themaninthedark
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
2,320
Submissions
1,435
Member since
Jul 11
Recent submissions
Comment · 4 days ago
Comment · 4 days ago
Not sure why they have to provide a solution in order to talk about the issue.
The only solution is to elect better people. I know some people who hoped that Trump would be that in 2016 but he is just more of the same.
I do disagree with grandparent that nothing has changed; the Supreme Court has shored up the First Amendment rights over the last 50 years and with Chatrie v. United States it looks like they are expanding Fourth Amendment protection.
Now if the Executive and/or Legislative ignore those protections then not much can be done.
Similar to Denver, city votes out Flock, Mayor does a backdoor. Unless they elect someone new and/or bring the Mayor up on procedural charges or something then nothing will change.
Comment · 4 days ago
Ok but how is that a rebuttal to anything I said?
Fatwa was put in place in 2003, Fordow construction was started 2006.
In the words of Obama in 2009: “The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program,” then US President Barack Obama said in 2009
So who do I believe; a Supreme Leader who says they will not build nuclear weapons or my lying eyes...
Or perhaps you are saying that the Supreme Leader didn't have control over his country and some rebel faction was able to build that with out his knowledge?
Comment · 4 days ago
Yes, democracy and trade are the proven paths for preventing conflicts. Just ask the Ukrainians how that is going for them, I am sure they are so glad that Germany was buying oil and gas from Russia.
>The controversial gas pipeline Nord Stream 2 (NS2) has become the symbol of Germany’s widely criticised energy and security policy, which sought to build political bridges through trade and at the same time supply companies with cheap fuels. However, it drove the country into a fatal dependence on Russian oil and gas. Years later, government documents from the 2010s and early 2020s reported by Süddeutsche Zeitung showed that former chancellor Angela Merkel sought to portray her government as neutral and lacking competence in regards to the "business project" Nord Stream 2 to the outside world and European partners, while supporting increased gas trade with Russia through several actions.
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/gas-pipeline-nord...
Comment · 4 days ago
I like that he had banned nukes in 2003 but for some reason, Iran covertly construction Fordow starting in 2006. I guess he was just not as Supreme of a leader as he thought he was, somehow all those people just decided to hollow out a mountain and install centrifuges there.
Comment · 4 days ago
The intelligence assessment was very careful about what it said.
>A U.S. intelligence assessment says Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons at the moment but has ramped up activities that could help it develop them. https://apnews.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-intelligence-b506...
So they were not actively building a nuke, only getting all the pieces together to build one ready....
Prior to the deal: >Iran initially possessed centrifuges sufficient for one nuclear weapon, but not for nuclear power. https://web.archive.org/web/20190709050018/https://www.polit...
After the deal was broken by Trump and Biden was trying to restart it.... >2023 : An IAEA report on the Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant found that two cascades of IR-6 centrifuges were configured in a way "substantially different" from what Iran had previously declared. Iran claimed the difference was due to a human error.
>On 4 March(2023), Grossi met with Raisi and other top Iranian officials. Earlier, IAEA had detected uranium particles enriched up to 83.7% at Fordow. In the meantime, Iran gave assurances that it would reinstall monitoring equipment at sensitive locations.
Comment · 8 days ago
The characters do seem to have the same voice...
I thought that the characters reactions/behavior felt a bit off, most accepting if not reluctantly at first of AI takeover but honestly that's probably what would happen, including the arguments the the American dream has been dead for a long time because we are not "safe"(enter quote from Mr. Franklin here).
Freedom gives you the ability to get hurt, are we afraid of that?
Comment · 10 days ago
Would you put in your life savings every time?
Comment · 12 days ago
A chicken in every pot
https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruse...
Comment · 12 days ago
I did not, do you know this one:
https://youtu.be/Ppm5_AGtbTo?is=JXIEHIckWMhcfmUP
Also bonus one: https://youtu.be/miomuSGoPzI?is=IpXvzjGRIswRjUsv
Comment · 17 days ago
Great project, glad to see something like this!
Also all links under the resources heading are broken.
Comment · 17 days ago
Thank you for replying, hope you get some rest.
I have worked at several different companies, of various sizes. One place sold equipment, 1 machine was between 100 ~ 250k, they usually sold 10 or so a month so revenue would be ~12 million. IT department was 1 guy, he eventually was able to get a helper.
Another place I worked at used to have IT on site at every location, they cut that as a cost savings. It became a small team at corporate HQ, then was outsourced after that. Regional offices and factories worldwide.
A story about their policies; They decided to ban USB drives in the name of security but there was equipment that you needed to get data off that could not be put on the network. Their solution was "Get a computer that we not controlled by IT, Login to Teams on that computer and use it to send the files to yourself."
This is a company that has over 5 billion dollars in revenue...
I think neither revenue nor profit can give you a good idea of what a company's IT ability is.
Myself, I have no idea why the fridges would be on the network/ internet but wouldn't be surprised that the utilities requested it be done.
Comment · 18 days ago
>This is a very weird thread.
I agree; you post some revenue numbers to try and prove a point that theses businesses have a lot of money. When someone reminds that revenue is not the same as profit, you state the numbers aren't relevant.
Companies try to cheap out all the time, in incredibly stupid ways. Especially when they are thin margins, fat ones usually try and protect the cash cow.
Comment · 19 days ago
>Naturuk therefore challenges our views about what the causes of conflict are. It is possible that human prehistoric societies simply responded antagonistically to chance encounters with another group. But this is not what seems to have happened at Nataruk. The group which attacked was carrying weapons that would not normally be carried while hunting and fishing. In addition, the lesions show that clubs of at least two sizes were used, making it likely that more than one of the attackers were carrying them.
>All three involved projectiles, one of the hallmarks of inter-group conflict. Two of the projectiles found embedded in the bones at Nataruk and in two of the other cases were made of obsidian. This tells us that such attacks happened multiple times, and were part of the life of the hunter-gatherer communities at the time.
https://theconversation.com/finding-a-hunter-gatherer-massac...
>In this study, Standen and colleagues examined signs of violent trauma on the remains of 288 adult individuals from funerary sites across the Atacama Desert coast, dating from 10,000 years ago to 1450 AD. The researchers also analyzed patterns in weaponry and in artistic depictions of combat during this time. They found that rates of violence were surprisingly static over time, though there was a notable increase in lethal violence during the Formative Period starting around 1000 BC, a trend also found in similar studies of the Andean region. Data from strontium isotopes indicate that this interpersonal violence was occurring between local groups, not between local and foreign populations.
https://popular-archaeology.com/article/long-term-history-of...
> I concluded that most recent foraging groups were likely to have at least occasionally participated in lethal intergroup violence. I used this evidence alongside several other lines of evidence, such as archaeological remains, the behavior of other species, and predictions from behavioral ecology, to argue that at least occasional intergroup violence extended well into the Pleistocene.
>Progression in science typically requires agreement on a shared empirical reality. Once we identify well-supported empirical findings, we then make inferences about how these findings relate to hypotheses about behavior we cannot directly assess, such as the role of war or cooperation in human evolution (Table 1). Much of the current stasis on the role of intergroup violence in human evolution is due to a failure to agree on the nature of mobile forager intergroup relationships with minimal colonial/state influence or impact from agriculturalist neighbors. If we cannot reasonably agree on whether ethnographically recent mobile foragers sometimes killed members of other groups as part of or supported by a coalition, then we cannot begin to reach a consensus on what those relationships may tell us about warfare in human evolution.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S10905...
Comment · 20 days ago
Hunter-Gatherers had concepts of land ownership, if another tried to hunt on your tribes land there was conflict.
They also had no problem driving species to extinction.
This idea of a group of people living in harmony with nature is fantasy.
Trump sucks. So does Pelosi, so does Bush and Clinton. What, we need to rank how much they suck?
JFC man, if it's important to you to know how much each of them screwed you, then build a table or something. To me the degree doesn't matter because a little is bad enough.