Not the original commenter, but I would guess that the goal would be to reflect the population. Women are about 50% of the population, so assuming all things created equal, they should be about 50% of any other population, like those with a specific job title.
MechWarrior 2: 31st Century Combat
The Remembrance speaks to us on the evil of man’s will, of the reasons for Exodus, and the Rites of the Traveler. Arcadia is our destiny and our right. Enlightenment is our gift. By the Bloodnames of the founders we must return, return and protect that which is unique among the stars. Terra awaits us as it was written. We are the last of the Wardens, the sole hope for the Earth.
Wolves still prowl
The lack of policing ideas is what allowed Hitler to come to power. This is a result of the tolerance paradox. A tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance, or it will erode into an intolerant society.
I have zero idea what your angle is, but for the benefit of others…
Nazi-ism is a chosen belief system with a core belief in depriving other groups of basic human rights. The depriving other people of basic human rights is the key part.
Hate speech is directed towards people with attributes that they cannot change or religion. Religion gets added in there because changing religion is not a simple thing, and in major religions doesn’t hurt people. (Don’t start citing religious terrorists - that is fundamentalism within a religion and not a commonly shared belief among all followers.
So hating on nazis is cool.
It’s not a matter of reward or punishment. It’s a matter of the skills required for continued success.
Early startups require big risk-taking, progressing at an absurd speed, charisma to get investor capital, and really just being a little crazy.
Once the concept is proven to be viable and potentially profitable, the focus needs to shift from proving it can work to making it sustainable. This involves less risk, process improvements to avoid issues like getting sued, better money management, more careful time management to avoid burnout of non-founder employees, and generally just being more rational about things.
It’s rare that a person can exhibit both of these sets of behaviors, so companies will often swap out the former for the latter as a company matures. If they didn’t, the founders might unintentionally drive the company into the ground by taking unnecessary risks after finding something that already works.
Does that answer your question, or did I miss the mark, still?
And I’m guessing a smaller chip makes it even harder to detect. Makes sense. Thank you
Can anyone inform me regarding the purpose of preventing China from producing these more advanced chips? Is it protectionism? Is it anti-China policy? Is there some kind of particular military application?
That was a really, really good article. My observations from living here for 7 years match, and I learned some stuff. It’s good to hear that these initiatives are happening. I try to teach coding in English as a non-profit, but I don’t know enough Korean to reach these other folks. I should do more
We do, actually! You should read up on immunotherapy. It’s not for everyone, but it works in many cases.
The metaphor holds up, too. With sufficient time and effort, you can make things work.
You haven’t read about the founding of modern Israel and the history of Zionism. Please do
(Before accusing me if being pro-terrorist, pro-Hamas whatever, know that I consider both entities unnecessarily violent and evil. But it is important to know why they are that way)
Sure, but when did bring in your right mind preclude you from being a customer? There are plenty of industries based on preying on idiots
Good point. That stuff is chill. I dig me some Johnny Cash now and then, too
Don’t dare say Winnie the Pooh in China, friend.
That whole culture is cancer. A lot of Koreans here think country music is typical American music, and i have to explain to them how that whole culture is super, super fucked and how they need to turn off that fucking music
Your reference to academic debate in a previous comment is hilarious. Academics know how to stay on topic.
The original comment you replied to was referencing Israel’s behavior as terroristic. You provided a counter argument that nation states cannot conduct terrorism based on the definition of the term terrorism. When provided with evidence supporting the opposing claim, you say the evidence is not valid because it is not authoritative. You then say there is no authoritative source for such evidence. You then use a classic goal post argument method of saying, “even if your argument is invalid, that doesn’t work because x,” rather than focusing on the original argument. You also misuse appeal to authority. Appeal to authority as a fallacy is only a fallacy when the item in question isn’t explicitly defined by that authority. When you moved the goal post, you operated under the assumption of your continued argument that dictionaries are authoritative. However, your language is imprecise enough that you’re going to claim you didn’t make that assumption.
That is not proper academic debate method. That is political debate method. This is the kind of shit that makes it difficult to make meaningful progress today. But hey, since we’re not doing proper academic debate anyway, I’ll indulge in some ad hominem. You’re a terrible person for trying to confound a serious issue with irrelevant pedantic arguments and arguments in bad faith. Fuck off. No one cares if “terrorism” - as defined by you as some authority on words - can be applied to nation states. A nation state committed an act meant to cause terror in civilians (in order to take their land). People understood that as the intent, which is the purpose of words anyway.
Ah, you were referencing English. Thank you.
Ah! I learned something recently about lingua franca. It was a combination of French and Italian jargon. https://www.britannica.com/topic/lingua-franca
What are today’s lucky 10,000?
Sorry, what is called the Lingua Franca? I missed which part you’re referencing
I only made the French comment because the French government has an official entity granted the authority to define the official French language.
Correct. There is no authority in language except French. So your pedantic arguments are also flawed. Your own argument works against you
Not exactly what I was hoping for, but that works. I can also do a bit of answering, per the comments. Thanks!
In case you were innocently using whataboutism without meaning to, here’s a tip to avoid it.
If you’re going to compare to the US or wherever, first ask yourself if that place was mentioned in the comment you’re replying to. If not, it’s whataboutism.