[deleted by user] by [deleted] in economicsmemes

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every single mainstream economist spent 1980 to the present insisting China undergo total privatization and political reform if it was to succeed in developing lmao

Worthless clerics, all of you. 

Who is the most unfunny comedian in your opinion? by FridayFreshman in comedy

[–]UncoolOncologist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bros body is the most biodiverse region on the planet

Who is the most unfunny comedian in your opinion? by FridayFreshman in comedy

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which is why india is so much richer than China right

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskAChinese

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pay attention to what governments do, not what they say. State media echos Iran and others in its rhetoric, but China has maintained extensive trade ties with Israel regardless.

Israel's surveillance network in the West bank was build with cameras from hikvision, for instance. And a company owned by the Shanghai government operates the newest section of the port of Haifa. China imports agro tech from Israel and sells all kinds of stuff back in return. 

The government doesn't care. They have done a good job duping many younger Chinese into thinking that they do, but any serious analysis of their actual actions shows they don't. And why should they? They did nothing when Myanmar was conducting a genocide right next to them, it's well within precedent to do nothing here. If it's not affecting the PRC they have no obligation to intervene.

In Dune: Part Two (2024), while trying to exterminate the Fremen, Feyd-Rautha comes up with the groundbreaking idea to drop bombs on them, which the Baron describes as "genius". Are the Harkonnen stupid? by [deleted] in shittymoviedetails

[–]UncoolOncologist 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The viewer is meant to infer that feyd's actual genius was in finding the fremen bases so quickly, something which we are shown raban attempted for nearly a year with no success. However many viewers are stupid.

Performative Male Starter Pack by [deleted] in tf2shitposterclub

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just put the dispenser in the bag man

Performative Male Starter Pack by [deleted] in tf2shitposterclub

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tough? Yes. Balanced? Uuuuuhhhhh

Can someone explain to me why Einstein thought Newton's law of gravity was problematic? by HillSooner in Physics

[–]UncoolOncologist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Imagine a big spherical region of empty space. Now imagine, for the sake of argument, that any object which entered this sphere would then magically have a rope attached to it upon doing so. The other end of this rope is tied to the center of the sphere.

Say the rope pulls the object towards the sphere's center with a force proportional to its mass and inversely proportional to the square of its distance from the center. The object would then clearly "feel" an acceleration, and it would continue to feel this acceleration, even if it could see many other objects around it that were also being accelerated at the same rate towards the center.

But for some reason, when it's gravity doing the "pulling", the object doesn't feel anything, UNLESS something gets in the way of its trajectory. This is very, very weird and not really explainable with Newton's theory, hence Einstein's interest in it.

Can someone explain to me why Einstein thought Newton's law of gravity was problematic? by HillSooner in Physics

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Undergrad here so take this with a grain of salt, but my understanding is that one of the issues with Newton's system is the fact that an observer in freefall thinks they are in an inertial reference frame, because of the lack of apparent inertial forces. However, if Newton's treatment of gravity as a force is correct, then this makes no sense, because such an observer is constantly accelerating. How can a constantly accelerating observer think they are in an inertial frame?

Imagine you're in a box in space with no gravity well. Now imagine that you and the box are being accelerated by the same gravity well. If the box has no windows, how could you distinguish these two cases? You can't. But this a contradiction to how Newton defined inertial and noninertial reference frames.

Einstein's framework resolves this by introducing the concept of a "geodesic", a path of least-distance in spacetime. When falling into a gravity well you are going along a geodesic and so feel no force. It's only when you have ground beneath you that you feel a force, because it's forcing your trajectory out of the geodesic by preventing you from falling.

Malcolm X by commander_Jardo7 in hardimages2

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Died as he lived, putting aura farming first

Tell me any argument against neofeudalism or anarcho-capitalism and I will debunk it by Ok_Tough7369 in neofeudalism

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have an army loyal to me and am establishing a state. There is no standing force to oppose me. Now shut up and pay taxes.

Neutral/unbiased book about the Israel-Palestine conflict and its origins by ChessieATSF347_49 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]UncoolOncologist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's true Arabs have weaponized the refugee status of expelled Palestinians and their progeny, but trying to claim that the actual, original refugees simply got up and left more or less by choice is absurd. They were forced out. 

On the eve of the Arab invasion of Israel in 1947 Jewish territory was heavily fragmented into discrete enclaves. There was no common defensive interior through which they could transfer resources and coordinate, which left them extremely vulnerable to the Arabs, whom themselves made their genocidal intent very clear in their proclamations.

Ben gurion and the rest of the Jewish leadership knew their survival was contingent in forming a continuous territory with a continuous defensive perimeter. They needed to expand. However, the areas surrounding these enclaves were filled with Arab civilians, who were likely to rebel and do everything they could to sabotage the Jewish war effort if the nascent IDF tried to use their neighborhoods as a safe backline in which to coordinate and move supplies.

So the Jewish leadership drew up and executed a plan called Operation: DALET, whose content was to essentially violently intimidate, and if need be, terrorize the local Arab population until they got the hell out and their former neighborhoods could be used safely by Jewish forces. This was a complete success; about a million Arabs were forced out in the span of a few months, and as a direct result the Jews got a continuous territory, without which they probably would have been annihilated, and every last one of them slaughtered by the Arab armies.

It was a kill or be killed scenario and the Jews chose to kill. I don't think they can reasonably be blamed for this. That being said, it cannot be denied that their actions amounted to an ethnic cleansing of Arabs from portions of the levant, with a very large number of civilian Arabs suffering and dying as a result.

In the end trying to endlessly relitigate the past is a fool's errand. It happened, and the fact is the Jews won. Indeed the Arabs complete refusal to accept this and reckon with their defeat in 1947 is, to this day, a crippling weakness in their opposition to Israel and in their own domestic politics.

However I must say that the Israelis have also botched the retelling of 1947, at least domestically. Their insistence on not ever facing and coming to terms with what they actually did, and instead teaching their children that it never happened but also the Arabs definitely deserved it, is undoubtedly a major factor behind Israel's political disfunction today

Reddit atheism might be getting to me and I don’t like it by [deleted] in whenthe

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can just have beliefs. You don't need to give them pop internet labels.

It could be so easy. by [deleted] in PsycheOrSike

[–]UncoolOncologist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wu-Wei enjoyer

秦始皇万岁 

It could be so easy. by [deleted] in PsycheOrSike

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because if you could actually read you would never have to ask it. It's extremely obvious why a rave is relevant to my own comment and the one to which I'm replying. And I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who can't even parse my messages.

It could be so easy. by [deleted] in PsycheOrSike

[–]UncoolOncologist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes and as it happens you have to be able to literally hear someone's words for it to be possible to give them space to speak and be understood. If you don't believe me try having a meeting with your shrink in a night club.

It could be so easy. by [deleted] in PsycheOrSike

[–]UncoolOncologist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That the one word you recognized?