_NoName_

literally says: baseline is the average from 1991 to 2020, and the data is from ERA5.

Also Freetube has these features.

For linux users, you can add it to Steam as a nonsteam game for proton support and add the .NET 8.0 runtime environment using the explorer app in protontricks. It runs great via that method.

It is a sad day.

I’d argue Hanlon’s razor is not a very good heuristic. It ultimately presupposes the user of it is the mental superior in the situation, and does not take into account polarized and ambiguous controversies. It also encourages energy wasting by presupposing the issue lies with mental capacity or education, suggesting that you could educate your opponent out of their stance.

I’d recommend moving towards more energy-conserving practices. Rather than arguing your points directly, it’s better to first understand why the opposition would be taking their current stance and adjust your argument based on what common ground you both share.

Possibly the greatest skill is to just learn when it’s no longer worth your time to argue with them.

Could I get an explanation on what’s happening in the gif? Is that on a train?

Current accusations:

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) claims the malign foreign influence efforts at issue in the case were orchestrated by three Russian nationals — two FSB officers identified as Aleksei Borisovich and Yegor Popov, and Aleksandr Ionov, a Moscow-based activist whose anti-globalization efforts were allegedly bankrolled by the FSB. Ionov founded and ran the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia (AGMR), which, according to prosecutors, worked with a handful of US grassroots organizations to spread Russian influence and interfere with US elections.

To this end, Ionov invited Yeshitela to Moscow in 2015 to discuss “future cooperation,” according to the indictment. The trip was fully paid for by AGMR, according to US prosecutors, who also noted that in planning logistics, Yeshitela had requested meetings with “an official representative of the Russian government” and members of the diplomatic corps of Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, and Syria. Though the indictment did not detail the outcome of the Moscow trip, it outlined several campaigns AGMR subsequently supported APSP with, including a UN “petition on Genocide of African people in US,” which Ionov allegedly offered media support for.

According to the DOJ, AGMR used APSP and other groups to “create the appearance of American popular support for Russia’s annexation of territories in Ukraine” and to cast Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine as a war on “Naziism.” The latter is a common Kremlin talking point; in March 2022, days after Russia launched its invasion, Putin told members of the Russian Security Council:

I will never abandon my conviction that Russians and Ukrainians are one nation, even though some people in Ukraine have been intimidated, many have been duped by nationalist Nazi propaganda, and some have consciously decided to become followers of Bandera and other Nazi accomplices, who fought on Hitler’s side during the Great Patriotic War.

Among other alleged incidents, the AMGR also pushed APSP to make statements in support of APSP Russian Olympic team as its athletes were ensnared in a massive doping scandal, encouraged APSP’s efforts to seek reparations for American slavery, and offered to finance defendant Nevel in a run for local office.

Yeshitela, Hess, Nevel, and Romain face charges of conspiring to defraud the US. The former three are also charged with failure to register as agents of a foreign government.

Was gonna say, it’s almost definitely a cost-savings measure.

Do the pieces look different or are they just called a different thing? Like what’s a ‘jumper’?

What’s a smog?

Answer provided by chatGPT /s

It not a massive gap like that, but it’s tall enough and far enough away that 99.9% of people who try, fall.

Title’s hard click bait. It leads up to talking about Arrow’s Impossibility theorem, which sets forth some explicit rules for defining a fair election, and communicates that all finite-vote systems are dictatorships that fail to meet those criteria, including ranked choice voting. Arrow’s theorem also uses ‘dictatorship’ in a pretty weird technical fashion, meaning that one individual can technically sway any election with their sole choices.

Directly after, though, Veritasium does acknowledge that Duncan Black pokes holes in the actual value of Arrow’s theorem, by showing that many ordinal voting systems will still favor majority preference, and that Arrow’s theorem does not apply to rated voting systems like approval voting and STAR voting.

It’s pretty bizarre that he decided to make such a click-baity title and front-load only skim over the better solution at the end, right near election month.

I’ll trust that’s true, but even still, logic has never stood in the way of any legislation passing in the US or corporate decision.

Gimme an ASCII character for it. We can replace the bitcoin character with it

Voter intimidation sounds exactly right here. Like he’s telling his voters to stay away so anyone they attack is probably a non-follower of his

I mean, I think alittle? Not because of the reasons you think, though, and it’s not really ‘your fault’. More of a pitfall that most people fall into.

TLDR: ditch the apps and try to get out into more social situations through clubs and sports. The ‘right one’ will come along when you are more socially able an mm you’ll likely make friends along the way (genuine friends are WAY more important for staying sane).

So, tinder specifically objectifies and compresses you into a blurb and some photos - it basically cans you for mass consumption. When you finally get ‘bought’, you only get a chat box to communicate unless you actually exchange contacts, and the whole thing’s kind of terrible in general because of that. I’ve tried bumble and it’s pretty much a similar thing.

There’s this thing sometimes called the ‘predator/prey relationship model’ by feminists, and dating apps explicitly reinforce this model, with the only minor change being that bumble required the woman to open the interaction. The predator/prey relationship makes it so that in our society, dudes are expected to go out, find a random woman they fancy, and ‘pounce’ them, essentially. Originally, this was quite literal if you have heard some stories of relationships starting in the 40s and 50s where a couple got together because the guy was just constantly unrelenting. This has shifted to being more egalitarian and consensual but still requires the guy to basically peacock to gain the woman’s approval. Once it officially becomes a relationship, the woman is expected to be submissive while the man is expected to be dominant. It’s a pretty old-fashioned relationship style that still affects modern dating today. Some folks even still subscribe to it.

The better model that I think is more natural is to just go out and find new friends and groups I can participate in. This way, anyone you might date sees you in more context. You get more practice being social, which can be helpful in actually getting someone to become attracted to you, at which point they might actually start putting in effort.

I don’t see much problem with this. It’s one thing to advocate for everyone having greater freedoms to form non-heteronormative-style relationships, and an entire other thing to necessarily want that for yourself. That’s what Feminism is about after all, a broadening of accepted lifestyles and freedoms - not necessarily a complete shift to a paradigm that prohibits the previous one. In this kind of case, it just sounds like you are discovering up front that you two are not seeking the same type of relationship, which is good to find out early.

It’s kind of like advocating for a bike lane in your city despite you not biking and having no interest in biking. I don’t think you’re a hypocrite for not using freedoms you advocate for.

My understanding is that infant labiaplasty and other female genital cosmetic surgeries are pretty common as well in western countries. Luckily there is a growing protest to these practices on ethical grounds, since they’re all medically unnecessary surgeries performed on babies that can’t consent to it.

This journal publication seems to put it into perspective decently. It also points out some of the racist hypocrasy surrounding it, like how we classify these actions being done by non-western cultures as ‘mutilation’ which is unlawful, while classifying ones aligned with our own culture as ‘cosmetic’ and still allow them.

I think it’s kind of hilarious some of the insanely close conclusions some ancient philosophers got to being correct.

For example, Xenophanes observed that there were fossils of fish and shells, and correctly concluded that Greece was at one point underwater. He also had a bunch of insane claims on top of that, but the underwater part was correct.

His teacher, Anaximander actually said humans came from fish, which is hilariously close to correct despite the incorrect reasoning.

Empedocles is probably the most interesting. He concluded that humans and animals originated from these disembodied organs, which found each other and would form wholes. The catch was that many weird forms came about, like people with heads in the center of their bodies, and any other creation you can think of from just slapping animal organs together. He asserted that the forms which were unfit for life died out, leaving only the ones which worked to continue living. Empedocles almost describes a concept adjacent to multicellular organisms forming from single-celled symbiotic relationships (obviously Empedocles didn’t know about bacteria or cell theory), and then goes on to pretty accurately describe the mechanisms of natural selection.