DaedPsyker

I should also say that nuclear weapons in dictatorships (more so than oligarchies like Soviet Union) is dangerous. Hopefully there will be those that can prevent its usage but dictatorships are fragile things. A dictator may consider their removal an existential threat.

There is a few points that make it worrying but certainly not guaranteed.

MAD policy appears to be effectively over, or at least there is no longer any mention publicly, perhaps it is just assumed. While it can appear crazy, hence the name, it was a rather ingenious way to solve the problem, albeit we know now we have come dangerously close at times, at least we knew the risks and the lines that had to be crossed.

The next point and somewhat related is the change in nature of nuclear weapons. The variable ability of tactical nukes to change their explosive size, has resulted in a modern range of weapons that aren't as destructive as their elder brethren. It may seem like a good idea but the issue is it also opens the possibility of their more active use. A state may consider it acceptable. This could result in the reverting to an older policy of nuclear weapons. The MacArthur plans to use them in active combat, it becomes too easy to dial the Nuke down, target a military base and say "sure it's ok it's a legitimate military target".

That to me is the danger in the modern world. Attitudes, at least Western are still as a weapon of last resort but I can't predict the future and say that will always be the case or that other nations will share the same sentiment.

I am absolutely not a climate scientist but my understanding is c02 from the likes of us isn't a problem as we are naturally part of a cyclical process. Same goes for forest fires which is burning trees that had been absorbing carbon.

However we are releasing an excess amount that had been trapped and removed from that cyclical process, adding more energy into the system than its natural equilibrium usually takes.

While the time to build is certainly true, is the cost truly more expensive than that of effects of climate change? I suspect not.

70% of French power is nuclear, and as far as I'm aware the EU hasn't mentioned nuclear.

That's a good point, unity has the higher numbers but unreal battletest their engine.

I think it shows too in the nature of unity vs unreal. A common criticism of unity has been that too many things are half-baked. Sometimes it's good to suffer your own products :D

On a slight side note to this, I remember as a kid one of the common things cops said to us about drugs besides health was, if you get convicted you can't go to the US anymore. Just a bit of a chuckle I had there of the threat of not being able to visit the us was bigger than threat of jail.

Do you know if the ban was due to a blanket ban on anyone convicted of anything abroad or specific crimes?

I mean the second one is bad for someone just being gay but the first would seem to catch people convicted of political crimes in the likes of Spain during the fascist era or the Soviet Union.

How is it misdirection? The comment said maybe the brexiteers were right, so why would leaving for the purpose of privacy benefit when UK's own laws go beyond the EU? The answer isn't brexit it's changing your own laws in that case.

I'm not aware of a specific ml model for this, but I know there is some adjacent ones that pull just the lyrics. Perhaps someone needs to publicly release one to counter this type of behaviour.

I think this needs clarified, are you be referring to the communist party or United Russia. The communist party has practical no influence outside of Russia and like most opposition parties, little internally either. United Russia is absolutely not Communist, statist yes, communist no.

Stupid sci-fi analogy incoming: it's almost like the chaos and the warp from 40k. This potential that just became corrupted and amplified by the emotions of beings.

The declaration is noble but it feels too much like an almost mythical unifying spirit that pushes humanity to some perceived enlightened perfection. To be fair the previous enlightenment suffered that same problem. Individuals will pursue matters that satisfy both the real and perceived needs. The desire to push humanity towards more noble intentions is good but needs to factor the human level.

Are the targets not new cars sold? That's how I see most of the stats presented.

But it is early, it was supposed to be left alone for another 30 years.

CCP actions, or rather Xi, imo, reflect a level of nativity or perhaps just typical authoritarian paranoia. People in Hong Kong were warming up to the mainland, more and more were identifying as Chinese primarily. If CCP had left well alone and continued on the course, they would have had a loyal Hong Kong with a new generation that could accept gradual reform, but they've poisoned that well.

Wasn't the informal natural of 19th and early 20th century Italy politics one of the factors that gave rise to Mussolini?

I mean this is more vague memories from school which probably oversimplified factors. I just remember it mentioned that 'political parties' were more informal groupings around outsized personalities leading to clientalism and cronyism.

I'm still of the opinion that any alien capable of traveling here would have technology to be utterly undetectable to us if they so wished. I can't imagine they would even need to abduct anyone to analyse us. So to me it has always been a moot point.

I'm not an 'atheism is just a religion', I don't believe in Gods, but I do think there secular ideologies. In the US context, the civil religion, the notions of the constitution, the military, and other institutions have take on a quasi-religious nature. Founding myths that become a spirit regardless of truthfulness.

In general, cult of personalities are clearly examples of secular religion although one that can become supernatural in the case of the Kim dynasty in North Korea.

Ceremonies and traditions that we continue because 'that is just how it has always been done'. There isn't some binary notion of you are religious or your rationalist, non religious people can hold non-rationalist thought.

Personally I don't really understand what you're on about with the scientific method, the parent didn't mention anything on it.

I really don't know how you can see Germany as whitewashing the Holocaust. It is pretty evident that they ensure every generation knows the horrors that were caused. Although I can understand why the modern generation might get annoyed at the sense they are supposed to take ownership of something they can't change.

It was based on a non comedy book, ‘Red alert’. There is another film from the time as well , same premise, ‘fail safe’ that is also a serious take on it.

There is an inevitability of multinationals in bowing to censorship. Many see cracking the Chinese market as the white whale. Censorship costs a drop in the bucket compared to the profits that can be made, they’ll fight tooth and nail on taxes and general business regulation but won’t give a damn for censorship.

Quite frankly I doubt even western outrage would matter, in 5 minutes everyone has already moved onto the next story.

‘Tank man China’ returns the image on DDG as does bing (Although not the first result). I think you are correct that this could be on Microsoft.

DDG should seriously consider the provider if there is going to be political censorship from their sources.

Absolutely. There is all sorts of methods that can be employed. Facts can be obfuscated, I suppose a natural language model might be able to detect if this is unusual for that source but it doesn’t mean fake news. Another is simply lying with statistics, this would be much harder for NLP as now your talking getting the model to understand statistically information, understanding the background and why certain ways of presenting stats might be disingenuous for that subject. You are also just relying on a model that only its owner could verify.

Ultimately though, this is fighting a losing battle because the source of the issue isn’t in propaganda which has long existed but in the channels through which it spreads. Something that has been known for a long time is flaming passions is more effective than fact. So too for social media is the spread of information faster when false[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/fake-news-spreads-...]. Which makes it difficult to counteract if the false information spreads faster than the rebuttal.

Should foreign influence be tolerated up to the point of a coup? On China specifically, its influence was fairly limited to its own region and still is to some degree. However the influence of a great power has never remained untouched, it is simply too tempting to affect matters for your own benefit.

A slightly separate issue for landmines is the tendency to main but not necessarily kill. It might seem morbid, a lot of the logic revolved around whether a weapon caused unnecessary pain compared to quick death. Dum Dum bullets for example banned for military use for their tendency to cause more pain than needed (sadly only applies to military). I believe before that there was similar debate on a sword type used by cavalry.

Coupled with its indiscriminate nature, and denial of swaths of lands, and it's an cruel atrocity of a weapon.

Automated weapons I feel fall under something else.

I would agree. I can easily put hours into straight programming when there is clear designs and goals. Actually designing the program though can just get exhausting.

I won't discount personality differences but I've certainly seen it enough in others that I figure there is some sort of mental limit.

A lot of discussion on automation is on removing the tedious, basic stuff so we can focus on the more difficult mental tasks. I do wonder though if perhaps we won't get as big a benefit as we think just due our nature.

I doubt the type of people that watch this stuff are really just prudes that can't handle porn.

So when you say sign-up do you mean sites that say something like "register your interest and we'll email you news when ready"?

"if you manage a team you've got to try monday.com" FFS I don't manage a team! I use whatever management buys, now stop asking me every video!

That, grammerly and now hello fresh, making me greatly consider premium. Maybe that's Google secret plan, annoy us to death so we subscribe.

They likely mean culturally homogeneous rather than financially.

Would that really solve it? If the funds for schools are raised from local property tax, then wealthier areas will still have the best funded schools will they not?