KidnappedByKitties @ KidnappedByKitties @lemm.ee

Posts

1

Comments

120

Joined

2 yr. ago

I trawled through your profile a bit, enough to see that you're reasonably well meaning, but both steeped in biased propaganda and having issues from the many broken systems in the US.

My question however is how you believe that Trump will make your life better?

From my perspective (from Europe), you're exactly the type of person Trump loves grifting off of. Last time he did a lot of killing off lower middle class jobs, plundering your workers rights, protections and wages, mismanaging or dismantling support systems like healthcare, infrastructure, disaster readiness, while also increasing taxes on you. Oh, and also bumbled through the pandemic and disaster responses causing more than a million unnecessary deaths.

He also openly broke the law, got very questionable payments coinciding with odd policy changes, and leaked/sold national secrets not only betraying the institutions, but the nation itself.

He's also a known adulterer, liar, slanderer, prideful cheat.

So that would seem to disqualify him as a good pick for either policy, statesmanship, patriotism, or moral reasons.

The only remaining reason then seems to be feelings, no?

Feel free to tell me what Trump does better than Biden, for your life and/or for the nation, or whatever other perspective is more important for you.

Heat is electromagnetic radiation - photons, sound is mechanical displacement - phonons.

They mostly propagate the same due to being waves, in most other respects they are very different.

Heat convection is an entirely separate process where heat radiation is aided by the movement of the surrounding medium. Where it would otherwise heat up it's environment, convection keeps the environment from heating up. Compare coffee in a thermos (very little convection) to a cup you're blowing on (significant convection); more air movement - more cooling.

Also, destructive interference does not at all work like that.

Maybe a more useful analogy could be that waves have like walking animations, where in part of the animation they go up, and in another part they go down. Destructive interference happens when a wave in its' "up" phase crosses a wave in it's "down", meaning the resulting movement looks like nothing. The waves don't however interact in any way, and will continue on their way and on their own animation cycles.

The shifting and heating parts are technically true but require very specific circumstances, enough so that I'm more prone to believe it's another misunderstanding of the physics behind this. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Covid had plenty of travel restrictions, took less than a week to set them up. There's already issue with people being falsely flagged as terrorist or other no-flight risk, and with some of the anti-leftist rhetoric it's not a big leap to make. Also it's entirely in line with Russia labelling LGBT as terrorists, which several GOP/MAGAts are breathing heavily over.

I hope you're right, I just don't see anything but decorum stopping them, and they've repeatedly thrown that out the window.

Just be careful to have plans for before they restrict travel. It's very popular with Russian allies, and similarly with other autocrats

Oh, so Trump is now running on the glory of the German republic? Seems like an odd shift in campaign strategy. /s

“Reich” doesn’t mean “Nazi”.

That might be true in german. But Trump's addressing the US, and particularly a demographic known to a) not speak german, b) associate "Reich"with the propaganda of the Aryan Third Reich of Nazi propaganda, which was the ideal to be ushered in by (and excuse) the Holocaust, Secret Police, Ghettos, systematic execution of homosexuals/disabled/colored, the subjugation of the lesser races, and other pastimes of the notoriously sympatico nazis.

Yeah, I'm sure you're right

Unfortunately I don't agree.

Good reasons to omit details include brevity, legibility, pedagogy and scope.

Showing the supporting evidence for all steps in an evidence chain is simply not feasible, and we commonly have to accept that a certain presupposed level of knowledge as well as ambiguity is necessary. And much of the challenge is to be precise enough in the things that need precision.

You're right to be sceptical until more data is presented, but saying no claim of progress is ever true is quite obviously a gross misrepresentation of our current reality. You are doing this on digital devices interconnected with millions of users ar staggering speed and latency. Every part of which are scientific claims.

There's a relevant physics anomaly called a Helmholtz resonator, or more broadly waveform interference.

🤣

Me calling you Shirley, no matter how much you insist you're Tom, doesn't make Shirley a slur, it just makes me a rude asshole.

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

Lol. Check your privilege.

A. Do a carbon footprint analysis of your life, if it's above 2,5 tons coe/year you're a net burden on the planet. My country is as well, although considerably lower than the US.

B. It is possible for you to be a paragon of environmentalism and still live in a country with inefficient systems for water, infrastructure, zoning, industry and food production. Not to mention live in a culture of unsustainable lifestyle. Many Chinese or Indian persons are simply too poor to have a major impact on the environment, but their national industrial practices drive up the average pollution to levels comparable to the US (although still lower). Most US people aren't as poor, and also have shitty industry standards, and also the means to change that without losing your standing internationally.

C. Multiple countries are shitty, in fact most of the non-developing world countries are a net burden.

D. As opposed to the other countries at the top, the US has had the economy, data, and access to resources to be able to something about it for generations, whereas most have had half the time and considerable need of modernising.

E. The US is much larger than the other countries, and could with quite simple measures make great impact and help pressure other great polluters.

Graphene, the superconductor hoax, the quantum electron model all would like to disagree.

Even though you might not need to calculate anything with it, it certainly applies in your daily life. (although the electron model maybe mostly for high school students)

It's always worthwhile to learn new things!

And programming is a tool, so it's typically made to be clear how to use it, although of course people will differ on what needs to be clarified the most.

My experience is that there's way too much discussion in what tool to pick, it doesn't matter that much and almost all of the common languages will allow you to do all the things. And even though some will be better adapted for certain applications, it's easy to pick up the new tool when relevant, and you'll be that much ahead by being well versed in one.

As for how to learn, I find that you kind of need to figure out the basic syntax in each language (loops, conditionals, output, memory management, typology, lists, function calling, maybe classes/libraries if you're fancy), and then start doing projects.

A nice intro for C# is the C# Player's Guide by R B Whitaker, using some gamification and storytelling to get you through the basics, and even leave you prepared to tackle your first projects (by practicing design philosophy, how to break down projects, etc).

Otherwise, Python is a lot of fun, it's made to be very easy to jump into, and then it's fully featured to do anything you'd like it to. Unfortunately all my resources for it are in my local language, but it has many many users so I'm sure there's great resources to be found in your own language.

I'm comfortable saying yes to that

Notice how the US is among the largest polluters per capita by quite the margin.

Thanks for linking!

But lol, that is such an obviously biased report with vague eyebrow waving suggestions that immigrants are to blame for everything.

None of the charts or trends they present are consistent in their effect, haven't controlled for anything (the major point is lowered GDP per capita while immigration spiked five years ago, but the Brexit drop started well before then, and the exodus of specialist EU-migrants isn't even mentioned), and don't actually say anything except look at this red line next to a thing getting worse.

CPS is why you should view every "Think tank" as a lobbyist organisation, and their materials as sales flyers...

Wow, this is a useless editorial.

No link to the report, unclear if the report takes into account years since migration (it takes time to learn language, develop networks, and climb ladders), some indication that the trouble is that migrants end up in low paying jobs (which of course would decrease GDP), and no comment on the fairly obvious question on what the integration policy says about time frames.

Also, it puts all of the post-Brexit decline at the door of the immigrants, which seems ridiculous.

This reads like a hit piece from conservatives in preparation for election season.