So two people communicate, one is American speaking English and the other is a Natmurrikan, speaking their Natmurrikan language. The former communicates with the latter and the latter communicates with the former. So if they speak Natmurrikan and it doesn’t feel natural for the American, is that right that this is the American’s fault?
In Europe without even anything exotic - German, archaic Dutch and all insular Scandinavian languages, and all Slavic languages. I don’t know Finnish, Estonian and Hungarian, so I can’t talk about them, a plethora of cases, but genders - I don’t remember.
The interesting thing to learn is that there are languages with more than 3 genders (M, F and thing). Or even more than 4 (M, F, N and thing), with additional genders being for kinds of animals, fish, plants, buildings, instruments. But I’ve only heard about that, haven’t studied any such language.
It has only 2 genders, and they don’t affect verb inflections.
extremely gendered
Compared to English - yeah, but in general there’s nothing extreme about genders in French.
I guess USSR was democratic then.
It’s not majority of the world, it’s majority of the people in power.
We’ve had sort of a revolution (or a reaction, however you want it) in the last 30 years, where a certain kind of people felt threatened by all the wisdom of the kind you get from reading Hannah Arendt or frankly anything intelligent and morals-related I can think of, and I think USSR finally dissolving galvanized them - both in their fears coming true when a totalitarian state fell, and in their hopes getting up when people just like them took power in ex-Soviet states.
It’s a very strong principle - making human rights really a value, making genocide really a crime, making it clear that you owe nothing you haven’t borrowed, and so on, are in direct conflict with a certain understanding of the world order. But antisemitism as a specific case is connected to the experience of WWII, which is an important foundational myth (not meaning it didn’t happen) of the modern world. So one has to maneuver.
Now, that certain understanding and that kind of people are not marked by anything notable - that’s actually their main quality. That’s people who are sufficiently social to bunch together, but insufficiently creative, intelligent and romantic to care about good, evil and duty. Their main achievements in our world are all about gaslighting and stealing.
Such people are the most likely to have power today. Their power exists because of organizations and faceless groups being above the human, because when it’s not so, they are irrelevant.
It’s a temporary situation just like anything else, of course, because the described culture cannot maintain structures control over which gives them power. It’s enshittification of nations, one can say.
So why is there no competition arising, simply with some fries, burgers, soda and without this bullshit.
Oh, I remembered, it’s all patented to hell. It’s practically illegal to open a fast food place not in one of these franchises.
Same with many other areas of life. The Web and computers are the most obvious.
Rats and cockroaches have conquered the kitchen. While many people in bureaucracies and everywhere were thieves and parasites, that still wasn’t socially acceptable. They didn’t like it, so now it’s almost official that the world is ruled by thieves and parasites and they are better than honest people. This IMHO also explains all the “geopolitical” stuff happening - it’s not to any practical end, the common thing between all (Western\Russian\whatever) policies is ideological, that decency should be murdered, dignity should be punished, and honesty should be poisoned. All the “rules” and “competition” and “civilization” stuff was (in the eyes of those people) being grown like livestock to be slaughtered for meat eventually.
300 years from now this time is going to be called the start of the new dark ages, or the end of the thaw (Soviet analogy here), or something like that.
If by “social media” you mean platforms encouraging teaming together and ape behavior, then certainly yes.
It’s the modern replacement of 30s’ propaganda. We didn’t notice a revolution in propaganda and censorship and crowd control. These platforms are it.
People flocked to these without considering that our instincts were developing without such mechanisms in place. That means you shouldn’t be careful on them just as you are with telephone calls from unfamiliar people or newspaper ads, but that plus careful as with a HV cable inside a slaughtering block.
That was limited to a certain kind of conversations and magazines. It wasn’t omnipresent.
If it would be a standard intented for Unix ideology and not business requirements of X11 (35+ years is a long time) or Wayland (RedHat is one company with its own interests, sometimes contradicting, say, mine as a Unix user), then it could work well.
X11 paradigm I like more than that of Wayland, but it could use some clearly incompatible changes.
I know they are allied, Israel and Turkey are not really that hostile between themselves too.
It’s about how optics of all this work on general Western audiences.
I agree Turkey relies less on such corruption. Azerbaijan is pretty similar to Israel in that regard, though. They just don’t need loud approval when silent approval does the job.
It’s very hard for people (well, neurotypical people) to understand what real destruction means when that contests their system of considering themselves (and their friends, their country etc) very cool.
Most of those advocating for bombing cities and big wars would turn into whining piss-smelling sacks of shaking meat the moment they meet one person not weaker than them angry at them in a back alley.
So is Turkey.
But the guilt for colonialism and belligerent Christianity apparently lies so heavy on Westerners, that they are ready to absolve it with the blood of Christians never involved in those.
It’s an especially disgusting kind of virtue signalling to combine being against Israel, but for Turkey and Azerbaijan.
It’s nutritious. Instead of carefully observing some diet you can eat some beef and buckwheat or cabbage or beans, and you’re good.
That said, I eat meat so rarely that my relatives worry, mainly because it takes some time to cook if you boil it, and I’m lazy and unorganized, and frying it has the potential of, eh, leaving the kitchen for 5 minutes which turn out to be half an hour and returning for the smell.
Other than that people can’t care about every problem at once.
It used religion simply as a component of typical XIX-century romantic nationalism. It was a secular ideology until the last 10-20 years.
That’s what modern Nazis do - try very hard to defame their opponents as Nazis. Sometimes even their victims. Then any argument from that side is disadvantaged.
Why the fuck I’m even writing this here, it’s obvious, only unless I find a way to kill some bad people doing this, I won’t help things.
Having it in the laws as something separate from racism was racist in the first place.
These people must know all this does is destroy the legitimacy of your authority.
I think I know what they think - that their authority doesn’t stand on legitimacy, it stands on power. The difference between now and 20 years ago is that modern Web and mass media are better controlled by them, and modern surveillance is another world.
They don’t care about “moral”, they think we’ll just eat it and shut up.
They are fine with a few protests which won’t change the outcome.
Notice how protests in the last decade or so have become less violent, while the crimes against humanity of those governments have become more blatant.
That’s not a coincidence, it’s a strategy of controlling population bringing fruit. People more likely to lead movements are detected and neutralized without ever knowing it, maybe through connectivity, maybe through disinformation, maybe through directing their attention at wrong things, maybe through various kinds of pressure, and I’m sure in a miraculous case where these don’t work nobody will notice a sudden death here and there.
Internationalization of KGB has happened. In Soviet times that was simply a very inefficient system, so it sucked balls compared to the western ones. But now the west both gradually reduced freedoms considered normal, making such control less expensive, and also modern technologies raised its efficiency quite a lot.
Admittedly the palestinians are hitting back harder than the jews were able to at the time,
No they are not. A few Israelis killed here and there is not “harder”. Just modern weapons are different.
When it’s not E2EE, maybe they are right. What’s the point of encrypting something that gets decrypted midway by an organization with hundreds of employees, many of them with access, not even talking about law enforcement and accidental criminals.
EDIT: I mean, illusion of security may be sometimes worse that lack of that little security which comes with it. Everything is complex.