Jiro
18hr ago
As recently as the 60s Indonesia launched an anti-Chinese/anti-communist pogram that killed a few million people.
Wikipedia says half a million total and that the Chinese were "thousands".
Jiro
5d ago
Even if you have both number 2 and 3 together so that you are not applying double standards to Jews, this amounts to "someone who supports politics that I don't like should be put in jail and forcibly removed from power". "Getting the country into a war" is not special; in a democracy, people are permitted to advocate for policies that you consider harmful.
Jiro
5d ago
The Blair Witch Project was a successful low-budget film, and it managed to achieve fame even without the help of internet video distribution!
The Blair Witch Project is a special case because being low budget is inherently part of the story, which alleviates most of the problems caused by having to be low budget. This doesn't generalize.
Jiro
5d ago
The issue here isn't even Bari per se, it's the criteria defining the nature of the pool.
I wouldn't count "critical of wokeness without being outright MAGA" as a problem with the nature of the pool, in the sense you seem to mean. That's probably going to be the best you'll get if you're going through journalists--exactly what should the pool have been instead?
Jiro
5d ago
It also gives a lot of authority to religions, for instance Israel does not recognize secular marriage, thus effectively banning any gay marriage- as no faith in Israel officiates such unions.
Israel recognizes foreign marriages, including gay marriages.
Jiro
9d ago
But they're not. US healthcare is overpriced, but the money is flowing to doctors and hospitals, not to the insurance industry, whose profits are small.
I don't see any numbers in that linked post, or in the posts linked from that, that compare hospital profit and insurance industry profit.
And even some of the links from that post blame the problems on the insurers when you seem to think they don't.
Jiro
9d ago
I'd like to point out that this is the exact same argument feminists use when they say that any advice like "Don't get drunk in a skimpy outfit and hang around lots of desperate horny men" is actually blaming the victim and morally wrong.
Feminists are saying that it is possible to say such things sincerely but most people who say them in real life aren't? I find this unlikely as a feminist position.
Jiro
10d ago
"I reworded the AI material back in my own words again" is still AI. Just because it's in your own words doesn't mean that there isn't something in the structure that still carries over from the AI version and can be noticed. (And obviously there was enough for people to notice.)
Jiro
11d ago
A less literal answer is that it's all the years when an adolescent is expected to have adult-type responsibilities, but without adult-type privileges.
I don't think there is such a thing. Normally, both privileges and responsibilities get gradually added as someone gets older. Things like having to work to pay rent are adult responsibilities, and people in that age range rarely have that responsibility. And I'm sure you can name privileges that someone just below 18 has that someone at 10 doesn't.
Jiro
15d ago
If you are a young earth creationist studying geology, and you refuse to date any rock to older than 4000 BC, you will fail.
The stated grading criteria for the essay were very unlike "what is the age of this rock?".
Jiro
18d ago
I'd say this is legitimate. It's easy to support very harmful actions based on abstract principles when the harmful consequences don't fall on yourself. Sometimes you need to do this anyway (punishing criminals, not allowing underage drinking) but it's often a warning sign that someone is applying principles in a very self-justifying way.
Jiro
19d ago
If I sell an appreciated painting, I no longer have it; my standard of living is decreased by exactly as much as having that painting increased it.
This is trivially true, but it just means that having a painting doesn't increase your standard of living by as much as a similarly priced house does. This won't change any relevant conclusion.
Jiro
19d ago
This is a fully general argument against due process.
Pretty much nobody thinks that due process should be applied or not applied depending on what you think the chances are of guilt. But the argument was about the chance of guilt--the OP was trying to insinuate that because the boats have large crews, they are unlikely to be criminals. So disputing that can't be an argument against due process.
Jiro
20d ago
Whenever I go to a restaurant where (rich, high earning, often at least moderately intelligent) clientele are dressed like disgusting slobs, which is almost all of them, the reason for their slovenliness is because of a decline in standards. It’s the same reason Elon Musk wore a t shirt to the Oval Office.
You ought to look up "countersignaling", which is what they are doing.
Jiro
20d ago
Presumably his childhood was not in the 1950s, and the point of mentioning it was to point out that things are not in fact better now, or at least recently now.
Jiro
21d ago
Sadly, this is not going to happen, because a military which will follow the orders of the president without hesitation is useful to whomever is the president.
The whole "don't follow illegal orders. Why am I saying this? No reason" kerfluffle was not long ago.
Jiro
21d ago
Television already went into diminishing returns at 1080p and the rise of streaming, never mind 4K, and can't improve much more. Video games also have gone into diminishing returns, which is why there's nothing original on the PS5. I don't believe for a moment that we're getting significant VR.
Someone could have told Gutenberg the same thing about books that you're telling me about TV improvements. To which the answer is that it would take hundreds of years to get mass market paperbacks, a hundred more to get ereaders, and those aren't improvements in books so much as they are general improvements that happened to be useful for books.
Jiro
21d ago
And even with all the problems of modern streaming TV services, the 5 inch smartphone screen is color, plays at high resolution, lets you watch programs when you want (mostly), and has a huge variety compared to a 1950s TV. And you can afford to have one for several family members.
Define "good for". If you waste your life playing video games, but you would otherwise have starved to death, is that good for you? I would say that it is, ignoring semantic questions about whether "better" counts as "good".
More options
Context Copy link