yrdmb
Then leave your rent stabilized apartment. What do you think rent stabilized apartments are? They are apartments with legally and artificially lowered rents. Would you feel better if they called it stabilizing rent rather than lowering rent?
Isn't that because all living organisms are composed of one or more cells ( cell theory )? It isn't an arbitrary cutoff but rather a result of observation that the smallest thing we can confidently called a living organism is a cell and all organisms are composed of cells.
> it's much more interesting to consider if viruses are machines or not and that really is a hot-topic in the biology community.
They are not self-contained self-replicating machines. But are they machines nonetheless? I'd say they are non-self-replicating machines. But I guess it all depends on how you define machine. Just like how do you define life or living determines whether viruses are alive or not.
Define unsubstantive comments and flamebait. Is this not unsubstantive flamebait?
"What propaganda? That it would be nice if Britain wasn't being beaten in the supercomputing industry by a totalitarian dictatorship and warmongering dictatorship? As a Brit, I think it's just common sense rather than propaganda."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35067967
That's the definition of flamebait and propaganda. But it wasn't flagged. Why do you allow unsubstantive comments and flamebait while flagging every substantive comment that responds to and opposes flamebait?
This comment I replied to dehumanized arabs by calling them extremists and barbarians.
"I don't know much about Israel or the politics, but just want to say I deeply admire the country. A shining light of democracy, technological progress, innovation, and prosperity in the midst of many countries ruled by dictators and extremist barbarians more concerned with infighting and grandstanding than the progress of their people."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34997427
Who did you flag? You flagged me and let this bigot alone. It was only after days of complaints that you finally flagged him. Did you give him a warning? Of course not. You wrote "As for anti-Semitic comments, I've personally banned plenty of accounts for posting like that." You do realize that arabs are semites. How come you haven't banned boeingUH60 for his antisemitism? Or is antisemitism directed against arabs okay?
> We don't really care about your views on the underlying topics
No you do. Anyone who reads my flagged comments and the comments I replied to can see it.
You can say all kinds of nasty shit about russians, chinese, arabs, indians, etc but that's not flamebait. It's only flamebait when you defend them. So I'll keep fighting flamebait til you learn to do your job better. In the meantime I share your concern about unsubstantive comments and flamebait and will do my best to deal with them accordingly.
Edit:
You forgot to flag another of boeingUH60's flamebait in the same thread. You couldn't be bothered to read the thread to flag his responses?
It's not tyranny. It's just democracy. Asset owners get lots of tax deductions, capital gains benefits and other goodies because they are the majority who voted it for themselves.
> Ordering them to decrease the rents is not that different from confiscating part of their property.
There have been rent stabilized apartments in new york for decades now. It's nothing new and it's nothing like confiscating property.
Notice how they used AP News in their snide remark since AP News has some standing amongst the news reading public ( not sure why but they do ) while they themselves have none.
The US and the EU have different goals. EU's goal is to protect their control of propaganda within their borders. Ours is to control propaganda within our borders and protect our social media companies from foreign competitors. There is a reason why the government attacks on tiktok coincides with youtube shorts, facebook reels, instagram reels, etc. EU doesn't have a social media company to champion so they don't have that extra burden of protecting market share.
> I've been living in Turkey for some years now and I promise you, it's not fun.
Tiktok isn't going to go away. Too many companies have invested in tiktok for it to be simply banned. Tiktok is most likely going to be "confiscated". Tiktok parent will most likely be forced to sell tiktok to a US based company.
No country should allow foreign social media to spread propaganda within their borders. Every country should nationalize social media within their borders. It's insane that only the US, China and Russia seem to be protecting their social media space. I just don't get it. Social media can be used to brainwash, divide and destroy any country. It's almost like most of the world's leaders are incompetent.
Right. The hundred or so native nations that were exterminate in the US really enjoyed that freedom and human rights. Not to mention the african slaves.
And lets not forget that democracy gave us nazi germany which people pretend was the worst thing in history.
Oh wait, russia is a democracy. Of course, democracies we don't like are "authoritarian". Like india's right? I love how people attack india, the largest democracy in the world, as an authoritarian state because we don't like modi.
Was it a totalitarian dictatorship or warmongering dictatorship that gave freedom and human rights to the civilians in hiroshima and nagasaki? Or was it a democracy. I wonder.
In the past 200 years, it was democracies who carried out the worst genocides and destroyed much of the environment. Also, most of human suffering ( poverty, disease, etc ) in the world occurs in democracies today.
The anti-chinese and anti-russian propaganda you see here and all over the media.
> That it would be nice if Britain wasn't being beaten in the supercomputing industry by a totalitarian dictatorship
Did that totalitarian dictatorship genocide a significant part of the world? Did that totalitarian dictatorship colonize parts of britain for nearly 200 years?
> warmongering dictatorship?
That "warmongering dictatorship" has been in less wars than britain the past X years.
It also democratizes the clout, power and protection that the hollywood famous have. Without social media harvey weinstein would not be in jail. A "relative nobody" wouldn't have been able to "out shout" and expose a media mogul like weinstein.
As with everything, there are positive and negative aspects.
Could be that these "gang members" are protected state or government actors ( cia, fbi, informants, etc ). Usually when government, media, etc ignores criminals or crimes, it's because of diplomatic or state reasons.
That's all we need. Basic income will allow people to get housing, internet and food.
That's because CBS, NBC and ABC are national broadcast networks while HBO is a cable network, like CNN. CNN is broadcast internationlly.
> only BBC has also transcended its home country this way,
That's only because of the british empire. Who but their former slave colonies watches BBC?
> None except Netflix has yet gained worldwide recognition for their shows and brands, yet, though (not even Disney and The Mandalorian).
Isn't Friends the most popular tv show worldwide? People may watch it on Netflix but it was originally broadcast on NBC as part of the "Must see tv" thursdays.
There is always value in truthful statements. You are right that 91 is not the smallest number as was implied by the parent. -91 is. After all it was the parent who brought in the negative integers into the mix.
No it doesn't.
> Oppressive regimes (of whatever sort) can only persist with the consent of the populace
No. You are believing in modern nonsense about "people power". The populace has never done anything. "Proles and animals are free" for a reason. Any change has always been done by the elites.
The american populace didn't rise up against britain. It was only a tiny portion of the elites. The slaves didn't rise up against the masters. The populace never rises up because they have no means to do so. No more than cows can rise up against the ranchers.
History has always been elites vs the next level of elites.
> Find the amount of oppression that people are willing to put up with, and you've found the amount of oppression they are subjected to.
Nope. The elite oppress as much as they need to. The opinions of the populace never matters - in a monarchy, democracy or any other form of government.
Most of the world sided with russia. Even more of the world will side with china.
Also, if china stopped importing oil it would not only hurt china, but the oil exporters as well. People think sanctioning china will only hurt china. As if trade didn't go both ways.
“We tend to forget that for many in China, and in their lived experience of the past four decades, each day was better than the next.”
— Tony Saich, Daewoo Professor of International Affairs and director of the Ash Center
So you think the researchers at the Ash Center did a bogus study?
> They have no freedom of speech.
They have more than most. But whatever helps you sleep at night.
Taiwan was founded by chinese nationalists. They wanted to make china great again. The ones who wanted to ultimately overthrow western imperialism in china. One of the imperialists ( aka nationalists enemies ) was the US.
The colonial imperialist enemy of these asian countries isn't china, it's the US. Go read some history. We were never the good guys. China didn't nuke hiroshima and nagasaki.
2. Go to 3.
3. Go to 4.
4. Go to 5.
5. Go to 1.
Because of foreign interference.
> I tend to take the view that the interests of dictatorships can be largely disregarded.
What dictatorship? Also, it's the interest of the chinese state and people. Big difference.
> The 1.4 billion people have not held an election to elect representatives to decide on the issue of Taiwan.
We could easily settle this by having a vote, but guess which side won't allow a vote? Not the side with 1.4 billion people. Just like in vietnam, korea, etc.
> Chinese policy has been decided by a dictatorial elite.
You never "dictatorial" rule 1.4 billion people.
"The survey team found that compared to public opinion patterns in the U.S., in China there was very high satisfaction with the central government. In 2016, the last year the survey was conducted, 95.5 percent of respondents were either “relatively satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with Beijing. In contrast to these findings, Gallup reported in January of this year that their latest polling on U.S. citizen satisfaction with the American federal government revealed only 38 percent of respondents were satisfied with the federal government."
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/07/long-term-sur...
They weren't initially. They tranformed into modern universities in the 1800s.
'A 1643 publication defined the university's purpose: "to advance learning and perpetuate it to posterity, dreading to leave an illiterate ministry to the churches when our present ministers shall lie in the dust.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_University
Do you think that's what harvard is about today?
> (1) an institution of higher education which (2) offers multiple official, publicly recognized diplomas in secular subjects among others.
A degree mill doesn't a univeristy make. Universities today have to be accredited. Who accredited Bologna? Nothing.
1088 Bologna is not anything anyone around the world considers a university. When people around the world found universities, nobody looks at 1088 Bologna. All modern universities are secular/research based institutions following the humboldtian model.
When harvard decided to transform from a religious institution to a modern university, they didn't look to bologna.
No. It just means there isn't a trend of people buying ferraris.
> suddenly its a trend
How many people do you know that are paying for social media? I personally know none.
1.4 billion chinese who won the civil war don't want their island stolen from them. I think the interests of 1.4 billion chinese outweigh the losing 20 million chinese. Don't you? Do you think southerners who make up 25% of the US should be allowed to separate from the US against the wishes of the 75%? Even after they lost the civil war?
> Then they should be given as many weapons as they want, so they can make their own decisions and are not forced to do anything by an invading army.
They already lost the civil war. That's my point. What would "arming" them do? Nothing. They'd lose anyway. It would just cause more suffering and death. Is that what you are trying to do? Get more innocent chinese people in taiwan killed?
Taiwan is a vassal of the US. They lost the chinese civil war and are only "independent" because we got involved when we shouldn't have. Sound familiar? So taiwan can't decide anything for themselves because they are an occupied nation. No more than japan or korea or the philippines can.
> If that is Taiwan's decision, they should be supported and allowed to make it.
They lost the civil war. The decision was already made.
The only ones instigating war is the US and europe. Of course the american people don't want war. It's the media instigating it. Wonder why?