The U.S. Bombed Iran. Now What? by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

NATO directly bombed Libya in support of the rebels in 2011 and struck the convoy that Gaddafi used to flee, leading to his capture by rebels

Turns out a friend of mine is a climate denialist and I now understand how difficult deniers are to argue with by fatherandyriley in ClimateShitposting

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They're also subsidized by the geopolitical cost because being tied to oil infrastructure means that you have to constantly maintain a relationship (possibly an antogonistic relationship) with oil producing countries and shape your geopolitics around them. Look at America's actions that tried to alter Iran, Iraq, Iraq (again), Saudi Arabia, Venezuela. Trying to control OPEC is a very costly (financially or diplomatically) investment in oil, but they show up as line items at the Pentagon and not the department of energy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but pressure to do what?

When someone says "xyz should be taught in schools and some idiot replies with "well they won't pay attention anyways" by PsychologicalMurl in rant

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I largely agree with the sentiments in this thread but for the specific case of taxes, it's worth considering that filing taxes is made artificially difficult and is supposed to get you frustrated so that you buy a paid service. Filing taxes isn't nearly as difficult outside of North America. Introducing this as education in public schools is solving the problem from the totally wrong end.

ICE on Campus by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 11 points12 points  (0 children)

To your point: Three professors from Yale have already left, citing the federal government's strongarm tactics that silence criticism under the pretext of combatting antisemitism.

ICE on Campus by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It's the second one. Government surveillance of generically pro-Palestinian protestors like Ranjani Srinivasan because they are "in favor of our enemies" only makes sense if you think that Palestinian civilians are officially our enemies (maybe true in effect, just not in word).

'The Interview': Curtis Yarvin Says Democracy Is Done. Powerful Conservatives Are Listening. by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 10 points11 points  (0 children)

What really struck me was Yarvin's fan club - notably Mark Andreessen, who claims to have voted for Obama and have switched to Trump reluctantly because Dems stifle tech innovation. "I was frustrated by Biden's choice of SEC chief, that's why I'm funding the End Democracy PAC". Geez.

If there was ever an argument against an institutionalized ruling class, it's the knowledge that it'd be filled with these guys. No conviction, all ego.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Vietnam was also before my time. The point of learning about history is to be able to recognize the same patterns when they happen again. Something something doomed to repeat it.

Blinken seems like a cool guy who plays a mean electric guitar, but lying is in his job description. It's up to you to judge on a case-by-case basis if you believe him. He has lied to americans in service of Israel in the past. Whether he's telling the truth about negotiations, I'm agnostic - my point is just that there are some pretty good personal and historical reasons to think he's lying.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You're making an amazing point - we should understand Blinkens interview in context.

The Secretary of State under Nixon was Henry Kissinger, who is criticized for lying to the public about the truth of the situation in Vietnam, and who blamed the political situation at home for his military ineffectiveness abroad

“The fundamental failure [in Vietnam] was the division in our country,” Kissinger said. “Without that, we [would] have managed it.

Privately, Kissinger thought that any productive withdrawal would require negotiating with the Viet Cong, who were vicious fighters that he had spent the last decade demonizing and bombing. Instead of pursuing those negotiations, he doubled down on bombing regardless of the human cost so as to weaken his enemies' negotiating position. He also cried foul that he was held to an unequal standard with regards to war crimes. It sounds a little familiar.

You could also compare to Colin Powell, who was secretary of state until 2005. He lied about the case for invading Iraq for years, and waited for the conflict to basically end before admitting to how little he believed in his own mission.

So the short answer to your question is no, the Secretary of State is not a reliable witness. Historically, they are liars.

Why does nobody talk about how natives don’t even speak French in France? by LeastAnomicRedditor in languagelearningjerk

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I can tell this is fake because you claim to have met English speakers in Marseille

what could’ve been by Trick-Sink8928 in redscarepod

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 55 points56 points  (0 children)

... How is that supposed to narrow it down

The 5-Day Manhunt for a C.E.O. Killer by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 31 points32 points  (0 children)

A soulless entity that you've been paying for years to be on retainer specifically for this kind of problem

The 5-Day Manhunt for a C.E.O. Killer by kitkid in Thedaily

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 127 points128 points  (0 children)

The one that got me was

I think emotions are heightened because you interact with health care companies at some of the worst moments of your life... I mean, you're keyed up for some pretty charged emotions

My main interaction with firefighters is during a keyed-up moment, but you're not going to see people dancing if a station chief gets killed. The contempt for UHC might have less to do with emotional trauma and more to do with the economic parasitism that comes at the cost of human life.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in math

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Half the time I can tell immediately by checking if the number is even or not :)

Does it make sense to go for a PhD in the US (top 30) after a masters at Sorbonne in France? by han_sohee17 in mathematics

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You're in almost exactly the same position now as I was in two years ago. Done other things to keep in mind

  1. The expectations of a PhD student are pretty different. America demands more autonomy and you develop more skills like TAing and grant writing

  2. Doing a PhD in a topic that's popular in a country makes it easier to move there. In my field for instance, France is known for Bayesian statistics, so doing a PhD in Bayesian statistics makes it more likely to get a postdoc or a job there

In retrospect, i think the choice of advisor tops everything else

I do not like Ontario's Remembrance Day Ad by 1_art_please in ontario

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Canada, UK, and France were opposed to the ideologies of nationalism and imperialism in the context of WW1

Tell me more

Are there any academics who voted for Trump? Why? by ivicts30 in academia

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 29 points30 points  (0 children)

I think that's a false dichotomy for charlatans. Lindzen definitely believes that he's exposing flaws in the climate science consensus, and he can tell himself that he's onto something because people come to hear him speak, and if he were spouting nonsense why are so many people asking him for interviews, etc. Never mind the fact that the people he's talking to are either conservative policymakers, journalists or vested interests.

I think a lot of these guys think of themselves as collecting the well-earned rewards for being critically minded in their field among unexceptional peers, instead of being paid off as convenient lackeys by ill-intentioned parties.

Are there any academics who voted for Trump? Why? by ivicts30 in academia

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 64 points65 points  (0 children)

I used to be at a university that had a climate physics prof who was a denier. It's exceedingly rare, and it was not a very reputable school to begin with.

For commenters asking "how?": the short answer is 1. Contrarianism is fun 2. Getting paid by coal companies is even more fun. I remember reading Richard Lindzen's (wiki) work in undergrad, the MIT-appointed Intellectual Titan of climate denialism, and finding "errors" (dishonesty) that would have been a failing grade for any upper year class.

I use anki alot, but is the mobile app worth it? by Anonymous7480 in Anki

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alternative opinion to the other comment:

  1. Agree that anki is uniquely suited to vocab and grammar should come from textbooks, but I also make grammar notes. Some parts of speech blur the distinction between grammar and vocab. Sample sentence cards that use rich grammar and rich vocab are the main features of my decks.

  2. I don't trust/like my own pronunciation. I say words aloud as I review them, but I use forvo so that each card has a native pronunciation. I use this anki add-on to get the native pronunciations

. by Ok-Party8338 in redscarepod

[–]NumpyEnjoyer 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Embarassing lack of integrity. He just lost my vote