In what way? The horrors of Auschwitz, etc where not known at the time.
Even with the limited access it's clear that Israel is killing and torturing an entire nation. Whether you want to call it ethnic cleansing or genocide anyone pretending it isn't happening has no excuse.
That the US, and more generally, the West, are arming and funding it makes us all complicit
> The horrors of Auschwitz, etc where not known at the time.
Oh, they were known, they were just able to be pushed out the mind until filmed, unredacted, and uncensored evidence started to be widely and publicly seen, after the fact. No one in the West sees Gazan children dying on their TV, they hear verbal descriptions (as they did from the very start of what became the Shoa) or they see a cut to black or a mosaic blur or a shot of aftermath rubble, maybe with a body covered by a sheet. Usually it’s just a number scrolling by on a chyron. One of the things the bastards of today learned is don’t make the mistake of the bastards of tomorrow and let your populace (or your enemy’s populace) see uncensored atrocities… anyone’s atrocities. Most Americans alive today have only seen the least horrible and most anodyne images from Auschwitz or Bergen-Belsen or Sobibor (or My Lai, or Phnom Penh, or Baghdad, or on and on and on)… if they’d seen the bulldozers pushing naked children with holes through their skulls into pits they’d never have been able to vote for the bastard of today when he’s using the playbook(s) of the bastard(s) of yesteryear.
And yeah, we’re all complicit, especially in the other substantially equivalent, if not greater, atrocities happening with Western funding and Western weapons that we’ve been ignoring for equally long or longer. Yemen, Syria, Sudan, the DRC. The less the victims look like us, the easier it is for us to ignore… especially when our governments and our media do us the job we’ve asked them to do by not letting us see what’s really happening out there.
They’re going to do a much better job of getting us to be complicit in the future, given the confluence of AI, social media, and the progressively more authoritarian leaning of aging tech broionaires.
Amongst the Jews it was public knowledge long, long before '43. By the time the camps started being liberated by the Soviets pretty much everyone knew something truly abominable was happening, they just didn’t know about the piles of hair and teeth or the showers.
In other words the world saw a genocide and did f**k all… then it was forced to see that this wasn’t just a genocide, it was a bad genocide, so it hung a few and shot a few and then expatriated the rest to run their space race.
What’s been happening in Gaza has been clear since at least '48… this is just the final turn of the horrible screw, but the screw’s been grinding since long before I was born.
Arguably it’s really only an English word once it deviates from the original spelling and meaning. Like how the original British English “Aluminum” is now the American English word for the metal represented by the newer British English “Aluminium”, all of which borrowed from, but didn’t outright steal, the Latin roots.
English has not been in its final form forever, therefore there was a language or languages that preceded it. English words derive from one of these previous languages. Since a word from another language cannot be an English word, English does in fact not have any English words except ones that sprang arbitrarily out of nowhere.
As per my other reply, I'm genuinely shocked that you took my comment to be serious. It's basically as satirical one can get of the position that a word cannot be a word in multiple languages. Poe's law and all that I suppose.
Hmm, divers have known the dolphin kick for years (decades?) as a way to move underwater at speed, but you’re rarely near the surface or the bottom to have effects from the surface interfaces. Interesting.
Seriously, just buy a bag of seed, go find some pigeons, and feed them.
Now, watch them, carefully… see how hard they work, every day, even when they’re hobbling around on grotesque stumps where their feet used to be before they got wrapped up in our discarded waste.
Notice how something can put so much effort into just surviving, against all the odds, and against the abuse and mistreatment and just casual negligent brutality inflicted upon them by your species. See how they aren’t focused on money or jobs or learning or prestige, just on being now and being for a bit longer.
See how they’ll eventually trust you enough to approach or land on your hand to feed. How, if you do this day after day, they’ll recognize you and wait for you.
The only living thing that won’t, eventually, react to a modicum of gentleness and kindness with trust is a human.
You’re not on this planet to earn money. You’re not here to work. You’re certainly not here to build edifices of ephemeral noise. You’re here to be, while you can.
Pay your parents back on their real investment, by dedicating your time to them. Be there to care for them as they age. Give them a bit of gentleness and kindness… they need that much more than they need the fiction that is money.
When they’re done, then check out if you want to. I’ve been suicidal for as long as I can remember, I’m faking it until there’s no one else to care for. That’s enough.
No one is beyond redemption, if only because there’s no such thing as redemption in the first place.
You are able to, that’s a defining trait of being human… what you may not be capable of without a serious mind shift is applying yourself to that learning. The first step of that will be seriously lowering what you think of as decent money (if you live somewhere that actually requires millions, which is effectively nowhere on Earth you’d ever want to be, then move elsewhere) and then getting control of that shame impulse. Doing that is going to be best helped by seeking out mild antidepressants, individual therapy (CBT works), and time in nature (in no particular order). You don’t need, or want, tech bro money or tech bro work, find something you can concentrate on, and do it.
Fake it till you make it works, you just have to lower your bar on what you only think due to bad marketing represents making it.
You’re only surprised because you haven’t spent enough time watching pigeons. They’re beautiful birds, many past societies literally worshipped them, and they saved a lot of butts in both World Wars. They’ve fallen from grace because 20th century plus humans don’t like what survives and thrives wild in their cities, especially when they associate them with dirt and garbage the humans leave everywhere.
I've spent plenty of time around pigeons. They've nested a few times within 20 of feet of my apartment.
If I don't use adequate protective equipment while cleaning the pigeon shit from my patio, I can be infected with an organism in the shit, namely, Histoplasma capsulatum, Cryptococcus neoformans, Aspergillus fumigatus, Chlamydophila psittaci, Salmonella bacteria, Escherichia coli, Mycobacterium avium complex, Listeria monocytogenes, West Nile virus, St. Louis Encephalitis virus or Eastern Equine Encephalitis virus.
Most of those you have any realistic chance of catching from a wild bird you can also get — and are vastly more likely to get during your lifetime — via the fecal-oral route from another human. Indeed many of those are only a risk at all with pigeons because they live near humans who expose them to filth they’d never encounter in the wild.
Oh, and several of those you can’t get at all from a pigeon’s poop, they require an intervening, blood-feeding arthropod.
>several of those you can’t get at all from a pigeon’s poop, they require an intervening, blood-feeding arthropod.
"A mosquito is needed to transfer the virus from the pigeon to me," is not a great defense of pigeons because of how common mosquitoes are and how hard it is to get rid of them.
Sure, mosquitoes have, historically, earned your ire, but now you’re blaming the pigeon, again, for a disease you’re just as or more likely to get from another, very likely human, source.
Which is especially true when you realize that most mosquito species that have adapted to blood feed off avians don’t also tend to blood feed off mammals.
And, not for nothing, but what I was refuting was the idea you needed safety gear around pigeon poop to defend you from blood-borne viruses that aren’t known to transfer via that poop.
13:02 UTC: So does pilot monitoring, after realizing he can’t move the throttle or put down the gear.
Two people exist for redundancy… when one fails, the other IS the safety.
How you prevent unauthorized intentional movements of vital switches is you pay people really well and give them lots of rest and very good psychological support systems.
The Air Current is very reputable, at least, so expect the preliminary report — if it’s got any technical details at all beyond a timeline of the flight and incident, which it may well not do — to mention movement of the fuel switches, even if there’s zero details about why they moved.
The crew at Mentour Now! did a pretty good job of explaining what these switches do and precisely how their operation would square with the videos of the incident, without straying into speculation or guesswork.
Yeah, watched this today too. Kudos to them for the absence of guesswork.
That said, I believe that if the preliminary report shows that (1) there were no engine failures and (2) fuel switches were indeed set to cutoff, this has some crazy implications, as speculative as they are.
Officially, now, it was the switches being moved to CUTOFF. They were put back to RUN in 10 seconds, after RAT deployment, with engine 1 spooling back up to thrust just before impact. Switches survived the fire damage in that position, so the detents appear to have been fully functional. Crazy implications indeed. The CVR transcript isn’t in the preliminary report, but the little bit referenced indicates one pilot asking the other why they performed a cutoff followed by the other responding that they didn’t.
Learning about sex isn’t traumatic; learning about sex badly and without your (informed) consent is extremely traumatic. The problem isn’t, and never has been, the porn, the problem is porn being used by children as a substitute for good sex education when that sex education isn’t present at all or isn’t good.
Now, we could leverage the Internet towards good sex education — see the recent Crash Course: Sex Ed series, for example — but we’d have to sneak it past all the willful idiots preaching (and refusing to fund anything but) abstinence-only.
Would such an extension not allow me to replace neutral words with obscenities? Or, for example, skin color descriptions with my preferred racial epithets or gender-affirming language with anti-turning-the-frogs-gay tirades?
I’d be more than a bit uncomfortable with using someone else’s ideas of what’s profane, but I’d also be a bit uncomfortable with the idea that there’s people browsing the same internet as me but looking through entirely different bias-conforming echo-chamber-reinforcing sunglasses.
Just not sure how you give anyone the ability to filter out what offends them without also giving them the power to filter in what should offend them, but doesn’t.
PureWord is designed with the noble aim of restoring civility to the internet. While it comes with a predefined list of words, you, the user, can freely customise it.
The tool is not intended for broader purposes, such as politically sensitive language, as mentioned in your example. That may be a concept for a future tool or an expansion pack.
It does not alter the meaning of a sentence; it merely makes it more civil. Users can still hover over the replaced word to view the original.
It is like watching a movie with the bad words bleeped out... you would still know what was said but even if you did not, the meaning of the scene is not lost.
If PureWord in allows the user to replace “shit” by mapping it to “poop” then it allows that same user to map “poop” to “shit”, and by extension “black” to “[not going to write this word]” or “trans|gay|lesbian|jew|palestinian” to “[not going to write those either]”.
Sure, I can see convincing oneself that there’s nobility in empowering people to pretend “bad” words don’t exist on the internet, but it seems you’re still empowering people to pretend arbitrary “good” words they don’t like don’t exist either, by replacing them with arbitrary “good” words they do like.
Sure, they’ll still be able to mouse over to discover they’re just pretending their personal version of civility has been roughly plastered over their personal version of incivility, I’m just not sure there’s an overall social benefit to that.
reply