133arc585 @ 133arc585 @lemmy.ml

Posts

4

Comments

368

Joined

2 yr. ago

It’s just difficult to fathom that the largest economy in the world

Using GDP PPP as measure, the size of China's economy surpassed that of the USA as far back as 2014. It is currently about 25% larger.

About 16% of China's exports in 2022 were to the USA. It would certainly be a significant hit, but to suggest there would no longer be adequate demand is unlikely to be true.

For example, Russian oil exports lost a lot of their direct importers, yet demand has not dropped significantly or in a way that is harmful for them. The volume of their exports has remained relatively constant, but the fraction of the total that different importing countries represent has changed. Even the price dip recovered.

I want to point out that the fraction of imports/exports between the USA and China is roughly symmetric (by monetary value). In 2022, about 16% of China's exports were to the USA; in 2021, about 17% of the USA's imports were from China.

That being said, you're probably making a valid point about which items are flowing, not just the raw value of goods.

Also, I would think it's generally easier for a producer to find new buyers of what it's already producing, than for a buyer to find a new producer for what it needs.

Edit to add: If we look at the ratio "Exports/Imports", we have about 0.3 for the USA with China, and we have about 3.3 for China with the USA.

No of course you can't opt out of the social credit score.

what you watch on it is absolutely used to adjust your credit score.

And yet another bold claim that you are even being so bold as to say is absolutely true. Do you have evidence for this one, either?

I'm asking you to defend your claim that not using TikTok specifically affects your social credit score.

So no, i don’t have a direct source that says “you must use this app or your credit score goes down”, i have a reasonable informed idea that it probably does, based on china’s current treatment of it’s citizens.

This absolutely doesn't follow. Can you elaborate on your logic here? There is no obvious line of reasoning from "china's current treatment of its citizens" to "TikTok is mandatory". Your imagination is not evidence of something.

Why, do you happen to a single or any even tangentially related source pretending it doesn’t?

I'm not the one asserting that failure to use TikTok negatively affects your social credit score; no, I can't find a source that explicitly states "not using TikTok doesn't affect your social credit score", because that's not how this works. You make a positive assertion you provide evidence to back that up.

Well I'm sorry you can't fathom that there is potential future value in old games. I even said that we can't know the future value of something like this, so the safest thing to do is to just preserve them as well as we can.

Do you disagree with all of the explicit examples of ways it can be valuable that I laid out? Or do you simply want to assert the games are "meaningless" and ignore every way in which value can still be derived, or could be derived in the future, from them?

I suspect you haven't actually thought this through and are just being antagonistic for fun; that's how it comes off, anyway.

Jesus christ. What useless reporting, every time. Are they paid by the word? These have the same template-looking structure and both have their word count highly inflated with zero added value.

What a horrible source. This is really shit reporting.

They've hyperlinked the word "hot dogs" to another article on their site titled "Hot dogs sold as ‘vegan’ dogs at Tel Aviv Hanukkah event".

They've also spent part of the article estimating the average hot dog size, converting it between units, and converting the reported asteroid size into hot dog units.

All of the section headers are lame hotdog based puns.

This whole shitty presentation adds nothing to the article. It's distracting. In fact, if you take out this bullshit, the article is really only a couple of meaningful paragraphs. And while there is absolutely value in comparing an asteroid size to a daily object (say, "the size of a car"), there is absolutely zero value, perhaps negative value, in comparing an asteroid size to a collection of sequential hot dogs, or two superbowl trophies.

I could somewhat understand if NASA themselves where putting out press releases with these weird comparisons: that would be a somewhat playful and innocent way to increase public interest. But when it is coming from third-party sources, who push it way past the point of playfulness into absurdity, it loses any value.

Also, unless I'm missing it: they don't even link to a NASA statement. So it's pure editorializing without linking to their primary source.

in china choosing not to use it affects your social credit score, and whether you can buy a house or ride the bus.

Do you have any source that says that using TikTok is mandatory in China, or that not using it does what you're asserting?

So why should the Library of Congress exist? Why should the Internet Archive exist?

"They're books, who gives a shit. Most things are lost over time." "They're web pages, who gives a shit. Most things are lost over time."

There's value in record-keeping. People can analyze it on a technical perspective (like a literary analysis). People can enjoy old games (like reading a book from the 1500s). People can analyze trends in the industry. There are endless reasons why record-keeping could be useful, and you can never plan for all of them ahead of time.

the config files show 99% were extracted from Debian Linux

Can you provide a source for that?

Indeed. See my edit on the parent comment--I noticed that the website provides commands to the user to run, which makes it ripe for MITM attacks: if the user is copying-and-pasting commands to run into their shell, those need to be served over HTTPS.

It's definitely not the case that it's useless. A MITM can embed malware into the page it returns if you aren't being served over HTTPS. It's not just about snooping on sensitive data going one or both ways, it's about being sure that what you're receiving is from who you actually think you're receiving it from.

(Edit to add:) I actually went to look at some of the rest of the site and it confirms what I suspected: not using HTTPS here puts the reader at risk. Because this website provides code snippets and command line snippets that the user is to run, by not presenting it over HTTPS, it becomes susceptible to malicious MITM editing of the content.

For example, this line on the site:

2. Install Homebrew (ruby -e "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/go/install)")

Could be intercepted, since it's not being served HTTPS, and be replaced with utf-8 lookalike characters that really downloads and runs a malicious ruby script! Even easier, perhaps, they could just insert an item into the bulleted list that has the user run a malicious command.

HTTPS is not just for security of personal or private information. It is also for verifiable authenticity and security in contexts like this.

Fair enough, I see that it wasn't mentioned in those 3 sources. Either way, they're still Neo-Nazi. And in my personal opinion, that makes them terrorists, but I can understand if you don't want to use the word terrorist. So just call them: Neo-Nazis. That doesn't make them any less deserving of derision.

The weaseliness comes from the fact that you took what definitely did happen and phrased it as "probably happened". You also took what one country definitely did, and tacked on a "well most countries were doing bad things" immediately after. That's what is bothering me. It's the whole "well it might not have happened, and if it did, they weren't the only ones, and even if they were, it was a necessary evil" goalpost shifting.

I’m very opposed to the world war alliance but understand the shitty circumstances

By "understand the shitty circumstances" you're seemingly saying that it made sense to make the alliance. But you're, once again, ignoring my point: if the cost of that alliance is that you must provide volunteers to kill Jews, you are in the wrong.

And I do see the agenda you’re set on.

Please, enlighten me. The only agenda I have here is to call out the minimizing of Nazi-collaboration that happened, including the murder of Jews, as some sort of "necessary evil" alliance.

It’s very probable that war crimes did happen as they happen with every country in a war.

So many weasel words. It's not just "very probable", Finland's own government published and stands by a multi-hundred page report documented how it did happen. Also, not every country was offering up volunteers to help murder Jews, so don't make this "all sides" junk claim.

Also, you glossed over the key point I made: if the cost to get protection from what you perceive as an invading threat is to offer up volunteers to kill Jews, you are completely in the wrong for accepting that protection. That is not a fair trade-off to make.

The methodology used here is specifically tied to Russia and cannot be used on Ukraine.

You said it's specific to Russia and cannot be used on Ukraine. It is not specific to Russia, and whether it could be used on Ukraine or not is, as you now say, dependent on data accessibility. I was pointing out that your original comment was not accurate.

No, the one I already linked.

In WW2 Finland hid Jewish people from the Nazis and the alliance was probably a mandatory evil after not getting support against the other fascists coming over the over

Is that so?

Authorities in the Scandinavian nation revealed the findings Friday in a 248-page government-commissioned independent report, which showed that 1,408 Finnish volunteers — many between the ages of 17 and 20 — served with the SS Panzer Division Wiking from 1941 to 1943.

...

After losing several territories to a Soviet invasion in 1939, Finland entered a deal with Nazi Germany for material support against Moscow. But the agreement also required the Nordic country provide some 400 volunteers for the SS Wiking division — a pact it reluctantly honored, the report concluded.

I'll say this: if part of the requirement of "getting support against the other fascists coming over" is to supply volunteers to kill Jews, it's not excusable in the least. It's completely unacceptable.

No you're right that was an honest mistake. I misremembered Economy Minister as Prime Minister.

I was simply quoting the Wikipedia page.