𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠 @ ChairmanMeow @programming.dev

Posts

0

Comments

918

Joined

2 yr. ago

At the time the prevalent belief initially was that the mighty British empire, together with the French, would beat back the Germans and Italians. Remember that these countries had fought a destructive war already which an at the time more powerful German empire lost. US sentiment also was against direct involvement in the war, and many in cabinet were more concerned with the rising threat to their west: Japan.

That's not to say the US did nothing. The US supplied China via the Burma road agains the Japanese, supplied the Allies with arms and they also did the destroyers-for-bases deal. The US also held their first peacetime draft in 1940, well before it officially entered the war.

At the time, the belief was that the US would have to defend the west (against Japan) and that the UK could defeat the Germans. It's why the US moves the fleet to Hawaii, to hopefully pressure the Japanese into backing down.

The US had both domestic and geopolitical reasons to not declare war immediately. It's fair to criticize that, but to characterize the US as doing nothing in that time is just a falsification of history.

The UK could, if Russia would stop interfering with Ukraine.

It's real. Batman #98.

Left is always off, right is on. Generally a toggle switch indicates an immediate change, whereas a checkbox can have a delayed effect. Colours are optional but generally a colour indicates the switch is turned on.

This seems rather unlikely. Ukraine for example takes care to inform journalists and simply asks them not to compromise their locations, checking phones and cameras where necessary.

They don't hold journalists at gunpoint, delete all images off of each device, then threaten the journalists if they dare come back.

Israel has committed crimes in Syria too, which they seem keen to cover up. Intimidation of the press fits in that pattern. They wouldn't behave like this if it was jusy opsec.

Sad indeed, it really sours it.

I hate that I'm pretty sure I know who you're referring to.

Perhaps a slightly less doom-and-gloomy scenario (because not all muslims hate women): in many muslim cultures it's expected that a relationship turns into a marriage quickly. A non-muslim colleague of mine started dating a muslim girl and her family was totally supportive of the relationship, but he did have to marry her within just a couple months of dating. They were both happy to do so but they're a fair bit older than you are. Your girlfriend might not feel ready for such a thing.

Talk to her about it, and ask if she's worried about her family's reaction, what she expects and why. Don't pressure her into introducing you to the family, but clarify that you'd just like to know why. You can express you'd like to meet them of course, but just remember that her decision should be final in all this. That will help your relationship going forward, and once she is ready for it you'll get to meet them.

The judges were personally sanctioned I believe.

That's all conjecture. I'm not sure lawmakers would be particularly swayed by the Haka, particularly not the proponents of the bill (who probably care even less about it).

Even then, an impassioned speech tends to be far more effective in parliament than disruptive protests (historically speaking).

The bill was already fairly controversial, so it probably wouldn't have passed through legislative apathy.

Yeah but why bother? That same parliamentary process defeated the bill?

But that same procedure ended up defeating the bill? I'm not sure the protest really achieved much.

You can fight a bill like this in a 100 ways within parliamentary procedure. If they had announced the protest it would be allowed too I believe.

Protest is for when the procedure fails. But it worked just fine here.

Also, arguments about the protest aside, my main point was that it's not racist to punish an unannounced disruptive protest, just because that protest happened to be a Haka.

I mean, personally I don't really agree with people here saying this punishment is racism.

For me this falls into the same category as walking up to other members of parliament and yelling loudly at them, or breakdancing, or doing anything that disrupts the parliamentary process. I don't think making exceptions for a Haka is reasonable. Parliament has these rules to ensure the room stays calm, collected and can do its work. The Labour party too believes some punishment is appropriate, though they suggested a censure instead.

Most articles refer to a previous suspension of 3 days, but I can't find what that was for. I can't judge if the severity of the punishment is therefore in line with precedent.

It should be mentioned, the bill they protested ultimately did not end up passing.

I'm mostly worried about what comes next...

True, it's not a perfect measure. But surely an instance with fewer users also tends to have fewer active communities, no?

It might be better than nothing at least.

I suppose we should normalize lemmy instances closing new registrations, to keep the user count at a manageable level for the admins.

On Thursday the Reform website was updated to accept cryptocurrency donations. There was a disclaimer stating that all donations were subject to Electoral Commission rules and that anonymous donations were not permissible.

They don't accept anonymous donations. So that doesn't appear to be a concern at least.

Gender dysphoria is a mental problem, in the sense that it causes mental distress to be in the wrong body. The treatment is not therapy, it's surgery to correct the body to fit the mind. A therapist can help identify the cause of the distress, but if the cause is the body then that therapist will recommend surgery.

I recall seeing research suggesting that trans people's brainwaves more closely match that of their "desired" gender than that of their sex. It reinforces the idea that being transgender isn't a mental issue, it's a physical issue that causes mental distress.

A trans man isn't a woman who merely thinks she's a man, it's actually a man inside that skull. Only the body underneath it is wrong. It's as if tomorrow you woke up in the body of the opposite gender. That will (after the novelty wears off) start distressing you. Trans people didn't wake up like that, they were born with that feeling.

Why did the Guardian even bother to write this article? It isn't really newsworthy imo.

I think the point is that even if LLMs suck at task A, they might be really good at task B. Just because code written by LLMs is often riddled with security flaws, doesn't mean LLMs also suck at identifying those flaws.