cholantesh

Hah, I had a feeling that was a NJB video. It is generally surreal to me that even smaller settlements in Europe have more, shall we say, evolvability than North American ones, and (at least in some cases owing to their antiquity) prioritize the needs of pedestrians.

>The palestinains started pretty much every war.

The Palestinians didn't start the 'war of Independence' in which the precursors of the most moral army in human existence prosecuted what widely fit the rubric war crimes on a massive scale. They didn't start the 1967 war, that was Israel. They didn't occupy South Lebanon or the Golan Heights. They didn't assassinate multiple government officials in Lebanon and Iran and the prime minister of Yemen. They weren't the party who broke dozens of internationally brokered ceazefires by raiding cities in Palestinian territories. This is such an egregious misunderstanding it's hard to blame it on simple ignorance.

This is quite literally the opposite of what legal scholars maintain: that the definition is so particular as to allow perpetrators to escape culpability, as in the case of Srebenica.

>The IDF doesn't need to human shields

And yet they still do, by their own definition and the one that is actually in wide use.

>Seriously, how many israeli civilians have been killed by military strikes aimed at legitimate targets?

Far fewer than the number of Palestinians killed by the IDF 'mistakenly' turning a hospital to rubble with journalists in the vicinity. What are you even trying to argue?

Maybe they should have erred on the size of not doing everything they could to ensure Hamas' birth and continued existence.

But not because Israel has demonstrated repeatedly within the past year alone that it doesn't particularly care about the sovereignty of even recognized states? Odd.

Does the other country have the right to wantonly flout international law and the social conventions it claims to be a standard bearer for at every turn while doing so?

>They use human shields

Israel's definition of human shields is placing military infrastructure adjacent to civilian infrastructure. Literally no international body agrees with this, but ignoring that, the IDF is itself guilty of this because many of its installations, including Hakirya, are surrounded by residential buildings. The Lehi also fired rockets from and cached ammo within schools and synagogues - this is commemorated by plaques in the affected buildings. There is also copious video evidence of them taking human shields by the much narrower, much more widely accepted definition of human shielding wherein civilians are coerced into entering combat zones under the thread of violence.

Quite frankly, suggesting that the Gulf states are only now, thanks to the Chinese coming around to "authoritarian capitalism" and the importance of "good PR" seems a bit rich.

As someone who's ambivalent about the experience, I'd say "because that's what my employer issued to me" is perfectly acceptable.

A sibling comment claims that making a comment like this constitutes waging a 'political'/'ideological' battle that 'tramples curiosity', because raising a legitimate concern is inherently ideological, but silencing any and all scrutiny of a VC is not.

IIRC it wasn't always this way - but it did ask for a login which I felt was a non-starter.

This flagging is pretty obviously the actual violation of the guideline.

I actively used Notion with a lot of my fellow students at the time. I've subsequently gravitated towards Joplin for 'richer' content and Obsidian for general text.

Great post; I'm reminded of how firstly 'no-code' was often used adjacent to 'low-code' in blogspam and press releases, but also how the only shop I've ever worked in that used such a tool had an ever-expanding team of devs building stuff with it, as opposed to the non-technical users it was supposedly meant to target.

You're literally commenting on a thread full of those explanations that were handwaved away.

>The fact that the two highest profile examples of starvation in Gaza have confounding conditions makes me suspect otherwise. If it is as widespread as feared, it should be easier to find pictures of starving Gazans than fat Gazans.

Sure, if Israel wasn't actively targeting journalists and cutting off telecoms from within the strip, and the case for starvation rested entirely on a couple of photographs in mainstream US broadsheets.

>It is notable that in the same famous photo of the emaciated Mohammed Zakaria al‑Mutawaq in the NYT article, his not-malnourished looking brother Joud was cropped out. And their mother is not emaciated.

You're right, just like it's notable that in the retraction, they didn't mention that his 'confounding condition' was caused by her malnutrition during pregnancy, per the same report that was used to force said retraction. Also, emaciation is not present in all cases of malnutrition.

>To me this is evidence of press cooperation with a propaganda campaign.

But, not say, calling it the 'Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry' to diminish the credibility of the casualty figures which were good enough for the WHO and UN? Odd.

>I submit that if you find either side in this propaganda war to be credible by default, you do the other side a disservice.

If you were sincere about this standard, you would apply it to yourself. Even this statement is implicitly propagandistic, if not conspiratorial.

In the article he specifically shitcans AI startups that were founded by former OpenAI execs, but also he has a habit of characterizing AI as something that needs expert hands, mainly his, to manage and contain. At the end of the article he delivers on this self-aggrandizement.

They can be, but given how many times Israel's made the assertion only to go "oopsie doodle, our multibillion dollar intelligence apparatus made a boo-boo and it turns out that there actually was not an installation under this civilian infrastructure", this isn't as robust a premise as you think it is. Anyway, the quality of evidence seems to suffice for doctors, NGOs, human rights watchdogs, practically anyone who isn't an Israeli official or an apologist thereof, probably something worth considering.

Think tank slop rarely is.

Or alternatively, the subsequent walk-backs are editorialized.

That 'most' Arab leaders are happy to operate as clients of the US and are just as susceptible to race science nuttery as you are doesn't really mean much.

Repeatedly and deliberately misspelling his name suggests to me that there aren't any such videos.

By Israel's rubric, turning 12 makes you a youth combatant and sweeping a broom at the Ministry of Transport makes you Hamas, so I guess it depends on who you ask.

Sure, provided they're not thoroughly wrung out by the compromised apparatus of their party - or just disappeared by Hoover*.

Assuming that's a reasonable analogue - I'm not super knowledgeable about that era of US history so can't say for sure

Xbox has done so well that they ravaged the division that oversees it.

Agreed, but surely part of the solution is getting the companies that build AI and the 'journalists' that cover it and its enthusiasts to stop pitching it as a cure for loneliness and/or a substitute for therapy.

This is just laundering editorial through some anonymous phantom; if he didn't offer any qualification or pushback, he's effectively endorsing the opinions being expressed. At the end of the article he also talks about devs being mere humans being reluctant to change and how "that's okay". This is very typical C-suite therapy speak. There's no need to unpack _why_ the skepticism exists, it just needs to be worked around until the inevitable truth™ is accepted.

There is exactly one remark about the military-industrial complex in this thread. It simply alludes to the historical fact that Eisenhower, who spent much of his adult life engaging with it, was wary of it. Why do you see this as childish?

I didn't know Nissans were known for being unreliable; my first car was a hand-me-down Sentra that ran smoothly till I sold it at ~220k. I've owned three cars since, I think the worst was a used Elantra that I just put out to pasture at 198k. Persistent electronic issues and terribly uncomfortable on the passenger side. The straw that broke the camel's back for me was an asking price of 10k to repair a faulty airbag sensor. Hoping the RAV4 that replaced it will live up to its reputation.