I think it is far more likely that some other country would fall out of our good graces than that the US government might become anti-Israeli-genocide.
(I am not saying you’re wrong as far as the Israeli calculus or that factoring into their decision. Just that, as far as my own calculus, they don’t really have any need to get concerned.)
It’s actually a very telling carve-out, and I have no idea what it’s doing so far down in the article. It should have been front and center.
The only two logical conclusions I can see are:
I very much suspect that it’s the second one. Which indicates that the lock-in was an intentional decision, and one that actually would make quite a bit of sense on reflection.
I actually changed the title to make sure that it wouldn’t be clickbait, by modifying the question to become instead the answer to the question.
If you care about privacy, don’t use biometrics.
It is sad because it is less convenient, but that’s what’s up.
This issue is explained in quite a lot of detail in the video. There do exist some stable orbits despite the lumpiness, and it’s possible to simulate the orbit (stable or not) of any given object given its initial parameters. Guess what was the starting point for the analysis they did in the video?
I feel like maybe enough time has passed that this can get un-stickied?
The black box algorithms are not designed to show you what you want to see.
It reminded him, the briefing says, of “fleeing arbitrary detention in Syria and forced disappearance of his friends in Syria in 2013.”
My brotherman, there is a reason for that.
Meta pursued arbitration, arguing that the book is prohibited under a nondisparagement contract she signed as a global affairs employee.
I feel like in the current climate, a lot more people need to be adhering to the doctrine of go fuck yourself.
“But we had the ARBITER say you COULD NOT”
“Yeah good luck with that”
“We will SUE you and RUIN you”
“Hey I’m doing a gofundme then good luck with all your stuff, people definitely know about my book now.”
What’s the impact of Biden’s policies on climate change? So far and then as calculated for the future?
What’s the impact of his policies on working class wages, as of the end of his term?
I’m curious if you know the answers to those questions. In another reality, those would be vital issues to some people in the same way that Gaza was a vital issue to some people, but I’ll wager that the relative importance that the media you consume placed on those three issues is basically skewed towards Gaza by an amount so close to 100% that it might as well be.
And, those were affirmative actions on his part, not just sort of “aiding and abetting” extensively with some efforts to stop it. Not that I’m saying it excuses his war-criminal support for Israel. I’m just saying that, when it’s not complicated, he came out swinging in a big way to do actually good things, which is pretty unusual for an American politician. I don’t know if you realize it, but ““Biden, again.” Almost nobody wanted that” is a textbook propaganda framing, sort of indirectly implying (quite effectively) that he did nothing of value.
And, of course, refusing to vote for Harris because of Gaza is about the stupidest strategy you could possibly pursue. It’s now more likely than not, I think, that Gaza simply won’t exist by the end of Trump’s term.
I hesitate to badmouth the agency because it has so many sincere talented people working there, but also, NASA management as a whole has been dogshit since about the 1980s. Like real dogshit, “should be in prison” type of thing. Read about the Challenger disaster investigations, things like people warning that the launch was unsafe and shouldn’t continue, and being told to “Take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat.”
You are assigning a type of objectivity to the process that simply doesn’t exist. They’ve taken people’s kids away because they came into the country and then requested asylum.
I don’t think “solving the problem” is the goal. I think cruelty is the goal. Sometimes that can be accomplished by kicking someone out of the country, but there are other ways, too.
She had flown from New York to Portland, Oregon, where she spent time with a host family, helping with household chores in return for accommodation.
At the end of February she travelled to Seattle with plans to travel to Vancouver in Canada to stay with another family.
However, when she reached the border, Mr Burke said the Canadian authorities denied her entry as they were concerned she may try to work illegally.
She described how she spent six hours at the border, waiting while officials were “trying to determine if what I had been doing in America counted as work”.
A few words about interacting with immigration: Less is more. Normal categories are good. Why are you in the country? “Tourism.” Where’d you stay? “In a hotel.” What do you do for work? “I’m a student.” Did you see any sights while you were there? “Yeah.” / “Not really.”
Don’t elaborate. Don’t embellish. It’s not that good an idea to lie outright, because they are pretty good at getting you tangled up in any little holes in your story, but you definitely don’t need to paint any extra pictures for them, either. You were traveling. You stayed in a few different places. End of story. This woman’s story is why. The immigration people are not good people.
I’m also interested to learn more about the people who have been in this facility for years. Why? What did they do? When are they getting out? Are they charged with anything, or just… there? Someone should really look into that. Trump definitely wants to find little crevices like that that he can stick people in. I expect that people like this guy from Columbia are going to be the first test cases of whether he can get away with it.
Lmao
I think most of the people are actually reasonable. It’s just easier to get in discussions and stay in them with the unreasonable people than it is with the reasonable people.
That makes sense, but not very relevant to my point. To a working class person, the big three items in their budget are food, energy and housing. Therefore to them, core inflation being X% implies that at some point they’ll look at the items in their budget and find that they inflated X%. It doesn’t, however, say anything about their present state, which is that everything is expensive as hell. The core issue here is that “at some point” isn’t “now”. The DNC missed that distinction in their campaigning strategy, and bragged about their (sort of real, to be fair) accomplishments rather than doing damage control.
Yeah. This is completely true. The Democrats pulled off some genuinely impressive economic things, among them controlling inflation, but then they fucked up any chance that the messaging would hit by talking about how they “brought inflation back down.” To an economist, that’s true: Things used to cost 7% more every year, and now they cost 3% more every year. That’s not how any normal person looks at “inflation” though. To the average person, inflation has “gone back down” once eggs and meat go back to what they used to cost.
I think if Biden had done half as much about climate change, and half as much for working-class wages, and gone after grocery stores to get them to stop price-gouging (like actually threatened the hell out of them with the federal governments’ lawyers Bernie Sanders-style and made a big stink about how he was doing it), he would have won the election. He and his team did do a bunch of really important things for working people in this country. But they also just don’t understand how the average person looks at it, apparently, or how to communicate effectively about what they did.
I sort of wish the news media would do its job, and bridge that gap instead of actively working to make people’s misunderstandings of the world worse, but that seems unlikely to change. Especially now. I was extremely creeped out to realize that a lot of the statistics about this stuff, and news stories I remember reading about it, are much harder to find on Google now, and I wonder if that is on purpose. I think it might be.
You’re using 2019-2023 wage growth with 2021-2025 inflation, so this comparison is meaningless. Now I actually can’t find 2021-2025 (or 2021-2024 for that matter) wage growth numbers, but they’re probably not 30%.
Why do you assume they are not?
It looks to me like, if you look 2021-2024, 10th percentile wages went up by 25%. You can download the Excel sheet at https://www.bls.gov/ecec/factsheets/compensation-percentile-estimates.htm under “The complete set of estimates and relative standard errors are available in Excel.”, from the very end. You want the second line “Civilian workers / Wages and Salaries.” It went from $11.26 to $14.06 (current dollars), so 24.8% up.
If you look on https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ for inflation over the same period, it looks like 2021-2024 inflation was 15%. So they beat inflation by about 10% if you constrain the periods to be the same.
Yes, but why do the voters think that? The voters in America thought that Trump would be better on the economy. Why on earth did they think that? It’s a very weird thing for them to think. They have a lot of those weird beliefs that definitely aren’t reality, and have to come from somewhere. Or, maybe they have some kind of grain of truth, but they get blown up into these hugely important things, that emotionally resonate. “He’s arrogant and out of touch” is a perfect example of one of those things.
Like I say, I’m not saying the voters don’t genuinely think that. I am asking where they got that idea.
I actually don’t know the answer, even as far as America and Trump being good for the economy. And I don’t think the answer for America, at least about that instance, is clearly “Russians,” for what it’s worth. And also yes I am totally uninformed about Canadian politics. I just know that with these kind of vibes-based judgements about politicians, it’s almost always based on some kind of bullshit.
That kind of thing. It’s very malleable. You might as well say that Trudeau is a man of the people, because he was a drama teacher, and this other guy is from a bank, he’s a banker, he’s greedy, he’s everything that’s wrong with society today. It’s just kind of vibes and random judgements. Or, at least, when I look at it within American politics, that’s what it is.
Plenty of US right wing and oil funding for destabilizing Canada, all the while supporting the demonism of war on Russia, by pretending that high diesel/home heating fuel was the result of carbon tax.
full CIA puppetry of all western political leaders
US wants Greenland to gift it to Russia
Oh, hello! I didn’t even notice it was you when I was replying. Good to see you found a way to shoehorn “Biden” and “DNC” and “Hillary” into this totally related topic. You did it real smoothly, too, it totally wasn’t some random hard turn into a rant about US politics and your favorite politicians from the US to talk about. Nice.