tassl

And I forgot to link to the covenant the Article 1 comes from: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Ci...

Signed by Spain in 1976, and that the Spanish constitution (10.2) accepts.

After all, they accused some puppeteers of glorifying terrorism for a play against police manipulating evidence in Spain [1].

[1] https://elpais.com/politica/2016/06/28/actualidad/1467119956...

Most regions on Spain had independent laws up to ~1700. While they belonged to the same Kingdom, they kept some independence. That level of independence was erased after a secession war that started on 1700, and ended with some decrees (Nueva Planta decrees, 1716 for Catalonia) that removed some "furs" and constitutions (not only in Catalonia, but everybody that supported the Hamburg's successor). And this was done using the term "derecho de conquista" (right of conquest).

Since then. I think that the source of conflict is that, for multiple reasons, catalans wanted to be part of a bigger political reality, but in "their" terms. And Spain, as a centralized system, didn't like that, doesn't like that and will not like that. To Spain, Catalonia is a property, why would they let it go? After all, it's their right (of conquest) to keep it.

A lot of the time, yes. Not always. In this case, hopefully not.

> Because they are not outside of, they are part of. The rest is a made up fantasy which a bunch of nationalists have used to rile people up, create a "common enemy" and a "them vs us" narrative and gain power for themselves.

No, it's just because they can. They are strong enough to do it.

Pro independence movements are orthogonal to nationalism.

> This process is absolutely not new and has caused terrible harm throughout history, yet here we are in the 21st Century, seeing Trumps and Brexits and all this bullshit again because we don't fucking learn.

I am sure Norway is hating that they split from Sweeden.

> The democratic means for eventual independence are HARD and SLOW because they HAVE to be. You should need a lot more than a loud voice and a molotov cocktail in your hand to push more than half of your presumed co-citizens out of their country against their will.

That's exactly why pro-independence Catalan movement has been asking for a referendum.

> We are talking about a region of Spain that in 1978 voted YES to approve the Spanish constitution.

More reductionist argument. Catalonia, and any other region in Spain voted between a constitution and a possible new dictatorship. Trying to imply that, since a group of people signed something 40 years ago, everybody in that region is rejecting their rights not explicitly expressed in that constitution is dishonest. And what is worst, the argument seems to be made that it will remain like this forever or until the majority of Spain decides. Again, the tyranny of the majority.

> the right of self determination does not apply to it when it's an autonomous region

The right of self determination is not yours (or Ban Ki-Moon) to give, it is for people to take.

> that is part of a functioning modern democracy

Clearly it doesn't function that well, or most [1] Catalans wouldn't be so eager to leave.

[1] http://icps.cat/recerca/sondeigs-i-dades/sondeigs/sondeigs-d...

Wait, both referendums (November 9th and October 1st) had +80% independence support. I am not sure why you would use them to make the opposite point?

No. That's a false wrapper around "lack of freedom" trying to make it look like freedom.

The politicians are free to have independentist ideology, and they can put it into their political program. But if they try to execute some pro-independence laws, they are blocked by the overuse of judiciary system in Spain and threatened (or punished).

So yes, the Catalan independentists are there for their ideas. Carme Forcadell is going to spend 10 years in jail while the rest of the table members of the parliament are being accused of disobedience [1]. Other Catalan politicians have seen reduced the accusations because they abandoned politics (Mundo or Santi Vila[2]).

> This takedown was to an app that was used to organize a blockage of a major airport. I do not agree with the takedown, but I do not think it's such a clear cut that it's 'freedom of expression'.

It's the right to protest.

[1] https://www.ccma.cat/324/el-suprem-jutjara-el-govern-puigdem... [2] https://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20191014/47901534881/c...

> This must be sarcasm. Yeah, they reject violent action at the same time that explicitly provide all the necessary logistic support for violent action, like telling people where is the police in real time, (the same policemen and policewomen that are ambushed later)

THAT might be sarcasm. There is no terrorism or violence implicit in informing people of police location in real time.

> they also slowly introduce and train naive youngsters in the exciting world of crime and urban war

That is false.

> send people to burn the streets, lose their eyes.

That is also false. The second part is quite disturbing, putting the blame where it should not be.

> and (with a little luck) die for the cause and create the long desired martyrs that will come some day

That's disgusting.

For context, other people have been convicted for terrorism with this list of materials: a mask of an activist [1], a printed map of a city [1], bleach, cabbage and a tweet saying "Goku still lives" [2].

But yet the terrorist attack in Barcelona that killed 15 people is not being investigated because of the connection of the master mind with the Spanish CNI [3] and its knowledge of the attack beforehand [4].

[1] https://www.publico.es/public/repressio-precedent-d-adria-i-... [2] https://elpais.com/politica/2018/07/26/actualidad/1532619800... [3] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/world/europe/spain-barcel... [4] https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/spanish-intelli...

> The comparison is flawed because Catalonia, like all other regions of Spain, is represented in the Spanish parliament through a democratic election process.

That's irrelevant for minorities; it's the tyranny of the majority.

> Also note how, just like in Spain, the US Constitution today does not allow for a state to secede, and in fact there was a civil war when some states tried to do just that.

That's false.

All independence movement start with laws that are not existing.

The argument of "I can secede from my home" is reductionist, simplistic and overall insulting to any group of people that want independence from the country they depend on or have fought for independence in the past.

Most countries today are independent even though it was illegal for them to become independent before they did. Poland or Estonia would still be part of the Russian empire. Austria and Hungary the same country, same with Czech Republic and Slovakia would still be Czechoslovakia. Malta and Cyprus would be part of the UK. And this is just a quick look to Europe of the 20th century.

We can go back and argue that the US couldn't/shouldn't be independent of the UK. And Cuba part of Spain. The question remains the same: why do people, outside of a territory, control the political status of this territory, going against international law?

"Article 1 1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development."

What Spain is saying, and some Spanish people justifying, is that Catalonia doesn't have that right, and Catalans should never freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Then reinforce that lack of freedom with charges of sedition if you try and charges of terrorism if you protest.

"Schmidhuber's significance in the field is not at the same level"

Out of curiosity, at the same level as any of the other three? I could see it from Hinton, maybe LeCunn, but Bengio?

Direct link with the pdf version: http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/DeepLearning2July2014.pdf

Unfortunately, a good PR is definitely important for prizes.

You are confusing independence with nationalism. You can be pro-independence without being nationalist.

That's not true. There was no referendum in 2016 and there is no "keep asking for a referendum" because the only referendum held was 1-O, and did not come from an agreement with Spanish government.

If Spain would have agreed on a referendum, the current situation would be very different.

I think that it is unfortunate that this seems to be the consensus among a lot of people. While there is clearly nationalism in both sides, we can't generalize and state that both pro and against independence are basically nationalist movements. That's unfair, that is simply not true.

Catalan independence movement is highly diverse, with people from extremely different political views.

The core question here, and I haven't seen it exposed, is when and under which circumstances can a certain region of a current state be allowed to become independent. Spain defends that once a majority of Spanish people decides they can, while most catalans (according to polls) want to have that sovereignty. Up until now sovereignty has been decided by force; if you are strong enough you have it. Catalonia is pushing for changes on that respect, trying to execute that sovereignty even though Catalonia does not have currently the strength to defend it.

Whether the reasons for independence are or not legitimated, the real question is when and how a certain territory can execute self determination without the need of a war. As far as I know there are no cases where the independence has been accepted from the country where the territory wanted to split from. Spain has multiple examples where they didn't accept independence (their former colonies, for instance, or Kosovo more recently).

Which book are you referring to?

"Avoid sin" and "cleansing" does not always goes together with self-improvement, but it usually goes tight with regret. I would have agreed with you if you used self-control as self-improvement.

Plus... the concept of sin depends on the religion.

The parliament didn't remove the sun tax. I am not sure about this new, but this tax is still being applied. The main leftist party in Spain (Podemos) defended during the last campaign to remove this tax [1], and there is a citizen currently suing Spain for this tax in front of the EU [2]. The Real Decreto de Autoconsumo [3] is active.

[1] http://www.lamarea.com/2016/04/07/impuesto-al-sol (this is around after the link you added, in spanish). [2] http://gaceta.es/noticias/espanol-denuncia-impuesto-sol-gobi... [3] https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2015/10/10/pdfs/BOE-A-2015-10927...

And, what we know, is that she removed 30,000 "personal emails", from which we know (at least) some are not so personal [1]. I wonder how the investigation would have changed if the FBI would had access to all emails.

[1] http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/06/new_clinton_emai...

(edit: added link)

Born in Barcelona, living in the US.

I am not sure the real problem is as described in the article. While there is a percentage of the population with no real skills, there are highly skilled people with either no work or working on positions for which they are overqualified (frequently non-permanent employees [1]).

I know people that are doing "fine" by Spanish standards, which is around 30K/year, but the majority of my friends and university classmates are making way below that bar. Most of them with the equivalent undergrad + master.

If the problem was "just" the lack of preparation among the youth, I am pretty sure that migrants would have trouble finding jobs on other countries (UK, Germany are the most frequent "destinations"), which is not the case. In my opinion, there is a big cultural problem; long hours, low salaries (employer) and a lack of culture for optimizing work hours (employee). If we add this cultural problem to the incompetence of the Spanish government, that basically prioritizes building pharaonic public structures (like the high speed train) or taxes technology (solar panels [2]) instead of investing on technology and/or innovation we have the current situation.

[1] http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/12/18/459854096/s... [2] http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2015/10/spain-a...

While I do agree with you that the hackers should be prosecuted (but in the same way than any other hacked service), what should be really prosecuted and repudiated are the regimes that allow that kind of "behavior". And I saying this assuming that you, as ex-muslim, agree completely with that statement, after all the punishment for leaving Islam is... a bit extreme.

As somebody that has gone through the whole process (MS, PhD, OPT, H1B, Green Card), granting green cards to diplomas of is a big mistake. While the current system adds some level of stress to the worker, I have yet to find (surely there are) a valid foreigner with some STEM degree that could not stay in the US if he wanted to. This is true for most "bad" students that I know. On the other hand, some students that trick the system (most of them, in my experience [1], chinese and indian) have had trouble to stay.

The current system gives you up to 29 months in OPT after a STEM degree (if I recall correctly, 12 + 17). During that time you can work towards H1B and Green Card; while H1B is tight with a employer, you can change employers with it. Now, if the Green Card is given to any STEM diploma, you will have a mass of unprepared, unethical students applying for and obtaining diplomas they don't deserve (because obtaining a diploma is not that difficult in the US). And I do believe this will create tensions later on with nationals.

[1] This is obviously biased. My experience in the university (and outside of it) is that there are networks that facilitate entry on universities, "success" in universities [2,3], and in interviews processes in companies. I have seen exams for the previous 10 years solved with detailed explanation; homeworks and all solutions for specific books solved, etc... with this only available to specific group. I have not seen this happening with people of other countries.

[2] http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/12/asia/china-education-agencies/

[3] http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/college-c...

Oh, at least thirds. Spain is even in worst situation; Google News closed Spain service[1] since they considered unacceptable to pay for providing links.

Spain has had a bunch of "interesting" laws for copyright protection. Like having to pay a tax for any HD, DVD (whatever thing you use to store stuff and per MB) as a preemptive pirate protection. And I think that other European countries shared this strategy[2].

[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/enrique-dans/google-news-leavi... [2] http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/digital-tax-opposed-sp...

Just to be clear on what is considered doping, the WADA considers any substance (or method) to be on the prohibited list if it meets two of the following 3 criteria[1]:

- It has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance - It represents an actual or potential health risk to the athlete - It violates the spirit of sport

So, in theory, the distinction of acceptable and non-acceptable is not drawn (only) in performance-enhancing drugs.

Another thing to consider is that (pre-BALCO) you are not always charged on taking performance-enhancing drugs but in either having some synthetic drugs on your organism detected or having some measurements over what is considered "normal" in humans. For example, T/E higher than 4:1 ratio. This means that the ratio Testosterone/Epitestosterone can be 4:1. If an athlete has a 1:1 level (which is normal), doping himself with testosterone won't be considered positive as long as it's kept below 4:1. All assuming that exogenous testosterone cannot be detected.

As far as I know, BALCO was the first time than some athletes were sanctioned without testing positive.

[1] http://www.usada.org/substances/prohibited-list/ [2] http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/steroid-doping-questio...

Where have you gotten that impression? Sharia support is large in most muslim countries, with a few exceptions. Some numbers on the %support of Sharia: Indonesia (72%), Pakistan (84%), Bangladesh (82%) [1]. Even in the UK the Sharia is used for certain areas of life.

[1] http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/gsi2-overview-1.png

If/when that happens, most likely there will be way less cars on the roads.

The atrocities committed during these periods were not made in the name of atheism, which is the main difference with ISIS or inquisition. Whatever they did, it was not consequence of their atheistic beliefs.