The withdrawal also once again established that the nation doesn't care about its responsibility and the consequences of its actions (Iraq -> Daesh, AF->Taliban and all achieved progress and hope ruined), only its own costs and troops (go-to excuse for AF: how long do you expect us to stay?)
What "progress" and "hope" exactly? If you mean the attempt of the US to brainwash the local population with western secular ideologies and hope to eat McDonald's and BK "cuisine", thanks to God it didn't work out. Also, Taliban and Da'esh are not the same, let's not mix things up and water things down.
The masks have fallen and exposed the monsters behind them. This whole tragedy for the people of those occupied countries was in western eyes nothing more than continued occupation, resource stealing, weapons testing, and meddling in middle eastern affairs post WWI under the false guise of "freedom" and "democracy". And now they end up defeated and retreating in humiliation.
And they're "enslaved" how? Because the western backed media told their viewers that those women should be free to be naked and follow their western peers, otherwise they're "oppressed" and miserable?
They are denied education, freedom of movement, and freedom of conscious.
It is not slavery, as you are correct to point out - it is a regressive reading of Islam and its insistence on removing the sexual from the public space (which is fine - it is in principle a modality of civilization — that takes that stance which is not inherently oppressive of a given sex, it places restrictions on both sexes’ behavior in public space).
A sign of your backwardness is considering women —- decent, moral, upright but lacking a covering tent — as “naked”. But imo, it is not that the woman showing hair is “naked”, rather the eyes that behold are soaked in lust. It is this lust that you can not control, so “let’s control women”.
That's what the media tells you. What we should do is give them the benefit of the doubt until they clear the brainwashing attempts the west tried to put in their curricula. They already said they have no issues with women getting education, let's give them time to clear up the mess that the west made, after 20 years of bombardment and brainwashing and occupation.
A sign of your bigotry to straw man the argument and then describe the veil that our women wear as "tents". It's a sad spectacle that the "white man's burden" exists to this day.
”Free to be naked”.
The women of Afghanistan are not allowed to leave their houses without being completely covered and without a male member of the family.
The women of Afghanistan are the biggest losers of the western worlds withdrawal.
Now wait 50+ years of oppression and you want to sweep it under the rug???
No they're not losers, the opposite in fact. Contrary to what the media tells you, many women are happy. Comments here are proving my points further. We don't need western "liberation" thank you very much.
When it comes to AI, I'm less interested in the aspect of copyright infringement - it's more of an anti-trust issue, imho - as in the privacy concerns that the tech enables, but if you can forbid reverse engineering of your product, I don't see how's that that much different with AI.
Besides, no harm to the market of the original works? They're quite shameless.
You need first to understand a perspective before you judge it. That's what cultural difference is and a lot of it is at play here. Good or bad, this is a different style of life. Not to mention that it is not unusual for executives or board members to have their personal priorities, especially in the art industry.
But, even in that context, they did a horrible presentation. At least from this clip they appear like full-blown nerds with low EQ who didn't consider what kind of person their senior they will present this to is like. Any fan could have told them HM wouldn't like the animation and it would not reveal what DL can do.
Due diligence usually refers to the review of the asset you're trying to acquire. There weren't any significant surprises about Twitter's state. Elon's issue was Elon.
Elon specifically waived the ability to withdraw because of post-signing due diligence in his offer to twitter's board. It's one of the (many) reasons he had little ability to get out of the deal once he changed his mind.
As I just argued, due diligence wouldn't have uncovered any surprises. It's merely that Elon could have used the process to ascertain what consequences the acquisition would have for his own assets (compatibility/marketing audit) and what his ideas would lead to.
It potentially could have. For example, post-signing he had a big fight with twitter's lawyers over the right way to measure bot accounts. If he could prove it was much higher than twitter's SEC filings, he might have been able to withdraw from the deal if he kept the due diligence condition.
You won't get far with that approach in communication with such people on social media. That is, assuming the fault isn't with you, if you're on the spectrum, for instance, etc.
As you correctly realized yourself it is not common for people on social media to read attentively and between the lines, discern fallacies, take prior context into account or to focus on the objective substance of a subject without involving any personal attachments.
So you need to make sure you write down your entire thought process with quotes and examples. Don't skip even the obvious. Tell your position from a personal point of view, like this post, rather than formulating a more generalized, abstract argument.
Naturally, that part applies before someone starts trolling or becomes hostile.
When they do, then mute and move on. If you have no other goals, such a conversation is less than a drop in the ocean.
> Whether research is generally undifferentiated, as you claim, is not the same as specific research that proves that screen time is undifferentiated.
They are directly opposed: you have to have differentiation in the research to distinguish between a differentiated and undifferentiated effect.
> In other words, are you saying there are no such evidence as parent asserted?
I am stating a basis for my skepticism that there is sufficient basis for what he claims the research clearly shows, in that AFAICT the research is weak on both whether there is a differentiated association and not of the type that would be able to make strong statements about the causality of any association, differentiated by type of screen time or not, that it discovered.
It's betraying the word shameful in that it's an utter understatement.
If people don't care about supporting companies that enable and spread far-right content and groups, it's they who are a problem.
To say nothing of the pure disregard of the human right to privacy (and with AI now IP as well) that is forced on the the rest of the world by the dominance of the US market.
Apologies, but I genuinely find the intensity of this comment delusional. (1) Doesn't this perspective apply to any social media platform, for example Facebook Groups. And (2) RE: pure disregard of the human right to privacy: doesn't this implicate pretty much all popular digital platforms?
It's both you and right wing people who are the problem.
You're both puppets in the hands of the powerful who wants us divided and weak.
Don't trust authority. Don't trust anyone.
In the past left wing people cared and fought about freedom, today is the right wing fighting for freedom.
It's all irrelevant anyway, governments keep growing stronger and stronger during right or left governments. And soon there is not going to be anywhere to run to.
It's the same 20-25ug daily for adults in all the major western sources: EFSA, NIH, NHS, Mayo, Harvard. Yes, there are recent studies (2020s) suggesting it should be higher and likely the RDA will rise, but you should really be taking vit K with it for proper utilization.
