I was living in Russia this time and I recognized the photo. And because I as a local have a context, I left a comment that the second photo in a row is misleading.
Wait a second. My point was only the TS` points were wrong at least for the "protests in Russia" simply because the photo are 9th May pride and the state backed action. You can check it by yourself by finding original pictures and checking the background story.
As one who was born in Russia and have been living there for 30 years until 2022 when the shitty government started the brutal invasion to Ukraine, I see this completely different. Russia is far away from socialism and is reuled by oligarchs. All the praise to Soviet Union is about only war propaganda to justify the imperial wars organized by Putin and his friends oligarchs.
At the same time Germany is totally fine to veto the EU-Israel trade agreement suspending. In this question Germany looks like two arms for the "unanimity among the bloc's 27 countries" for questions related to Israel war crimes and genocide in Gaza.
How can you prove to conspiracy theorist that he is wrong while conspiracy theory does not fulfill the falsifiability criteria by definition? Like everything that can proove that the conspiracy theorist is wrong just marked as CIA propaganda / Masonic manipulation / Government is hiding / whatever? I mean if the theory accepts only facts that proove it and rejects any facts that do not, this "theory" cannot make mistakes by definition, can it?
I read the whole article and did not find an answer for a very simple question: what are benefits for users? The whole speech is about how we CAN put agents to all the devices, etc. without answering the simple question WHY should we do it. There are a lot of words about how can google and friends use the data for advertising. But nothing about motivation of users to allow it. He is talking about economical reasons but it will work if and only if users will have economical reasons to put agents on their devices. As of today I do not see a lot of usage of autonomous agents outside of the professional work like software development or ms word automation. What are reasons for people to make these agents a part of their life? The whole speech is built on top of the assumption that happens without a word about why should it. Am I missing something?
Agreed, their logic is kinda strange. Who knows, maybe you re right and in a decade they forgot that "US imperialism" supported Pol-Pot for more than 10 years even after the crimes of the regime had no doubts. But I think they just understand somewhere deep in mind that Pol-Pot is totally bad, want to distance themselves from it and the fact of the western support gave them a good way to do it.
I don't think it will happen anytime soon. Pol Pot got a support from the US, UK and some others western countries in it's conflict with Vietnam starting from ~1979 until early 90s. For tankies it is a red flag: they better support DRPK, not a "US imperialism puppet"
Why anarchism is always only utopia? The question itself is strange imo. Why I cannot share the anarchist view and just ask for more federalization instead of centralization, ask for more workers cooperative ownership instead of private ownership, ask for support the community militia instead of militarization of police, ask to replace professional politicians by delegates with binding mandate, and ao fourth and so on? Why is it always dichotomy "complete anarchy or nothing"?
Why do you think it is a critique from the right? There are a lot of signs that todays corporations are actually building a kind of socialism / central-planning. For example, the book "The People's Republic of Walmart"
That is interesting. Why in Germany and Austria far-right (AfD, CDU, OVP) are against but center-left / liberals (SPD, SPO) are in favor, while for example in France and Czech Republic it is opposite (RN in favor, EELV against; ANO in favor, KDU-CSL against)?
During the investigation after the Yugoslav wars, the special tribunal convicted people from all the fighting sides (Serbia, Bosnia + Bosnian Serbs Republic, Croatia, Kosovo). You can decide for yourself who lost that war and who wined, but individuals from all sides who made war crimes were sentenced / convicted.
I was living in Russia this time and I recognized the photo. And because I as a local have a context, I left a comment that the second photo in a row is misleading.
Wait a second. My point was only the TS` points were wrong at least for the "protests in Russia" simply because the photo are 9th May pride and the state backed action. You can check it by yourself by finding original pictures and checking the background story.
As one who was born in Russia and have been living there for 30 years until 2022 when the shitty government started the brutal invasion to Ukraine, I see this completely different. Russia is far away from socialism and is reuled by oligarchs. All the praise to Soviet Union is about only war propaganda to justify the imperial wars organized by Putin and his friends oligarchs.
2d photo about Russia is a procession orfanize by regime. Jfyi, Putin himself participated in it. 100% not "russians fighting against regime".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immortal_Regiment?wprov=sfla1
Interesting person.
At the same time Germany is totally fine to veto the EU-Israel trade agreement suspending. In this question Germany looks like two arms for the "unanimity among the bloc's 27 countries" for questions related to Israel war crimes and genocide in Gaza.
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20260420-eu-gauge-member-states-willingness-take-measures-against-israel
How can you prove to conspiracy theorist that he is wrong while conspiracy theory does not fulfill the falsifiability criteria by definition? Like everything that can proove that the conspiracy theorist is wrong just marked as CIA propaganda / Masonic manipulation / Government is hiding / whatever? I mean if the theory accepts only facts that proove it and rejects any facts that do not, this "theory" cannot make mistakes by definition, can it?
Bill Klinton?
Full article if anyone interested https://archive.ph/s9gEZ
I read the whole article and did not find an answer for a very simple question: what are benefits for users? The whole speech is about how we CAN put agents to all the devices, etc. without answering the simple question WHY should we do it. There are a lot of words about how can google and friends use the data for advertising. But nothing about motivation of users to allow it. He is talking about economical reasons but it will work if and only if users will have economical reasons to put agents on their devices. As of today I do not see a lot of usage of autonomous agents outside of the professional work like software development or ms word automation. What are reasons for people to make these agents a part of their life? The whole speech is built on top of the assumption that happens without a word about why should it. Am I missing something?
Agreed, their logic is kinda strange. Who knows, maybe you re right and in a decade they forgot that "US imperialism" supported Pol-Pot for more than 10 years even after the crimes of the regime had no doubts. But I think they just understand somewhere deep in mind that Pol-Pot is totally bad, want to distance themselves from it and the fact of the western support gave them a good way to do it.
I don't think it will happen anytime soon. Pol Pot got a support from the US, UK and some others western countries in it's conflict with Vietnam starting from ~1979 until early 90s. For tankies it is a red flag: they better support DRPK, not a "US imperialism puppet"
Why anarchism is always only utopia? The question itself is strange imo. Why I cannot share the anarchist view and just ask for more federalization instead of centralization, ask for more workers cooperative ownership instead of private ownership, ask for support the community militia instead of militarization of police, ask to replace professional politicians by delegates with binding mandate, and ao fourth and so on? Why is it always dichotomy "complete anarchy or nothing"?
Why do you think it is a critique from the right? There are a lot of signs that todays corporations are actually building a kind of socialism / central-planning. For example, the book "The People's Republic of Walmart"
I would say "socialist modernism", not " soviet brutalism". Because there are a lot of examples not from ex USSR.
This is Belgrade, Serbia (ex-Yugoslavia):
Museum of Modern Arts:
Hotel "Yugoslavija":
That is interesting. Why in Germany and Austria far-right (AfD, CDU, OVP) are against but center-left / liberals (SPD, SPO) are in favor, while for example in France and Czech Republic it is opposite (RN in favor, EELV against; ANO in favor, KDU-CSL against)?
During the investigation after the Yugoslav wars, the special tribunal convicted people from all the fighting sides (Serbia, Bosnia + Bosnian Serbs Republic, Croatia, Kosovo). You can decide for yourself who lost that war and who wined, but individuals from all sides who made war crimes were sentenced / convicted.
Vodka meets Ketamin
First they come for the ...