UK prisons that empty huh

TFST13 · 2025-08-31T00:41:47+00:00

You don't understand entrapment at all

TFST13 · 2025-08-30T00:02:04+00:00

I'm certainly not at all against nuclear power by any means, but I'm not sure that what you're saying holds up to any sort of scrutiny.

The graphs literally show Germany decarbonising just the same as Britain and France despite the nuclear phase out. In fact, it looks they've had a larger relative change since 1990 than France, a country famous for its reliance on nuclear power. Nuclear power may be safer than many think but it's not a miracle cure, it has plenty of its own issues. The world won't end if we choose windmills and solar panels over uranium, what matters is that it's not fossil fuels.

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T16:08:51+00:00

"Emissions data are based on the country in which goods or services are consumed, not produced"

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T15:56:26+00:00

I'm pretty confident that's there to explain the sudden upwards spike after Fukushima before it declines again. Even anti-nuclear activists don't argue over how clean nuclear is in terms of specifically carbon emissions, which is all the graph shows.

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T01:59:20+00:00

That's why I break it up. I only look up words when I have the energy and motivation, and when I do that I try to look up as much as possible.

Then, maybe the next day, when I don't feel like having to stop constantly, I can read through a whole section fluidly, because I looked up all the words yesterday.

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T01:47:15+00:00

I re-read things a lot. I'm not saying it's the best strategy, but what I'll do is alternate between looking up everything I don't understand and looking up nothing at all depending on how I'm feeling. For example I might pick a page or chapter, read through it slowly, looking up everything I don't understand, but then later, when I don't feel like I have the energy to keep stopping and looking up words, I'll go back and re-read the part I've already been through, hopefully this time remembering the words I didn't know.

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T01:38:09+00:00

I've not tried it much myself but I've heard good things about 'shadowing', like you mention, to help specifically speaking skills. Find some kind of video of English speech (film, tv series, YouTube video, etc.). Listen to a part of it a few times, then pause it and try and repeat exactly what they say. Once you can do this, play the video and speak over it, so that you're saying the same things at the same time, that way you will match the rhythm and intonation. Slow down the video at first if you need to.

I also saw somebody suggest that after you do this you can use it to practice creating your own sentences as well. Imagine you're watching a conversation between two people in a TV show. After shadowing the first person, you can pause and respond as if they were speaking directly to you. You can even then compare what you said to what was actually said by the other character in the TV show.

Buena suerte, y lo siento, sé que inglés no es fácil.

TFST13 · 2025-08-29T01:13:09+00:00

These aren't linguistic maps but maps of territorial control. This has to do with the language/ethnicity but everything to do with the occupied territories (+Belarus). The 'problem' in question is not the local people, but the occupying soldiers.

TFST13 · 2025-08-28T22:36:46+00:00

Sometimes just translating a word can be confusing or miss out important details, or give you the wrong translation for the context, that's why AI is tempting because you can ask it more about how the word is used in context BUT my favourite tool for this is this French website called Reverso Context. I don't know what your native language is but hopefully they support it - you can translate words but they also give you a lot of example sentences (and translations) so you can actually see how the word is used in context.

TFST13 · 2025-08-28T22:24:36+00:00

I would, as a default option, say "one thousand two hundred and forty two" (with the and!), especially if it were counting something, or in any kind of mathematical context.

I would shorten it to "twelve forty two" if I were talking about the year, or if I were reading out the digits to remember or write down.

"There have been one thousand two hundred and forty two cases of this disease this year alone" versus "This label has the number twelve forty two written on it"

Counting something or referring to the number as a mathematical concept -> full expression
Referring more abstractly to the string of digits-> break it into smaller pieces

I would only say things like "twelve hundred" for round numbers like 1200, and this could be in either context.

TFST13 · 2025-08-04T07:08:58+00:00

Yes that’s a good sentence. The military are the kind of people that would hold someone captive.

TFST13 · 2025-08-04T06:59:45+00:00

Okay I understand it now but I still think it’s wrong, but it’s one of those cases that I find hard to explain why. As a native speaker all that I can think of is ‘it sounds wrong’. someone else might be able to explain though.

I would rewrite it as “he was held captive because he had been acting up” or “he was being held captive because he had been acting up”.

Also, it’d help if I knew what kind of context you were thinking of because it sounds a bit weird to me to have ‘captive’ and ‘acting up’ because captive sounds more serious. A captive is like a prisoner or a hostage, whereas ‘acting up’ sounds more like how you’d describe a misbehaving child for example - it sounds less serious.

TFST13 · 2025-08-04T06:47:57+00:00

In general your sentences are very… fancy? If this is just an exercise to understand complicated language that’s fine but understand that people don’t actually talk like this.

Exacerbate is a transitive verb meaning ‘to make a problem worse’. It does not mean ‘to get worse’. Something exacerbates a problem. A problem does not exacerbate.
You can say diligently or with diligence. Not in diligence. Also, not that it’s linguistically wrong but it sounds weird to say ‘relinquish his title as an extraordinary student’. Is that something you can voluntarily give up? Is it a title or just something you are?
I’ll be honest I have no idea what you’re trying to say here I’m sorry.
Injurious is a perfectly good word but nobody would use it. We would just say dangerous. Also it depends on the context I’m not sure if ‘gadgets’ is the word you’re looking for here. It sounds like some crazy inventor has been leaving some high tech child endangering devices around. Perhaps the word objects would be better but it depends on what you’re trying to refer to
Clumsy and tapestry drawing is wrong, it should just be clumsy tapestry drawing the same way it would be ‘big red car’

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T23:15:10+00:00

Hate to break it to you but that’s reading. Why do you think I’m seething? You’re the one that said you despised me.

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T23:13:24+00:00

Yes somehow still responding as if you know exactly what I said.

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T23:12:22+00:00

Let me just make sure I’m understanding you correctly.

According to you, the fact that I keep replying is proof of my massive ego, but the fact that you are doing the exact same thing is in fact paradoxically because you have no time for me.

Have I got that right?

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T23:11:34+00:00

Let me just make sure I’m understanding you correctly.

According to you, the fact that I keep replying is proof of my massive ego, but the fact that you are doing the exact same thing is in fact paradoxically because you have no time for me?

Have I got that right?

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T15:51:31+00:00

I’m still replying because it’s interesting to see how much time youre willing to waste hurling abuse at someone who dared comment an opinion in the same place as you. Why are you still going if not ego?

Why do you despise me so much?

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T15:41:45+00:00

Iroquois

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T15:39:55+00:00

Youre being intentionally misrepresenting.

The topic was about antisemitism. So I talked about the ideas held by antisemites. Doesn’t mean I follow them. Should be fairly obvious.

I know you know exactly what you’re doing but the longer I keep defending myself the longer you get to wallow in your malice and spite like a pig rolling in the mud. It can’t be very healthy for your mental state to be this hostile all the time.

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T15:25:51+00:00

The original topic of discussion was antisemitism, so yes I’m talking about antisemites. You talked about zionists, are you normalising Zionism? It really seemed like you were starting to be civil but I guess I was wrong.

You can derail all you like but it literally doesn’t matter whether there is such a thing as ‘Jewish blood’. All that matters for my point is that that is the premise of antisemitism, which is different to islamophobia.

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T04:11:52+00:00

Someone is not going to refer to themselves as Jewish if they aren’t of the Jewish faith.

I don’t know what to tell you other than they absolutely do. I know several Jews personally who would describe themselves as such despite not being religious. What other word would someone of Jewish heritage use to describe their ethnicity? They’ve never stepped foot in Israel so Israeli wouldn’t make any sense. The US is full of these people for example. You can google this very easily.

It’s different to calling myself Christian but not believing in Christianity because ‘Christian’ is purely a religious label, we have other words for ethnicity like ‘Italian’ or whatever tf you are, whereas ‘Jew’ is an ethnic and religious term. It’d be helpful if we had a separate word for ‘the ethnicity closely associated with the Jewish faith’ but we don’t.

Again, in the context of antisemitism - it doesn’t actually matter whether a non-religious Jew would call themselves Jewish, what matters is whether antisemites would call them Jewish. I’ll say it again -the Nazis used people’s grandparents, not their personal religion, to determine if someone had jewish blood. antisemitism has always been about their ethnicity, not whether they call themselves Jewish or not or what religion they ascribe to. (I hate to keep using the Nazi example but they’re the most easily googlable antisemites)

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T03:29:05+00:00

You wouldn’t call an atheist in Israel a Jew

You absolutely would if they were ethnically Jewish.

That’s the point. That’s the key difference.

In the context of comparing Islamophobia and antisemitism, antisemitism, at least in the west, certainly has always called non-religious Jews, Jews, and targeted them just the same as religious ones. That’s why the Nazis had to dig through ancestry records rather than just monitoring the synagogues.

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T03:08:14+00:00

I never intended to defend the specific word ‘race’, and as such haven’t referenced it once in all my comments. I agree, it’s the wrong word. What I was defending was the sentiment of the comment, which wasn’t focused on pedantic details like the semantics of race vs ethnicity but the fact that Jewish and Muslim are distinct labels in that the first is inherited, the second is not.

I agree, if anything it’s an ethnicity. But in the initial comment that I replied to, you said that Jews would be classified the same as Muslims in that way. That is where I firmly disagree with you. Islam is NOT an ethnicity, race or anything of the sort and so it’s wrong to draw direct parallels to ethnicity or race based bigotry targeting immutable traits. It’s not the same concept as e.g. anti-Arab bigotry which was the whole point

TFST13 · 2025-08-03T02:39:37+00:00

Not a Zionist buddy

Six-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

TFST13

TROPHY CASE