If you're Homer-curious from The Odyssey mania, do yourself a favor and buy The War Nerd Iliad, a much better retelling of the better of Homer's works.
@theobertram It was never really going to significantly change the behaviour of 14 and 15 yr olds. If it changes the behaviour of current 11 and 12 year olds then it might achieve its aims.
> be Alexandra Elbakyan
> be born in Kazakhstan in 1988
> start coding at 12
> hack your internet provider at 14
> hack MIT Press at 16 to download neuroscience books you can't afford
> get a CS degree from Satbayev University
> intern in neuroscience at Georgia Tech
> speak at Harvard on brain-computer interfaces
> notice researchers can't read the papers they need
> notice academic publishers charging $30 a paper
> notice peer reviewers worked for free
> notice editors worked for free
> notice universities funded the research with billions of dollars of public money
> build Sci-Hub in 2011
> upload nearly every paywalled research paper ever published
> give it away for free
> get sued by Elsevier
> get hit with a $15 million judgment
> don't give a flying f*ck
> keep Sci-Hub up
> get domain after domain seized
> register a new one
> keep Sci-Hub up
> get investigated by the US Department of Justice
> don't give a flying f*ck
> get accused of working for Russian intelligence
> don't give a flying f*ck
> have the FBI subpoena your iCloud
> get named one of Nature's ten people who mattered in science
> get a parasitoid wasp named after you
> get a deep-sea snail named after you
> get the Electronic Frontier Foundation Award for Access to Scientific Knowledge
> become a legend
@AvidCommentator Very much doubt that the greens would vote for. “the left” are broadly viewing this as move by pro Israel lobbyists to shutdown Palestinian activist groups
I feel like I’ve been getting a lot of comments lately like « Angelica are you pro-CCP now » or « Angelica why are you spouting Russian propaganda » and I just want you to know where my loyalty lies.
It’s to the truth and what’s actually going on.
I was at one point Taiwan’s most influential offshore wind reporter. I gave that up because I found out more information and realized nuclear energy has a lot more promise and works a lot better for Taiwan. It doesn’t mean I hate offshore wind now, I just moved on from it as my focus.
When the Ukraine war started I had the flag in my bio. Even though I have Russian family I didn’t hesitate to go to pro-Ukraine demonstrations etc…but over time I realized…wow. A lot of the propaganda is actually coming from the Ukrainian side too. The biggest shock: Nordstream pipeline and how everybody was so sure the Russians blew it up. I spent hours thinking about why the Russians might blow up their own pipeline. And any suggestion that the US might have something to do with it was instantly labeled Russian propaganda. But then things shifted and it’s pretty much accepted that the Russians didn’t blow it up but nobody cares anymore.
On China…I used to truly believe that the CCP was evil and genocided the Uyghurs and Xi killed progress in China and people there are reduced to sad NPC lives because they don’t have freedom like we do in Taiwan.
Now I’m obsessed with China because I see that a lot of what we’ve been told just isn’t true. And it doesn’t mean that I think everything in China is hunky dory. I just want to know what the truth is because I know a shitton of information I’ve been exposed to on China is propaganda…from my own side. This is not to say that there isn’t Chinese propaganda, but it’s hardly a one-way street.
I feel like the tragedy of my life is what people love me for ultimately turns out to be what people hate me for. How did I become Taiwan’s top offshore wind influencer out of nowhere? Because I called out the government’s irrational local content policy and laid out the dysfunctional contradictions that was hobbling Taiwan’s offshore wind development. They love me for telling the truth as I see it…until I tell another truth that doesn’t align with what they want to hear anymore.
I am keenly, nay, painfully aware that I have put myself out of the political mainstream here in Taiwan. But I hope that if you have followed me here for long enough and seen me evolve on those topics, you’d at least pay me the respect or acknowledging I changed my point of view not because I’m a contrarian or a grifter but because I’ve been convinced by evidence. And I’ll continue to be open to more evidence, wherever it might take me.
@NBL You’ve sent me an email with the game result in the subject line. Why on earth would you do this? I was planning to watch the game tonight until you spoiled it.
Incredible, even the US Congress now admits that Australia will probably not get the AUKUS submarines. And they propose an alternative that achieves the feat of being even far worse than AUKUS (which was already a terrible deal).
In a new report (which you can find here: https://t.co/5YorOPn0dV) the US Congressional Research Service admits that the country's industrial base is very far from achieving the target of building 2.33 submarines per year needed to build replacement submarines for those sold to Australia: in fact the rate is currently only "1.2 to 1.4".
Given this, they actually propose to just forgo the sale of submarines entirely (!) and go for an alternative approach where the US deploys US submarines manned by the US Navy to Australia instead: "up to eight additional Virginia-class SSNs would be built, and instead of three to five of them being sold to Australia, these additional boats would instead be retained in U.S. Navy service and operated out of Australia."
But since they don't want to miss out on the Australian money meant for the subs, they conveniently propose that Australia instead spends it on other US military products: "Australia, instead of using funds to purchase, build, operate, and maintain its own SSNs, would instead invest those funds in other military capabilities—such as, for example, long-range anti-ship missiles, drones, loitering munitions, B-21 long-range bombers, or other long-range strike aircraft".
All this for the purpose of "performing military missions for both Australia and the United States".
So essentially, from Australia's standpoint, the new deal would mean:
- Zero control over the submarines operated on its territory since it'd all be manned by the U.S. Navy
- Australia still spends a similar eyewatering amount of money ($368 billion) on US military equipment that is mostly "long-range": "long-range anti-ship missiles", "B-21 long-range bombers", "long-range strike aircraft". Meaning by definition not used for the defense of Australia but undoubtedly to attack China. Which is pretty clear: China is mentioned 44 times in the document...
- This US military equipment is to be used, as per the document, to "perform military missions for both Australia and the United States" which is extremely unusual: militaries normally don't perform missions FOR another military. Allied countries might perform missions alongside each other or in support of each other, but not explicitly "for" each other.
How could Australia possibly justify such a deal to its public? AUKUS was already, according to former Australian PM Paul Keating the “worst deal in all history” because it'd "turn Australia into the 51st state of the United States", but this new proposal would strip away even the illusion of Australian sovereignty.
implementation driven development is a development methodology where you first explore various implementations of your idea to determine the best one, then add tests for it
no test code may be written without first having some implementation code to drive that test
"How to Pay for the War : A Radical Plan for the Chancellor of the Exchequer"
by John Maynard Keynes
Summary provided by @UKLabour: "Keynes recognized that there is no "Magic Money Tree" and recommended surrender to the Nazis – with a balanced budget." #WWII#DDay#Allies
multiverse crisis where several versions of Keir Starmer - Rural Keir, Working Class Keir, Socialist Keir and Racist Keir - have to team up to stop the evil alternate universe Supreme Leader Corbyn
Biden 1997.
💬 And then the Russians tell me "you will continue to expand NATO, we will take and make friends with China." I almost laughed, barely restrained myself, replied "good luck to you, guys. If it doesn't work with China, try Iran
And here we are 2024
The billionaire Resnick family has been lobbying for years to start a war with Iran because Iran is competition to their pistachio business. The US is such a dystopian shithole that it’s being pushed toward World War over a snack food.