I noticed that too https://www.youtube.com/watch?... But even if they bungled up somewhere, the end result still looks pretty cool. The main emphasis shouldn't be on 'bungled'. Too much propagandishness to me.
Internal politics always plays, but it is possible in NK it plays less than elsewhere. Dictators who are firmly in place have more freedom to do as they choose. Relative to other regimes.
The best thing that could happen to the North Koreans is that the country is accepted by the US. I don't doubt that it will start developing very quickly, more or less taking China as an example.On the other hand any claim that the US has the interest of the North Koreans in mind is ridiculous. That China has the interest of North Koreans in mind is also an overstatement. Currently it's a buffer state.If it reunites with the south then what happens to the buffer state?
I doubt NK is able to negotiate quickly though, that would be quite a challenge. It's a challenge for many people when dealing with the US. They want more time. At the same time some warmongers only want to negotiate briefly and have it fail in order to have an excuse for war. So maybe a bit too much goodwill is required for this thing to work out
Concerning the testsite, even I knew it had become unstable and had to be closed down. That NK wanted to present it as a gesture is fine with me. Nobody is fooled but it's still a gesture.
Bolton says North Korea disarmament should follow the Libyan example, which is code for 'Kim Jong Un should end like Qaddafi with a bajonet up his ass.' I doubt NK considers Libya a good example. For them it the meaning of Libya was 'we need nukes right now'. Getting a signed agreement is also not much of an improvement. Iran did that. The US never stuck to it and plans to pull out.
I wouldn't take Kim Jong Un's words literally. They mean NK wants improvements. NK sees a chance for improvements because they now have a real stick to threaten with , South Korea got the ball moving and is leading the way. Trump always signalled he can talk to (pseudo)dictatorships like North korea and Russia, though we've seen that doesn't mean much.
Chances are slim though. The US is more belligerent than ever and international law has gone into the dustbin. There is no adversarial press putting any checks on them either. The last thing Japan wants is the two Koreas growing too close. Negotiations would be long and easy to derail. NK has always been open to negotiations but a lot of patience is required to get a real deal.
It never was about the natural gas pipeline but I fully agree it never is about human rights. Human rights are a tool. There is a lot of deliberate infliction of human suffering going on but you select the bits that support your agenda. An agenda which is never intended to reduce human suffering, not even as a side effect. The key to improve the human condition in dictatorships is to offer the rulers a way out: you commit to leave the state intact but demand concrete changes. In Syria there was a very legitimate opposition to the government (beside a very violent component which was not reported on and which grew massively from import in 2012) but from the start the message was 'the regime is going to fall quickly, don't negotiate or compromise in any way'.
Belgium is the size of a large city. Replacing a mayor with a 4 governments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and a bunch of other institutions maybe is a bit of overkill.
I think Trump being elected is not that much a fault of the electoral system but of many people voting for him. If you look in detail you could say ok he didn't get the majority of the votes, but it's close enough. When Al Gore lost in a close call to Bush a lot was made of the detailed count but the main issue should have been, why was it even close?
Suspension has improved because the industry moved towards using better suspension, not because of new inventions. They also pay more attention to setup. It's impossible to lose control over a modern car. Well maybe not impossible since somehow people manage to do that.
I read Vaclav Smil's book on the biosphere and he presents all these calculations but I forgot so much about it. The item about the ants must be in it.
So you switch to the cynical view that the DNC is just doing everything to make Clinton win, but that they would make up the Russiagate narrative, oh no, they are far too moral for that.
Well, what I believe is that Clinton worked hard to promote Russiagate to make you believe what you just said. To make you ignore the DNC leak, because DNC had been bought up by Clinton and actively worked against Sanders. Did you ever check what came out of that leak?
By itself being funded by pasta or whoever does not disqualify the science or the scientist. The science may be valid. If an interested party thinks there is scientific proof if only one goes looking for it, but nobody else is interested in investigating then in principle it is ok to do the investigation. The results of the research can be validated and reviewed on their own. In practice the situation is slightly different and a lot of research is worthless only serves a PR operation in someway. For instance it offers a valid scientific result which is actually uninteresting but it can easily be misrepresented as something interesting. Then the scientist strictly speaking is not a shill. Not far off though. There's a lot of this 'shifting responsibility around' stuff.
The invasion of Iraq was the opposite of realpolitik. Instead of offshore balancing there was the intention to overthrow regimes and control countries directly.The Iran/Iraq war evolved from an attitude of 'Iran is the enemy, let's get them' to a somewhat more cynical realist attitude of 'we're fine with it if they remain at war permanently'
Slashdot Mirror
I noticed that too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
But even if they bungled up somewhere, the end result still looks pretty cool. The main emphasis shouldn't be on 'bungled'. Too much propagandishness to me.
I'd wait till all those F35 contracts have been signed.
Internal politics always plays, but it is possible in NK it plays less than elsewhere. Dictators who are firmly in place have more freedom to do as they choose. Relative to other regimes.
The best thing that could happen to the North Koreans is that the country is accepted by the US. I don't doubt that it will start developing very quickly, more or less taking China as an example.On the other hand any claim that the US has the interest of the North Koreans in mind is ridiculous. That China has the interest of North Koreans in mind is also an overstatement. Currently it's a buffer state.If it reunites with the south then what happens to the buffer state?
I doubt NK is able to negotiate quickly though, that would be quite a challenge. It's a challenge for many people when dealing with the US. They want more time. At the same time some warmongers only want to negotiate briefly and have it fail in order to have an excuse for war. So maybe a bit too much goodwill is required for this thing to work out
Concerning the testsite, even I knew it had become unstable and had to be closed down. That NK wanted to present it as a gesture is fine with me. Nobody is fooled but it's still a gesture.
Bolton says North Korea disarmament should follow the Libyan example, which is code for 'Kim Jong Un should end like Qaddafi with a bajonet up his ass.' I doubt NK considers Libya a good example. For them it the meaning of Libya was 'we need nukes right now'. Getting a signed agreement is also not much of an improvement. Iran did that. The US never stuck to it and plans to pull out.
I wouldn't take Kim Jong Un's words literally. They mean NK wants improvements. NK sees a chance for improvements because they now have a real stick to threaten with , South Korea got the ball moving and is leading the way. Trump always signalled he can talk to (pseudo)dictatorships like North korea and Russia, though we've seen that doesn't mean much.
Chances are slim though. The US is more belligerent than ever and international law has gone into the dustbin. There is no adversarial press putting any checks on them either. The last thing Japan wants is the two Koreas growing too close. Negotiations would be long and easy to derail. NK has always been open to negotiations but a lot of patience is required to get a real deal.
It never was about the natural gas pipeline but I fully agree it never is about human rights. Human rights are a tool. There is a lot of deliberate infliction of human suffering going on but you select the bits that support your agenda. An agenda which is never intended to reduce human suffering, not even as a side effect.
The key to improve the human condition in dictatorships is to offer the rulers a way out: you commit to leave the state intact but demand concrete changes. In Syria there was a very legitimate opposition to the government (beside a very violent component which was not reported on and which grew massively from import in 2012) but from the start the message was 'the regime is going to fall quickly, don't negotiate or compromise in any way'.
I can't wait to read about 'lemming mode' megacrashes!
I doubt if there is any similar sized country with this level of federalization.
I stumbled onto that site too once through /.
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
I thought it looked mighty fishy. Sea mammal sized fishy.
I think student loans are a reason to support Elisabeth Warren.
Porsche makes amongst the best handling sportscars there are.
Also, if you call all your cars Corolla you will sell many Corollas!
Belgium is the size of a large city. Replacing a mayor with a 4 governments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
and a bunch of other institutions maybe is a bit of overkill.
I think Trump being elected is not that much a fault of the electoral system but of many people voting for him. If you look in detail you could say ok he didn't get the majority of the votes, but it's close enough. When Al Gore lost in a close call to Bush a lot was made of the detailed count but the main issue should have been, why was it even close?
Heck, didn't the mustang above move from live axle to IRS? That's not because IRS is new.
Suspension has improved because the industry moved towards using better suspension, not because of new inventions. They also pay more attention to setup. It's impossible to lose control over a modern car. Well maybe not impossible since somehow people manage to do that.
Porsche uses MacPherson fronts.
Science which spawns jokes is good science.
http://dilbert.com/strip/1994-...
Which is the main point nobody seems to care about.
Your comment on the time lapse is quite relevant though, as opposed to all the posts about GIF format.
I read Vaclav Smil's book on the biosphere and he presents all these calculations but I forgot so much about it. The item about the ants must be in it.
there: https://xkcd.com/1338/
It's true. If you look at the total biomass of mammals it's all cattle, humans and pets, and the odd elephant thrown in for irony.
So you switch to the cynical view that the DNC is just doing everything to make Clinton win, but that they would make up the Russiagate narrative, oh no, they are far too moral for that.
It's a worthy goal to 'baconify' discussion threads so that as many people as possible end up thinking about bacon.
Well, what I believe is that Clinton worked hard to promote Russiagate to make you believe what you just said. To make you ignore the DNC leak, because DNC had been bought up by Clinton and actively worked against Sanders. Did you ever check what came out of that leak?
By itself being funded by pasta or whoever does not disqualify the science or the scientist. The science may be valid. If an interested party thinks there is scientific proof if only one goes looking for it, but nobody else is interested in investigating then in principle it is ok to do the investigation. The results of the research can be validated and reviewed on their own.
In practice the situation is slightly different and a lot of research is worthless only serves a PR operation in someway. For instance it offers a valid scientific result which is actually uninteresting but it can easily be misrepresented as something interesting. Then the scientist strictly speaking is not a shill. Not far off though. There's a lot of this 'shifting responsibility around' stuff.
The invasion of Iraq was the opposite of realpolitik. Instead of offshore balancing there was the intention to overthrow regimes and control countries directly .The Iran/Iraq war evolved from an attitude of 'Iran is the enemy, let's get them' to a somewhat more cynical realist attitude of 'we're fine with it if they remain at war permanently'
Sorry but I said it first.