whereisk @ whereisk @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

413

Joined

2 yr. ago

The reality is those graves and artifacts were being hunted and sacked for thousands of years for all kinds of purposes (mostly steal whatever they could, to melt the gold and sell the gems) as soon they stopped being actively guarded or cared for, or their religious value diminished along with the religion that they were made for.

More than that, surrounding people kept on repurposing materials from the temples to build other structures.

Every new empire that took over their land would plunder whatever value they could find to fund their army and enrich themselves.

This long term view of history of artifacts of old empires as something to be preserved at all costs, let alone in their country of origin is rather new - hell, the idea of a nation state is rather new.

Where are the ancient museums that were preserving artifacts of older civilisations?

Now, should they be given back close to their place of origin and historical context? My modern sensibilities say absolutely.

But I can hardly call the people that took them for the sake of inflating their social standing and preserving them in the process of displaying them in their collections special kind of assholes than anyone that came before them that wanted only to melt them down for cash - it was an improvement if only because were not as desperate as the people before them.

I guess my only question is what is that 19% doing being part of a party that doesn't trust expertise.

I mean, religions are fucked in all kinds of ways and can certainly fuck up their followers in a systemic way but in this instance I'm not sure Mormonism is teaching emaciation of children, more like they were attributing their fucked up impulses to religion.

Putting the hard work in for that Soros check!

What if she used magic?

All that can be true and they still don't make the person investigator, judge and executioner. I guess we'll see what the defence says at the trial - I'm assuming "feared for his personal safety" will feature heavily.

I think that was clear, my further comment was to highlight how far off (maybe), FB's implementation intent has been from the way people are now using it.

Yes, in a joke or funny post the laugh emoji is used as intended. But in a more serious announcement it is the equivalent of mocking disgust, hence more emotionally devastating than a thumbs down.

Eg say someone posts a somber poem about their late father - a laughing emoji is saying "fuck you, I laugh at your pain or your shitty poem or the memory of your dad".

The only question is, why, now that they've seen how it's used don't they let people disallow certain reactions. I'm assuming because emotional distress is more addictive..

It's art (that makes you horny)

A laugh react is more insidious than a thumbs down.

You can customise that home page and the news hover to show nothing, which is what I always do.

They hate American Jews as they lean heavily Democrat, but they hate Muslims more (they also hate each other but they'll turn on each other later, see how many Trump appointees are now blasting him).

I don't see an upside for Putin in this. Given how many years he's been in power anything bad that happens falls on him for failing to prevent it, there's hardly anyone else left to blame. He'll probably fire a few people to look as if he's doing something.

Also everything he lost is treated indistinguishably from property - e.g. he dismissss his wife to sleep with other men, he's made whole by being given more children (probably with some other woman/en), as if having more children would replace the children you lost - it's an insane piece of text.

The ancients had more sense: at least a capricious, emotional God similar to humans (like the ancient Greek gods) that does everything including create evil and allows the torturing of people on a bet at the high council reconciles better with nature.

So God, through Satan.

No worries.

For those who were wondering:

On the security updates:

Yes they'll provide some security updates for some time even out of contract. No time frame given, only in relative release numbers:

Our naming convention for releases is: major.minor.patch.

Version -2 of currently released minor version goes EOL. The cadence is not explicitly provided

On not renewing or renewing later:

Yes, jump in any time.

Can I update every second or third year? Will the previous versions receive security updates?

No, they actively hate the poor, even when the money is donated freely by the rich to pay for their school lunch.

That's fucked, sorry, I had no idea.

Yes, but nothing on what the article was focused on - the impact on individuals.

So we have no idea if it hit intended targets, if it improves lives better than other programs or differently etc. How it was used, did it enable people to escape a suffocating circumstances that then allowed them to thrive (a medical procedure, fleeing domestic abuse etc) or put more food on the table like the individual stories it had. Give us some statistical data.