NIB @ NIB @lemmy.world

Posts

11

Comments

270

Joined

2 yr. ago

They can affect a western country but these are not societal threatening issues, not in the same way climate change is for poorer countries.

The truth is that "western" countries will be "fine". They have the money to build walls(for the rising sea and immigrants), cool and heat all the houses, buy/grow food, infinite energy. The cost of living will increase, the quality of life might decrease but nothing directly societal threatening.

Climate change will mostly affect poorer countries, that are already struggling to survive. Those countries cant really afford to do anything. And people in those countries will have to decide between dying or migrating. So the only "issue" for the "West" is the mass migration that will be caused by climate change.

I think it is gibberish.

The second word is almost something. It starts with "EYE". "EY" means "good" and it is a common greek prefix. Words like euphoria, eugenics, eukaryotes, eucalyptus, etc use this prefix. Fun fact, while Europe is also a greek word that starts with EY(in greek "y" and "u" are the same), it comes from a different world("ευρυς" which means "wide" and "οπς" which means "face", because europe is wide).

Anyway, after the EYE, it loses it. But the end of the word, looks like "ΕΙΟΝ" which is also a common greek suffix(kinda archaic). Except the last letter is an "Λ"(L) and not an "Ν" but we can give it the benefit of the doubt.

If you wanted to write "BREWERY" in greek, it would be "ΖΥΘΟΠΟΙΕΙΟN". It also ends with "ΕΙΟΝ", so the ai got 1/3 of the word right.

Dont you guys not have phones parents? You will get a house once they die. If you have siblings, tough luck, you will have to battle royale for the house.

Either Ukraine or Russia(accidental friendly fire) shot it down. It was probably Ukraine, risking one its few precious patriots and moving them close to the front. Ukraine is trying to shape the battlefield for the arrival of the F-16, so shooting down flying radar planes is very desirable.

Generally these radar planes are not only rare but extremely valuable for Russia's war efforts.

Ukraine atm has millions if not tens of millions of mines all over the place. Adding a few hundred or thousand bomblets wouldnt make things measurably worse.

Many of these wont even be used as artillery shells, they will just strip them and ducktape the bomblets on fov drones.

Both sides have been extensively using mines and cluster munitions, because they are extremely effective. Sending Ukraine extra ammunition will save countless ukranian lives.

After the war, both sides will have a strong incentive to remove mines. Mines are often an issue for poorer countries, who dont have the funds to clear them out. Of course even in Ukraine there will be incidents decades later, but they should be comparatively low(to the amount of mines used).

Ultimately, the issue with cluster munitions is mostly about conflicts that dont already have millions of mines, because failed bomblets can act like mines. Thats less of an issue in Ukraine, because it already has millions of mines, acting like mines.

PS Russian cluster munition are terribly unreliable, much more than even old nato ones

You can wash your dog's feet you know.

The review is pretty fair and somewhat agrees with you.

And in before "good job greek conservative government for making gay marriage possible". The main opposition to gay marriage was the current government and even though it was their own bill, half of their mps voted against/abstained.

The government just wanted to disarm the opposition and knew that even though most of their voters opposed it, in the long run(once old people die), the majority of voters will support gay marriage.

And if they keep opposing it, it will have significant political repercussions, especially since the main opposition party just elected a gay leader. Also our prime minister is a CIA asset(thatcher conservative, not maga conservative), so that works too.

The bill passed only because most of the opposition voted for it(except for the communists and nazis).

Yes.

Greeks did beat the romans. Imagine if the US militaraly/politically declined and Canada became the world's super power. Is Canada a thing? Not really, it is America's hat(if we exclude the weirdo frenchies). Canadians are culturally americans.

Do you think they watch canadians movies in the cinemas?

The romans might had military defeated the greeks but the greeks culturally dominated the romans. Romans took a lot of greeks to Rome and made learning the greek language "the fancy" thing that all educated and cultured romans expected to know.

Thats how eventually the Eastern Roman Empire(or Byzantine Empire, as the filthy westerners try to rebrand it), became more and more greek.

Well maybe culturally influenced but Mesopotamia didnt "conquer" Greece. Well Persia conquered greek cities in western Anatolia(Turkey) but that happened later on. As i wrote, before classical Greece, you are basically entering a prehistoric era from which we only have myths and archeological artifacts. What little text we have from back then is either too limited or incomprehensible or non historically accurate(myths).

As far as Greece is concerned, there was the Minoan civilization(in the island of Crete and other islands), whose writing(linear A) has basically nothing in common with (ancient) greek. We still havent decyphered Linear A. They are the basis for the whole Atlantis myth and they were probably destroyed by a tsunami(Santorini's volcano going boom).

After them we had the Mycenaean civilization, which is a greek mainland one. They used linear B, which was between linear A and greek. We have mostly decyphered linear B. Myceneans are the trojan war greeks.

After that we had or maybe didnt have the "dorian invasion"(northern greeks? fucking/conquering the Myceneans??? noone knows), which caused cultural changes and many centuries of "dark age". And only after that we had the classical greek city states and the start of history.

History and national identities are very messy. And once you start going prehistoric, it is even more ridiculous. Which is why every country has artificially created its own national myth/history.

Italy's? Dont you mean Greece's? Italians(romans) were just wannabe greeks, greekaboos. Literally every aspect of roman society is copied from the greeks. And luckily for us, greeks were one of the first people who started writing down shit, in a language we can understand, so there is no reason to go further back.

Wasnt he Princess Dianna's boyfriend?

God of War? Elder Ring? Baldur's Gate? Spiderman? Last of Us? Super Mario? Zelda? Red Dead Redemption? Cyberpunk?

Using the wrong name is a very common thing among elderly people. Stop trying to justify it. Both Biden and Trump should not be candidates for the presidency.

What company in the world would hire 80yos for anything mentally demanding. Biden wouldnt be hired on any company in the world, yet you want to put him in charge of the world? And he will be in an even worse condition later in his 2nd term.

Bill Clinton is 4 years younger and he is pretty much a zombie. Presidency takes a huge physical and mental toll. Even Obama went from super fit young man to middle aged.

It isnt about China collapsing, the West didnt collapse in 2008, it is about understanding reality and taking measures to deal with issues. China used construction similarly to how people in the West used the stock market. As a speculative investment scheme. And similarly to stocks, there were some underlying issues that caused a massive bubble(on top of your typical capitalism issues).

Money do not exist as wealth, they exist to be used as a medium for transactions. They are a representation of wealth but they are not wealth. Their only function is the get circulated. You are seeing things pretty narrowly. Let's say you have 10million. You have the option to keep them under the mattress and they will worth 50% more in 1 year. Or you can invest them into something.

What would you choose? Why would you risk investing that money into something when you can guarantee increasing their value by keeping them? Now imagine if everyone is doing that. Everyone is taking out of circulation trillions of dollars because it is more profitable and less risky for the future.

What effect would that have in the economy, quality of life, technological progress, literally on everything? And this is why deflation is orders of magnitude worse than inflation.

Production for production’s sake is pointless.

Almost all production is for production's sake. Humans need nothing to survive. You can become a hermit and consume nothing. Yet here you are, being inauthentic and buying things that you ultimately do not need for survival. Clothes, coffee, phone, haircut. Even your diet is not maximized for calories needed.

People adapt. Thats how someone can live in extreme poverty with less than 2 dollars a day. Think that next time you buy a 5 dollar coffee. You could have fed 2 people for a day.

If you are talking about why we moved away from the gold standard, yes there being a limited supply was a problem. We pegged a dollar to a certain amount of gold and pretty soon we ran out of gold to buy to maintain that peg

You should read more about the history of gold. We created silver coins because we run out of gold because the rich people hoarded all the gold and did not use it because by not using it, its value kept increasing. So we got the silver coins but then the rich kept hoarding them too. So we made fiat(or their era equivalent).

Bitcoin is not a good currency. The fundamental use of a currency, the whole point of its existence is to be used. Bitcoin is heavily throttled by design and cant be used as an every day currency. No crypto can replace VISA without become centralized and VISA like(which defeats the point of crypto).

I have been following crypto for 10+ years. It is a cool tech(decentralized database) but everything related is a "scam". Even if it isnt a deliberate scam, it is still part of pump and dump and an unusable speculative asset. All volume is whitewashing and gambling addicts. Crypto has basically 0 real world use atm, lower than the use it had 5 years ago. Noone cares about adoption anymore, i wonder why.

Yet the market is up. That should tell you everything you need to know about crypto. It's value is not representative of real world use. Not to mention that the whole point of crypto was decentralization and not having a middleman but most people keep their crypto in exchanges. Crypto dudes are literally reinventing the conventional economic system, with fiat and banks. What do you think the whole layer 2 stuff is? It would be hilarious if it wasnt so sad.

Exchanges are literally banks and your account there is literally FIAT. Not your keys, not your money. Your money is just a number in an exchange spreadsheet. And could disappear tomorrow, just like it has happened many times so far(every time an exchange goes bust).

Most people still keep their money on an exchange because ultimately it isnt about the crypto technology, it is about gambling and get rich quick schemes.

Rich people hoard money now too, they just put it into assets and securities and generate a return, then live off the interest.

True but at still in theory, the central bank can nuke their monetary wealth. So they are forced to use it. Buying assets is vastly preferable to keeping the money under the mattress. Again, it is all about circulating the currency, thats its main purpose. This is not a bug, this is a feature of the currency. You arent supposed to hoard it.

Money is a transaction tool. Money is not wealth, it is just used to represent wealth as a convenience. Hoarding money should not be your goal, your goal is to use that money to acquire things, either things that you "need" or "investments".

That’s a money printing & budgeting problem, not a gold problem. That’s a spending more than you have or make problem.

Again, you assume money is wealth. But even if you think it is the evil governments who want to have infinite money, ask yourself, why literally no economist supports the return to gold. Economists are the most contentious breed of people. They disagree on everything. Why do they agree on this?

Cleopatra wasnt an egyptian, she was a macedonian greek. Alexander the Great conquered the "entire" world, then died and his general Ptolemy got the kingdom of Egypt. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemy dynasty and was infamously isolated and incestuous. Their court was mostly greeks or hellenized(greekified) egyptians/jews. In fact, Cleopatra was the first(and last) Ptolemy ruler to even bother to learn egyptian, in 200 years of their rule.

Also egyptians arent black, even today they have all kinds of skin colours. Primarily they fucked other mediterranean people, greeks, carthaginians, romans, phoenicians, hittites. Most black people live(lived) below the Sahara desert, so while there was some trade traffic towards/from that direction, it was pretty limited in comparison. You did have things like the kingdom of Kush but for the most part Egypt had more to do with mediterranean(and middle east) states than with subsaharan ones(Sudan/Ethiopia).

So i dont think egyptians are black for the most part and i think most racists would agree.