Let’s be clear though—two destroyers ain’t waging war with Iran. They’re most likely moving these closer so that, once again, if/when Iran retaliates for this unprovoked attack by Israel, they can help shield Israel from incoming missiles and drones.
I mean the guys already making this joke himself right? So you’re just laughing along with him. Unless you made the T-shirt text for the meme, and even still, he’d probably chuckle at it if that were the case.
Yeah was worried this was the case. Seems insane though that they can make that decision and then force the family to take liability for the cost. Hopefully they will have some sort of recourse—I don’t know exactly but I’m pretty sure long term life support ain’t cheap.
So this is horrible and stupid. But also, who pays for this? Does the family get forced to eat millions in ICU bills? Does the hospital just eat it? Does it get covered by Medicare, which they’re actively trying to erase?
This is what my wife keeps saying, with certainty. I thought it was weird at first, but then I remember that he had that protective order specifically because of the strong threat of violence to him if he was deported back… to the country they sent him to.
I am hoping it’s not the case, and that this is just them wanting to avoid having to back down, but it really wouldn’t have been a big blow to them to bring one person back.
Yeah this was my reaction a while back when I saw their promos about how they want to de-extinct wooly mammoths and dodos. Like ok neat, but where are the mammoths supposed to slot in, a rapidly warming arctic that will more likely have palm trees than ice by the end of the century?
I mean I’m being a little obtuse here on purpose—these species choices are obviously guided by marketing potential. No one will pay attention if they resurrect some niche mouse that went extinct a couple years ago, so they’re picking stuff that looms large in pop consciousness.
But in the end, it’s a private company, and I very much doubt their whole goal is to make money off of conservation societies and zoos to make extinct animals—far more likely it’s to refine and recreate new genetic editing procedures which will then get ported into making purpose-built animals for industry (think the sheep who’s milk has certain valuable enzymes or chemicals built in) or like human biotech (so, like, GATTACA).
The “founder” gives off strong Palmer Luckey vibes. (This is based on visual aesthetic and his general demeanor vibes only, he could be a saint, I have no idea)
This article resonates strongly for me, thank you for posting it. I often muse that some of what gets termed a disorder or an illness is just a lazy way to hand wave over someone not being happy about fitting in with certain aspects of “normal” behavior or culture. There is of course actual mental illness, but once you start investigating stressors or traumas, the concept gets more complicated than “something’s wrong with your brain” in terms of cause and effect.
I read about a study that was about instilling “learned helplessness” in the participants, and the one group that was mostly resistant to the effect were the chronically depressed group. This led the researchers to speculate some of what was termed depression was actually an inability to suspend reality; ie the “depressed” group saw reality a little too clearly, and aside from this making them resistant to the effects of induced “learned helplessness” it also made them distressed.
That is very helpful. Now I want to know silly stuff like, what happens if you fly through the beam, and could you in theory reaim the array towards a completely different receiver plant, and be able to shift power around as needed (albeit very slowly)
I was hoping the article would explain how they planned to transmit the energy in a useful way. It says beaming back my microwave, but I have no idea how that works or if it has a good scale potential. Guessing they’re targeted at some surface that vibrates or heats up and that geberates the power on the terrestrial side of the equation?
I’d imagine for the same reasons that people study the past and try and understand how events unfold. People still mention the name Chamberlain when discussing the rise of the third reich for instance.
When Snowden released his collection of files way back when, he made the argument that the panopticon that was being built wasn’t being used in the worst way at the time of his decision to whistleblow. But his point was that the construction of such tools could not be justified based on their eventual use by a worse form of American govt.
When the liberal mainstream—and this includes Biden, major media, and most other center/center-left politicians and pundits over the last year and a half—presided over the framing of anti-semitism as the act of being critical of Israeli govt actions and supported that govt in a year long punishment campaign to destroy an ethnic group, they normalized the positions that are now being used to deport green card holders and leverage higher ed into submission. Free speech on this issue was fought over last year, and generally, the anti-free speech side won.
It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re worse, or even equal in vileness to the current admin, but it is a point worth recognizing. Enshrining Trump, as horrid as he is, as an exception may be comforting, but it removes the broader narrative that brought our present about. If we don’t work to understand this sequence with clear eyed judgment, our resistance to it will likely fail.
“Scientist” as a general concept doesn't have an inherent positive or negative value. Some scientists have invented things that saved lives or expanded our understanding of the universe. Others experimented on prisoners, or developed addicting drugs for big pharma. Personally I’d say scientists are more likely to resemble the first, not the second, but what defines the value is not the profession, but the actions they take as individuals.
His comment appeared to describe the issues with approval of scientists as a baseline, when the capitalist system they’re trapped within has other incentives and agendas. It’s a point one can certainly disagree with, but it is a coherent argument.
If one cannot learn from history, it will repeat. The actions that led to this moment are important to understand if one wants to be able to counter them and avoid them in the future.
Let’s be clear though—two destroyers ain’t waging war with Iran. They’re most likely moving these closer so that, once again, if/when Iran retaliates for this unprovoked attack by Israel, they can help shield Israel from incoming missiles and drones.