huge" arrays/pointers where pointers can point to things bigger than 64K -- at the cost of a lot of instructions for pointer arithmetic and array indexing.