One exception to it : fascists managed to convince people who can only lose stuff to a war that it’s good for them too.
One exception to it : fascists managed to convince people who can only lose stuff to a war that it’s good for them too.
You might as well warn about the sun eating the earth and turning it into hell. It’s not too soon, only 5 billion years left.
And yet 2 centuries ago some people were already thinking, exactly like you, that there was too many humans for the earth to sustain them. You can see how wrong he was. The fact that you refuse to learn from past mistakes is quite telling though.
You know who thought like you? Thomas Malthus. 2 centuries ago.
No nuclear accident has the ability to end life on earth. It is not a possibility.
And humans in the past would regularly suffer from famine and epidemic, and child death was crazy (as was mother death during birth).
No, a language is not just a language. I fact, it’s a bunch of compilers. How many there are and the hardware they work on is what matters.
And as a matter of fact, rust isn’t as much of an industry standard as C++ is.
Your mistake is to consider an election is a rational competition. It’s not. Not anymore, because medias make it impossible to know the truth. So it is more like a football match. People have the team they support, and for most nothing will change their mind because there’s too much propaganda. When almost everything is propaganda, you get to choose the reality you “prefer”.
So the point of the campaign is more about convincing people to vote in order to defeat the opposing team. Or to persuade the other team to concede.
For the first, it can be women too. For misogyny it’s harder. But there is a trend currently to attract and radicalise women into conservatism too. The trad wives movement. I don’t remember the names but there are movement for spirituality and naturalism that are also linked to trad wives. That is also a slippery slope : first you hook them spirituality, and at the end you have JK Rowling who is an anti-trans activist.
Women and men are not in the same groups simply because conservatives are misogynistic so they like to separate men and women.
Overall it is a culture war lead by the far right.
It’s a slippery slope. First it’s either a community they can share anything with, or it is a subject dear to them that they see people give solution to. Then, slowly, one idea at a time, they get litteraly corrupted. Ideas are imprinted through repetition, values are suggested. Then, or before, you imprint the idea that the others are lying. This is key because it seed doubt in everything, but as he is closer from this group, this group get to imprint its own ideas through repetition alone. Distance is built with relatives so that the group is the only group he has. Then if he starts to disagree, he will be kicked, sometimes also punished, and he’ll be left alone, or at least he must be convinced of it. Once there radicalisation is a process that’s hard to stop.
Doubt, distrust, and a group to be with are the key ingredients. Liberalism is a fertile ground for this because it promotes individualism when humans are social creatures. So it’s very easy to find people in need of a social group that gives belonging. And racism makes the easiest pretense : you belong because of your blood, or because you’re born here.
For sexism, it’s mostly a reactionary backlash, and secondly this liberalism problem of promoting individualism to humans who seek belonging. Feminism did won, and the old way of treating women is being addressed. But it is a process, and while we know what’s bad, we don’t have much new examples to follow. Yet most people have been trained in the old way, so now they are at lost. It’s not the first reason why they’re alone, liberalism has this place, but it is far easier to blame it on women and feminism than to try to build a new society. And also, it again gives them belonging with men like them that understands them and give explanations and solutions to their problems. Not good ones, but that’s not the point.
Nexus: the Jupiter incident. It is a now a bit old tactical space combat game with a big focus on the narrative. It’s awesome, but I never see it mentioned anywhere.
Sometimes I wonder if these people understand that no player ever wanted exclusivities on a game store. Instead of providing a decent service, they’re litteraly trying to kidnap customers with a choice between waiting for months for this big release or taking it on a subpar platform.
Oh so managers are biological LLMs! It explains everything!
Ukraine has no nuclear weapons. Nuclear arsenal is basically meant to face nato/USA in Russia.
Ukraine invading Russia is a humiliation. But it’s not a real threat for now. Russia didn’t even declared the state of war yet.
I’ve heard that Russia can’t really use atomic bomb against Ukraine because Ukraine has no atomic bombs itself. If it did, it would spark nuclear proliferation by breaking a tabou. And China wouldn’t allow that, because they don’t want Taiwan to get the bomb.
But nato is an atomic power. Thus, atomic bombs are fair game.
A neutron reactor (Institut Laue-Langevin). The mix between 80’s concrete bunker like structure or yellow steel bars and uber high tech mirrors that reflect neutrons is amazing, as is the crudeness of the experiments that achieve the best matter probing on earth. It’s straight out of retro-futuristic sci-fi, and at the same time higher tech than many modern sci-fi will imagine in some technical areas.
I feel like like inventing the wheel every five years is not the best use of talented people’s time.
What’s the problem with the gecko engine?
Vesper. It is imo a good sci-fi movie, but a tough one. The lives of the characters are not easy, but the movie doesn’t tell you that, you discover it through details casually said by the characters. The movie itself is a post apocalyptic movie in a very original setting. It is about biotechnology instead mechanised or AI tech. It is worth it for this alone IMO. It was a great movie imo, but not one to cheer up.
I don’t think you get my point. Sure, you did educate your children the best you could, and for the best goal of humanism. But you did so beside your society. That means that, at your core, you believe you are better than your society, AND you think your children are better learned OUT of it.
This is individualism at its core. You go the lone wolf path if it means it can ensure the better for your own tribe. At the expense of the society as a whole.
This is a self feeding cycle. Society will get worse and worse while some lineages of individuals will get better. That’s how the liberal neo-feudalism is born.
I’m not blaming you. You do what you think is the best for your children in a society that pushes for this choice with all its strength. I’m merely trying to explain where it leads.
I prefer the term liberals than richs. Not all richs are assholes. Some of them are humanist a’d working to make the world better for everyone at their own expanse. They are not many, and not enough definitely. But underlying the moral superiority from the material one is an important thing imo.
Horse archers, or skirmishing units in general, are countered by archers or siege units. Unless the game is wildly unbalanced it always works.