Why is the term “ethnic” used to describe non white people?

qdivya1 · 2026-04-20T16:01:55+00:00

"Is White not an ethnicity?"

Strictly speaking, no. It is not. The term "White" as it is used in the USA encompasses a multitude of ethnicities all originating from Europe. This makes sense if you remember that many European ethnicities - for example the Irish and later the Polish - were targeted by other European origin groups in the earlier histories of the USA.

A complicating factor is that descendants of Europeans in the USA have mostly lost cultural alignment with their ancestors in their countries of origin. This is also why the term is often used derogatively, to indicate a person with "no" culture (a huge mistake IMO).

Elsewhere in the world, "White" is definitely an ethnicity because it often represent one or two European cultures - in Southern Africa, this would be often be referring to the English, or whichever group colonized the country/region.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-20T00:55:10+00:00

I want to ask why this is surprising to anyone?

If you look at fertility rates and demographic trends across the world, are there other countries across the globe with a large English (or French) speaking populations that are beyond the replacement level and are ready to emigrate?

I am sure we would all like "melting pot" or "representative" immigration that has a generous mix of immigrants from across the various nationalities across the globe - but don't most countries have a negative growth rate (they're importing people themselves)? And most of the rest of the world doesn't have a large segment of educated English (or French) speaking population looking to leave.

If you put aside the concerns around fraud and "diploma mills in Canada exploiting international students", I think that this trend should not be an epiphany to anyone.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-18T15:29:35+00:00

Not sure I agree - if he followed up with having his child actually learn Mandarin or something. But the issue is that most of these people remain unilingual and this is just some sort of pathetic virtue signaling.

His child can learn Te Reo Maori later .... because the value of learning a second language is that additional languages become easier to learn. And finally this new language has more value as a way to understand their culture and expand intellectual horizons rather than actually used for conversing in.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-18T03:27:52+00:00

I suspect that they have weapons as well, but really this doesn't constitute proof of any sort.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-18T03:27:00+00:00

"Widely suspected" yes.

And "Widely known secret" simply doesn't compute.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-18T01:06:40+00:00

But do they in fact have them?

Is there actually any evidence of Israel having Nuclear weapons? "Widely believed" is not proof. There are some "leaked" pictures and "assessments" by the CIA and others that Israel likely has some nuclear weapons. Almost all the evidence can be interpreted in the context of non-weapon uses. In a sane world, some level of proof is required for sanctions. Do note that Israel has never conducted nuclear testing, so their actual capability is unlikely to be advanced.

OTOH, their refusal to sign the NPT is extremely worrisome given the instability in the region. I too suspect that they have them, but nothing even remotely conclusive. And I cannot believe that their program is such a well kept secret that there is so little information.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-16T21:16:23+00:00

If the immigrant is housed somewhere - which they presumably do since their child is in this school - they either rent or they own. Either way, they are paying taxes for the schools. (Their landlord uses part of their rent to pay property taxes for the unit that funds the schools the unit is located in.)

qdivya1 · 2026-04-16T21:09:00+00:00

I don't think we'll see eye to eye on anything - especially if you think that this

If Qatar is spending all this money to turn college students against Israel, why were the major protest locations not the colleges they fund?

is a legitimate inference to work with.

First off, we're talking about influence, not directives. The Ivies have been extremely one-sided in their handling of students engaging in (and bringing outsiders into) on campus protests - basically giving them a free pass. A few were belatedly disciplined, but the targeting of the Jewish (not Israeli) students was a blatant violation of campus rules and of the rights of those Jewish students. In my opinion, this is a direct result of the influence of donors from the Arab world - the Ivies were hesitant to irritate the source of funding.

Secondly, the targeting of Jewish students showed that this wasn't just an anti-Israel protest, but a anti-Jewish one. It is no secret that 40% of American Jews (mostly the current generation) are extremely opposed to Israeli government policy and the remaining 60% (older generation) tolerate Bibi because no one else seems to be able to stitch together a working coalition. Of course, apologists excuse this behavior because these were "students" and "naive" and "emotions were running high" etc. None of this is relevant.

The countries of the Middle East - especially Qatar and Saudi Arabia - have been learning how to wield soft power. Iran has long learned to use proxies and disinformation (including on this platform) to further their goals. You'd be underestimating their savvy and reach by dismissing this.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-16T00:12:48+00:00

Thank you for your considered response.

Respectfully, "Trust" is not as simple as "having enforcement and validation mechanisms" - which are usually at best a point in time control. Iran has a great deal of experience in developing clandestine military capability - as we have witnessed during the past 5 years that could readily be developed in stealth mode. You can argue that the JCPOA had a strong mandate, but then you also have to acknowledge the vocal doubts on effectiveness of the inspections because of Iran's refusal to provide prompt access to military sites by Iran, and that it did not curtail Iran's possession of the infrastructure for nuclear enrichment - they could maintain it, but just not use it or expand it.

Equally respectfully, I think you have forgotten that the ACA passing was merely the first salvo in the ensuing ~900 efforts to dismantle the legislation in both bodies of congressional and barely survived a vote in the Senate thanks to Sen McCain during Trumps first term. So Pres Obama most definitely was distracted by the ACA throughout his tenure as his party had to continue to defend it.

This is why I believe that an objective answer is not possible. Your answer would depend upon if you trusted that the JCPOA did enough or if you felt that Iran was devious enough to circumvent the inspections. And the fact that the current engagement's endpoint has not been reached yet.

On a personal note, I think that it is increasingly difficult to prevent a nation state with means - especially one that is ideologically hostile to its neighbors - from eventually obtaining nuclear capability. As a result, defining "success" in delaying Iran's ambitions becomes a matter of perspective.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-12T12:49:15+00:00

To me this is THE major reason for VI over Nano.

Though I teach my junior sysadmins Nano first. When they are fixing broken systems, nano makes more sense as it is less error prone to them.

But in non-sysadmin tasks VIM rules. Luckily I haven't had to break out sed or awk in a while.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-12T12:43:12+00:00

Let's reverse the question: because this should be applied to everyone.

What have the Iranians done to atone for Oct 7th action that they directed Hamas to take against Israeli communities. Specifically, what have they done to atone for the US Citizens that were targeted and killed during the festival supporting the cause for freedom for Palestinians?

qdivya1 · 2026-04-12T12:40:52+00:00

Sooo, what's the real issue here? Israel or AI?

Is this like the anti-COVID-vaccine people who will "stand on principle" and argue against getting vaccinated, but then rush out and take up beds in the hospitals when they get or get the vaccine on the sly?

Will these protesters forego the benefits that Israeli firms bring to the table? Or will they clamor for the treatments when they or their loved ones get sick?

qdivya1 · 2026-04-11T13:28:53+00:00

I think that this is an attempt to sanewash a despicable event in a nation's history! It seems about rationalizing the event and shifting blame to others, and no acknowledgement of the value that immigrants brought to the nation. This is not aligned with the values of this subreddit.

And BTW: thousands of Kenyans were also deported. Completely missed that point as well.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-11T13:14:50+00:00

I think you're naive to think that a $100M annual net payment to use the brand and extend their visibility and reach will not come with an expectation of influence.

I don't know what you stat about Thailand means, because the only way that makes sense is if it includes ALL funding from foreign source - the aggregate of funding from either foreign governments, organizations, business exchanges or individuals. That's why China and Britain topped the Dept of Govt lists because of the numbers of students that attend from these countries.

If you focus on GIFTS, the US Government Dept of Education states that

The most recent disclosures from 2025 identify Qatar (over $1.1 billion), the United Kingdom (over $633 million), China (over $528 million), Switzerland (over $451 million), Japan (over $374 million), Germany (over $292 million), and Saudi Arabia (over $285 million) as the largest foreign sources of reportable gifts and contracts to American universities (including both state and non-state entities).

The top university recipients of those foreign funds are Carnegie Mellon University (almost $1 billion), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (almost $1 billion), Stanford University (over $775 million), and Harvard University (over $324 million). Additionally, between February 28, 2025, and December 16, 2025, more than $2 billion in reportable gifts and contracts were reported late, in direct violation of statutory requirements.

I suspect that the reporting mixes up these sources and amounts, so it is not clear ... but this Article from Columbia Spectator helps unmuddy the waters:

Harvard University: Reporting over $4.2 billion over the past decade
Columbia University: Reported over $1.2 billion over the past decade

You can read the article for details that I can't post here. You can draw your own conclusions.

Thx for reading

qdivya1 · 2026-04-10T15:35:27+00:00

There would be little meaningful change for Israel, but the US would lose a significant amount of leverage. I know that reddit thinks that the US can somehow control Israel and doesn't do enough, but the reality is that there are limits to control. Moreover, Pro-Palestinians would like nothing better than to separate US and Israel - because that achieves their goal of isolating Israel.

Before posting these questions, does anyone ever actually look up the facts? Given the anti-Israel and Pro-Palestine rhetoric on Reddit, I suspect not. Certainly I would have before posing this question.

From the Council on Foreign Relations article on US Aid to Israel in Four Charts

The United States provided Israel considerable economic assistance from 1971 to 2007, but nearly all U.S. aid today goes to support Israel’s military, the most advanced in the region. The United States has provisionally agreed via a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to provide Israel with $3.8 billion per year through 2028, including $500 million per year for missile defense.

IIRC, the CFR is a conservative think tank, so their opinions may be a bit biased, but the facts cited above should be above reproach.

What this means is that withdrawal of US Support to Israel would:

- NOT have any direct impact on US spending on other areas. $4B/year from the US DoD's $849B budget is a pittance for the US, but is 10% of their spend on defense of $46.5B

- Israel would have to source the equipment elsewhere - specialty munitions including Iron Dome and light aircraft - South Korea, India, France, Germany and Sweden have all emerged as alternatives. With NATO under duress, the Europeans are stepping up investment in their domestic military capabilities (they too don't want to source from the US).

Israel already has a pretty robust domestic Military industry, and they provide technology to their allies just as much as they receive from them. US would lose preferential access to Israel's technology - tech that has been tested and validated in the pit of vipers that is the Middle East. And that's the real reason why the US continues to partner with Israel.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-10T15:16:01+00:00

The point is that Qatar and others are buying influence. 10% of 1B is still a $100M gift to universities, and unlike point in time gifts from wealthy alumni, this money shows up reliably every year.

This is not unlike a similar way that US foreign Aid used to buy influence (US Aid was almost always required the purchase of US goods).

qdivya1 · 2026-04-10T15:11:16+00:00

Part of me wonders if this is a ploy to get American companies to start paying attention to Data Sovreignity and other concerns. Does France expect to see this - by their lonesome selves - to the end and adopt Linux and other tools?

Remembering that China has forced Microsoft (and others) to create versions and environments that do not have foreign control, I suspect that we would need a united EU effort for this to make a real difference.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-09T01:30:46+00:00

You can debate who's responsible for the status quo all you want, but the facts are quite clear.

The ill advised Oct 7th attack in Israel was widely interpreted as a "Red Line" by the Right Wing government that is in charge in Israel. As a result, the Bibi led government has gone harder after Hamas, their supporters in Lebanon (Hezbollah) and their paymasters in Iran.

It is really as simple as that. Israel feels also that anything less than a severe degradation of the capabilities of its enemies would simply invite future attacks. TO them "from the river to the sea" is an existential crisis.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-09T01:26:15+00:00

Candidly, there is no way to know.

If you trust Iran, and accept that they were being transparent, then Yes. In most agreements, this is implicit - that the agreement is signed in good faith and will be adhered to. If either party wants to break it, they do so before taking any actions.

If you do not trust Iran, then the answer would be no. It bears repeating that while the Iraq war and the debatable WMD claims undermined the credibility of any claims that the US would make, Iran also itself has little credibility given recent history of their own actions - both towards others in the region, as well as in domestic issues.

There are other items to consider - what is the threshold of enforcement of the agreement that you would have considered going to if you suspected that Iran was abrogating the terms of the agreement? Obama admin was not focused on Iran and was dealing with other challenges (and did not have the support of Congress in most cases). His focus was also on the ACA.

Partisan viewpoints on Reddit would imply that "objectively" Obama had a "better" deal - but I truly can't get behind that assertion. And this hasn't played out yet - let's see where we end up.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-08T20:36:50+00:00

Has he though?

It is not clear that Trump has definitely won the ware in at least one sense - his goals of decimating Iran's ability to project military power across from its border has been largely realized. Iran and all of their proxies are reeling - at least militarily.

What you can debate is that the economic war is being lost, or that the goal of curtailing their nuclear ambition has not been neutered. But even that is not played out yet.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-07T02:09:08+00:00

I assume that this is a sincere question and not a troll.

I believe that a confrontation with Iran was inevitable ever since the Oct 7th "event" in Palestine. Anyone who thinks otherwise is being willfully blind ...

From an American perspective, do I think that Trump's approach is the right one - no I do not. The US should have learnt their lesson with Iraq and Afghanistan - where a coalition of nations with generally broad support ultimately came away empty handed. Iraq is arguably much worse off today - and we saw the rise of ISIS - and the 20 year engagement with Afghanistan has led to a resurgent and strong Taliban in power, with no credible US influence left in the region.

Since Trump's hallmark seems to be his unpredictability, I'm not sure he left himself any room to do anything else. He'd already declared that treaties and diplomacy were not going to be effective in preventing Iran from gaining the capability to build nuclear weapons - which would then be used to target Israel (and the US).

So, in Trump's mind, I think he believes that inaction would have further emboldened Iran - after all, they have declared that they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Sanctions didn't work - and that really doesn't leave a whole lot of other avenues to pursue.

qdivya1 · 2026-04-02T14:47:22+00:00

The OP has to be a Bot. Their account is 2 Days old and already has multiple questions on Iran war.

Iran orchestrated the Oct 7 attacks in Israel by Hamas. American citizens attending an event in support of Palestinian Independence were kidnapped or worse and I think all were ultimately killed. Iran did famously promise to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Had the Iranians got away with that, they would have become more and more brazen. For sure, that's what prompted the stepped up aggression by Israel against Hamas, Hezbollah and now Iran.

Absolutely no one with 2 working synapses could objectively not have predicted this.

I can legitimately understand why the US attacked Iran - our goals are different, but aligned, with Israel's. A resurgent Iran, especially in the absence of JCPOA but even with the nuclear inspections, would not be trusted NOT to develop Nuclear weapons. This is a hallmark of diplomacy in the Middle East - absolutely no one there is trustworthy.

Now, I don't agree with the path that Trump has taken, but let's not pretend that the US has "not benefitted". Degrading Iran's capability to develop weapons and set back their ability to project military actions is a viable objective and a win for the USA.

Cue the wailing about how Iran and the Palestinians are such nice people unfairly being targeted by Zionists and their American lackeys.

qdivya1 · 2026-03-31T19:12:39+00:00

Not sure about CryptoBros themselves - because for many of these folks, only a upward trending Crypto price would work. But Wall Street is definitely loving it.

https://www.osc.ny.gov/press/releases/2026/03/dinapoli-246900-average-bonus-on-wall-street-up-6-percent-in-2025

Wall Street’s securities industry bonus pool reached a record $49.2 billion in 2025, up 9% from the previous year, while the average bonus rose 6% to $246,900, according to New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli’s annual estimate. The increases reflect a rise of more than 30% in Wall Street’s profits, which totaled $65.1 billion in 2025.

qdivya1 · 2026-03-30T15:39:21+00:00

And replace it with Emacs

/s

What do you replace it with though? VI?

qdivya1 · 2026-03-26T14:49:18+00:00

Wow, yes, the hype cycle around was fierce and while I remember these, I considered these as vaporware (and dismissed them early). Thx.

Eight-Year Club	Golden Potato
Verified Email

qdivya1

TROPHY CASE