811–820 of 899 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pointless to get into a competition for who's worst. I disagree at least partially on each one of your points and could reply with something equally bad or worse that's happening right now in the US, but I won't as we're talking about economics, not unsourced genocide claims.
China is rich North Korea. Even if China were much richer than the US, it would be better to live in the US.
And US is Russia with better PR? :-D
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_et... Literally half of all the worlds countries is more diverse.
The methodology used in this list is deeply flawed. It depends on US Census Bureau data which does not make distinctions between subgroups of ethnicities, despite them being culturally and racially distinct from each other. Indians (which could be broken down into further subgroups), Afghani (which could be further broken down into Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, etc.), Japanese and Laotians are not the same peopl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The two examples show exactly the problem of the median: it is not that different from the mean in many situation when we talk about salaries and incomes. Now, if you start using the percentiles as you're doing here, then you are looking deeper into the data and your results get more accurate and reflective of reality, which just proves my point.
>The two examples show exactly the problem of the median: it is not that different from the mean in many situation when we talk about salaries and incomes ??? Did you compute them? do you know how? The Brazil data I just posted has median around 1383, mean of 2308.36, which is 65% larger. An interesting test: compute with details the median and mean of the data I just posted. I already gave you the answers. I think y…
You're pretending to not understand what I said. The figure for median income of 8K is very different from what most people make in Brazil, because a lot of people will make less than that, and a lot make more than that. So, the median has little value, because there is just a small group that makes close to that figure compared to the other groups that make more or less. It is a society with large inequality that is polarized on the two sides, instead of concentrating on the middle. My point is that this measure is more useful for societies that have more equality, such as a few countries in Europe. For the US, the median is less and less useful to get a clear picture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "nationality" of a company is basically irrelevant here. Foreign governments could obtain this data from an "American" company in numerous different ways.m The most obvious vector would be a subpoena, but they could also negotiate payment for the data or infiltrate the company. There's a shitload of data for sale from brokers. So foreign governments might not even need much from a company like FB. Perhaps just en…
It's not irrelevant to the FCC, a United States federal organization. I don't think any brokers are selling "execute code on 10s of millions of US citizens' phones" to foreign entities, and if they were I suspect the FCC would have something to say about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mostly agree with you, except I don't believe that MAD is a sufficient deterrent, or that low level conflict is unlikely to evolve into large scale war. The best way, in my mind to minimize conflict is through a global monopoly on violence, one street gang to rule them all This is what the last 30 years have been
Russia specifically developed their "de-escalation" policy of tactical nuclear weapons use under MAD assumptions. Basically, betting that there were scenarios where the US wouldn't risk escalation to nuclear war in response to a calibrated Russian tactical nuclear strike in a third party country, thus allowing Russian nuclear effects to nullify superior western precision weapons without consequence. https://thebullet…
At this point there is no support for the idea that US weapons have superior precision. The Russian campaign is showing the opposite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mostly agree with you, except I don't believe that MAD is a sufficient deterrent, or that low level conflict is unlikely to evolve into large scale war. The best way, in my mind to minimize conflict is through a global monopoly on violence, one street gang to rule them all This is what the last 30 years have been
This is what the last 30 years have been Only they haven't. The reason the US and Russia haven't run rampant the last 30 years is because the US and Russia can blow each other away. So Russia satisfies itself with Georgia and now Ukraine. And the US satisfies itself with those nations in the MidEast region. Remove Russia, and the US would have been all over the yard. Remove the US, and Russia would have been all over…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first argument sounds like appeasement, didn't work so well in WW2. Sounds like burying your head in the sand hoping no one will do anything bad. I think the parent post means top dog in military and power sense, not welfare of citizens which is all well and good until another nation is trying to undermine your core values. > Your successor will be judged by the standard you set What successor are we thinking of…
Yes indeed. Two out of those three countries have never invaded outside countries, whether for freedom, WMD or some other crap excuse. One of them is actually a functioning democracy. On the other hand a citizen of a country that has invaded almost a dozen sovereign nations, conducted almost an equal number of proxy wars and even used nuclear weapons twice, thinks we are scary. And lumps Russia, China and India all i…
My biggest concern is domestic policy, given that being "top dog" would probably imply a general cultural and political movement towards whichever regime wins.
USA has done awful things, and nowadays seems to have a very uncertain future but values such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion are important to humanity and happiness imo and they still stand in the US despite all the craziness.
China and Russia shouldn't need any explanation in that respect, I can point to many sources. India's BJP is almost openly persecuting Muslims and doctoring history to be more Hindu.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It annoys me that these headlines keep falsely attributing his statements to the FCC as a whole. I hate TikTok and I tend to agree that it’s a security risk (so, too, is Facebook, IMO). But this guy has it out for TikTok solely for political reasons and in order to please Trump.
To be fair, and I'm not fan of Trump, but if Trump hypothetically supported something good... like let's say universal healthcare, a lot of Democrats would oppose it just because Trump supported it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The founders were well aware that what they were creating was a republic AND form of democracy. To argue otherwise is silly.
They were aware that the House of Representatives was modeled to be sole aggregated voice of the people. The House is the totality of US democracic input.
Again, to say the US is a republic and not a democracy is incorrect. It is both, just like a Civic can both be a car and an automobile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not irrelevant to the FCC, a United States federal organization. I don't think any brokers are selling "execute code on 10s of millions of US citizens' phones" to foreign entities, and if they were I suspect the FCC would have something to say about it.
Data brokers are absolutely, 100%, verifiably selling data collected by large american tech companies and selling them to foreign actors. See: Emerdata for one example. Yeah, the FTC makes attempts to take on these companies, but only if they find out about their activities, and even then, only years after the fact.