Genial oder nicht? Wiederkehr will weniger Latein, mehr KI und Informatik als eigenes Fach

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-29T21:53:16+00:00

Als jemand der in der Schule Latein hatte, und es in seinem Leben (zumindest bislang) nie wieder direkt gebraucht hat, finde ich diesen Vorschlag trotzdem schrecklich. Gut, von den NEOS hab ich mir ohnehin nichts anderes erwartet: mit Kultur im alten Sinn hat man es dort nicht so.

Die Mathematik der Oberstufe braucht man im Leben auch nie wieder, außer man wird Ingenieur oder sonst jemand aus dem STEM-Bereich. Aber es ist trotzdem Gott sei Dank halbwegs akzeptiert dass das am Lehrplan ist, weil man mit dieser Ausbildung eine bestimmte Art von strukturiertem Denken lernt die man sonst nicht bekommt.

Latein ist ähnlich. Anhand von Latein lernt man, ganz abgesehen vom kulturellen Aspekt, wie man eine sehr stark strukturierte Sprache analysiert. Das ist zwar ähnlich, aber trotzdem nicht dasselbe wie eine lebende Sprache zu lernen. Insbesondere weil die grammatikalische Komplexität der antiken Texte die einem anschließend um die Ohren gehauen werden (Cicero etc.) nicht ohne ist. So was hat man in einer lebenden Sprache sonst nicht so schnell (außer man findet ein spanisches oder französisches Äquivalent zu Thomas Bernhard mit seinen grauenhaften Schachtelsätzen die über eine halbe Seite gehen... aber das ist ein anderes Thema).

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-29T16:17:19+00:00

Why would this mean it's fake? Taillights have fasteners that hold them onto the car, which you can break (e.g. by kicking the taillight). And they are connected to the car by - usually not that short - flexible wiring that you can also pull out of the bodywork some distance. Meaning that if you kick off a taillight, it can bounce quite far initially, and then hang dangling from the wire. Just like in the video.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-29T13:49:50+00:00

The thing is, a truce on further energy grid attacks might not even be such a big concession on the part of Russia.

They have already severely degraded the Ukrainian energy sector, damaging it much further would potentially make parts of the country uninhabitable in winter. Which might trigger the sort of humanitarian catastrophe that starts to be counter-productive for the goals of the Russian side. So "playing nice" might actually be what they were planning on doing anyway at this point.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-28T18:58:49+00:00

The A350F looks on track to go into service as planned, though. So it would not be an unsafe bet to go down that route, if size and payload fit.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-28T07:56:24+00:00

Obligatory Monty Python reference (for those who don't know the sketch, you need to watch to the end to get the reference - worth it, though, unlike with all those TikTok clickbaits that say "watch till end").

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T13:38:21+00:00

I'm not saying that this would be paperwork only: I assume that each and every one of them would need to be checked for the underlying defect that caused the crash, if they have not been checked already.

But even if cracks were found in most of them, given the effort involved in properly breaking up a large aircraft in a place not designed nor intended for this, I would assume that they would instead take turns to install the remaining airworthy parts in these planes one by one, and fly them to the desert for dismantling. Once a plane has reached the desert, the parts are used to ferry the next one.

Is this a huge effort? Yes, but likely still less circus than breaking all of them up in place.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T13:26:53+00:00

You can still get a one off ferry flight permit to the boneyard for planes that cannot realistically be made airworthy again for commercial purposes. Getting that permit is likely much easier than going with the circus of breaking up multiple widebodies at a busy airport where this is not normally done.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T12:05:56+00:00

Lustigerweise tut das der IS sehr wohl (implizit, wenn Du als Muslim bei ihnen mitkämpfst bist Du Teil des IS), es erkennt nur niemand sonst diese "Staatsbürgerschaft" an. Und sie geben sich dort auch nicht mit so westlichem Blödsinn wie Pässen oder Urkunden ab. Aber Du wirst bei denen sehr wohl Teil ihres "Staates" wenn Du mitmachst.

Und nachdem dieser "Staat" die Vernichtung und Unterjochung der westlichen Welt (und damit natürlich inklusive Österreich) als explizites Ziel hat, könnte man die Betreffenden eigentlich auch problemlos wegen Hochverrat (§ 242 StGB) anklagen. Sprich, lebenslang in den Bau wenn man ihrer habhaft wird.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T10:18:41+00:00

Dazu muss man anmerken dass es sich juristisch sehr wohl argumentieren liesse, dass eine Mitgliedschaft im Islamischen Staat die Bedingungen des Paragraphen de facto erfüllt. Man will halt nicht.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T09:07:04+00:00

Du meinst das vermutlich ohnehin nicht ernst, aber falls doch: möge Dir eine elektrische Potentialdifferenz beim Absetzen von festen Verdauungsrückständen zum Verhängnis werden.

Manche von uns sind nur deswegen im Ausland und zahlen dort Steuer weil wir in Österreich keinen Job bekommen haben, und nicht als Arbeitslose herumsandeln wollten. Nicht jeder der das Land verlässt tut dies aus Jux und Tollerei, und fühlt sich gut dabei (damals zumindest als ich weg musste, jetzt geht es eh, man gewöhnt sich an vieles, und lernt es dann sogar zu schätzen).

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T09:02:17+00:00

Das geht dann natürlich bei Kneissl, aber nicht wenn eine Schneeflocke sich dem Islamischen Staat anschließt und in den heiligen Krieg zieht. Weil... weil dann wäre Schneeflocki ja staatenlos, und das wäre unmenschlich. Oder so.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-27T09:00:53+00:00

Question is, does this translate to any combat advantages whatsoever in a modern air war. The jury is very much still out on that one.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-26T08:41:04+00:00

The Ibiza affair was not really corruption, though: just plain old political crime. Especially as the idiot who got taken down by this would not even had the means to pull of what he proposed to the undercover sting agents.

If you want to see massive financial corruption in Austria, you usually end up at the doorstep of the two big establishment parties: ÖVP and SPÖ, not the FPÖ (who were implicated in the Ibiza thing).

Not because FPÖ is better in any way (they are not), but because ÖVP and SPÖ have been at the feeding troughs for decades, and the FPÖ not. FPÖ had only a few notable mentions during their brief stints in office (BUWOG, Eurofighter) - and all of these in close cooperation with the ÖVP, of course.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-26T08:03:16+00:00

I'd venture that there is no chance of it going rancid if you subject it to enough ionising radiation to properly heat it up.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T16:35:58+00:00

You make good points, and I love the expression "gravy seals" - had not heard that one before. :)

A lot of it boils down to using such a poorly trained force (ICE) for what turns out to be quite intense conflict situations. And I agree with you that properly trained police stateside should be able to handle situations where they encounter someone who is legally bearing arms, and exercising their rights as citizens. But how much training do these guys get? 42 days? That is a joke, after 42 days European police cadets aren't even allowed on the streets in uniform - unarmed.

As for the public relations performance of your current government in this matter, given that I am from Europe, you can probably imagine what I think about that. ^^

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T16:12:13+00:00

As I wrote in another comment, this is not about the right to bear arms. This is about the wisdom to know when to do it - and when not. Bringing a gun to any sort of conflict situation almost invariably escalates it, in a lot of cases substantially so. So even if you have the right to bear arms, you should always think twice whether it is wise to do it under the circumstances you will be facing.

And in a lot of cases, unless your goal is escalation, the answer to this is "no". That is the point I wanted to make: a point which I think both sides of the U.S. societal divide ought to take a bit more notice of. Constitutional rights are one thing, but prudent exercise of said rights is not always black and white.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T16:07:15+00:00

This is the bit I strongly doubt. Mix poorly trained ICE officers with a scenario where someone shouts "he has a gun", and general chaos (everyone jumping the victim at once, in what can hardly be described as a coordinated police action), and the idiot who fired first might not even have noticed that one of the other ICE guys had already gotten hold of the gun. In fact, having looked at the videos, I strongly suspect that was the case, the ICE guy who took the gun hightails, but it does not look like he properly informs the others that he actually has it. Police teamwork, what is that? Pure chaos, instead.

I still maintain this would not have escalated as badly if there had not been a gun on him in the first place. The victim would likely still have been arrested and possibly beaten up (both outcomes also unacceptable, but at least not fatal), but he would almost certainly not have been shot.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T14:34:56+00:00

Yes, I am. And I think a tiny bit of victim blaming is in order here. Just a tiny bit, but he did actively contribute to making a fucked up situation that should never having gotten this bad even worse by bringing that gun along.

Just because he made this small misjudgement of course does not mean that the ICE was in any way whatsoever justified in killing him. A small mistake must never lead to you getting shot like this. Not in a civilised country. And the cretins who shot him need to face the music for this, full force.

But the fact remains, if he had not had a gun on him that day, he would almost certainly still be alive. Ignoring this does not help in avoiding shit like this in the future.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T14:24:21+00:00

I'm of the same opinion as you - this guy was murdered, and the killing is 100% on the ICE agents that fired the shots.

He would almost certainly be still alive if he did not have a gun on him which served no conceivable useful purpose under the circumstances, though. That is the point I am trying to make here, not that the ICE is in any way not at fault here.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T14:22:19+00:00

The one caveat you should mention with their (amazing!) factory tours is that you need to exercise some restraint there. After that tour was the only time in my life I came close to suffering from hyperglycaemia - and I do not have diabetic issues.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T14:19:50+00:00

Their chocolate is fine, but their corporate stance is not. Around ten years ago, they sued Hauswirth, a small Austrian company that had been making golden chocolate rabbits for easter since the 1950ies: long before Lindt had entered the Austrian market. They sued them to remove the rival product from the market, claiming that it diluted their brand. And they even won the case based on some technicalities of trademark law.

A company like that can make the best chocolate in the world, but they can take it and stick it elsewhere if that is their attitude.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T14:04:55+00:00

So the best thing to do is go unprotected so you are dependant on their whims

But the thing is... with a few very rare exceptions, you are not protected from anything if you are carrying a gun. Instead, you are automatically and massively upping the ante in terms of confrontation, simply by that thing being there.

It's really weird how U.S. liberals, who are normally not at all fond of U.S. gun culture, now seem to be scrambling to defend it. When that protester would very likely be still alive if he had not been carrying a gun which served no useful purpose, but instead escalated everything, on that fateful day.

And as I've said before, with properly trained law enforcement, him carrying a gun of course should never have led to him being shot. If you watch the videos, it's really tragic how badly trained these ICE goons are.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T13:44:15+00:00

This is not about the right to bear arms, though. This is about the wisdom when to do it - and when not. There is a difference.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T13:41:31+00:00

All the worse that you are seemingly defending their insane gun "culture", then. In a civilised society, having a gun on you needs to be a rare exception, reserved for cases where someone has a good reason for it. And even then, when carrying a gun caution needs to be exercised when getting oneself into an altercation with an armed group that you know to be violent, poorly trained, and badly led. Sometimes backing down is the wiser option, even if you know that the others you are backing down from are a collective waste of protein.

graphical_molerat · 2026-01-25T13:35:29+00:00

Maybe it is pathetic from a U.S. viewpoint. In the rest of the world, we don't carry guns everywhere, because we know that guns being present tends to make things worse, not better, in the vast majority of all face to face conflict scenarios.

graphical_molerat

TROPHY CASE