I'm thinking we should start banning yahoo.com from this commag. All that site does is copy from another site and attribute it so that we can't see what the actual publisher is from the domain. (You can see at the top here that the OG source is Slate.)

I do agree! (and that was a delightful reply to read) I'm just still upset that this was called truly "awful solutions to the Fermi paradox", because physicists have entertained the possibility that these assumptions are true. Even if it is very unlikely, at least the principles of discovery and that Earth's more-advanced civilizations have destroyed the less-advanced one in nearly every contact are likely enough that consensus is apparently to not broadcast, just to be safe. According to https://warwick.ac.uk/..., that is their reasoning.

TL;DR: I agree that it's very unlikely (and that it's made as a fictional device; to do classic science fiction, essentially) but I disagree objectively that it is "awful" lol.

1. That’s true. It doesn’t change that Iran is more oppressive, unfortunately. I hold that oppressing everyone (and especially a certain nearly 1/2 of the population) is worse than apartheid oppression.
2. My entire argument is that “Iranian claims” is different from “Iran claims” and The Guardian uses the noun phrase for everyone at the same rate. You might argue about the latter, but the former is what The Guardian uses to refer to “the things that X said” and not “X said”, because there is no such thing as “Iranian saids”, and the closest alternative “statements” is just longer and rare.
   Your reply does not address that, or that I did also argue the latter. From looking across their articles, including the one you sent and not just that paragraph, The Guardian uses “claims” the verb for Iran at about the same rate it does for the US. In fact, the same goes for the noun phrase in that article. (listing both: Trump claims, Iran has claimed, Trump was quick to claim, Mohammad Eslami[ ]claimed, Iranian claims, Trump’s claims.)

to be technical, it’s more trump’s fault for promising something the US could not guarantee. of course it’s israel’s fault for doing all this war in the first place but creating an unworkable deal is trump’s fault.

you can of course be left-and-center and still make mistakes such as this. despite what it was in the 1930s, guardian has been pretty consistently fair about this

what would’ve going to the OIG achieved but his arrest?

oops. just because he’s dead now and not because he changed his mind, right?

how is Andor supposed to appeal to “Disney adults”?

Death Note style "I know that you know that I know that you know that I know..." style bullshit that falls apart

yeah if you didn’t like that part of death note (which i guess would be another of your responses to this question) you definitely wouldn’t like that plot line, which PSA to other commenters takes up about 1/4 of the second book. (i’m also curious to hear why you think it falls apart and debate it though i presume you wouldn’t be interested in debating this book lol. i liked the plotline partly because you also have to deduce what he’s going to do and going on through his mind)

awful solutions to the Fermi paradox

the Dark Forest Hypothesis has been around and proposed by physicists decades before the book popularized it, though not with that name; it is plausible that Liu independently thought of this. Stephen Hawking is a major proponent of this hypothesis.

fans will all say "Oh, yeah, the first book is bad

i don’t think that’s how it goes. the fans i know all say both books one and two are really good (second one being better than the first of course, but no the first book is still awesome) while the third one is controversial. i personally agree with that except i also like the third book though i agree that one did nothing to dissuade misogynist interpretations and there are little if any strong femm characters in the series

the axis of resistance’s goal is to maintain its collective security, after all

i have just scrolled through ten days without finding a trace. search results, the recent one is about the news item itself without any objections to the wording. the rest are from months ago and mostly do the same or are using guardian as a counterexample or pointing out the common use of passive voice in news headlines. the exceptions i didn’t find convincing

Looking at the DSM I don't see any item that's analogous to your talkativity example. I agree that would be wrong but I disagree that we see it in current psychiatry.

their brains being a result of their environment

I don't think anyone denies that. That neuroplasticity exists is very well known.

1. as bad as Israel is, it is not an authoritarian state oppressive of its “own” people, even though that doesn’t justify invading Iran. it is trending that way but it’s somewhat far from having an IRGC
2. you’re not comparing “Iran claims” to “US said”; you’re comparing “Iranian claims” to “US said” instead of “US statements”. here, “claims” is just shorter. in your example the word “claims” is used at the same frequency for trump and iran. google results suggest “US statements” is used at about the same percentage as “Iranian statements”

they stopped that very soon after the controversy started

i never understood the vitriol against debug-only opt-in telemetry

it was never opt-out, it was always planned to be opt-in

it was always opt-in.

people finding out: https://github.com/...

people highlight the opt-in dialog text: https://github.com/...

there are no commits in between; it could not have been changed to opt-in "when people found out" as you claim.

tenacity development looks somewhat moribund and lacks so many of audacity's added features and fixes like pasting audio. tenacity's release porting audacity's added realtime effects, beats and measures view, and opus support has only been present in an alpha released eight months ago.

it was never meant to be opt in.

Source? I've posted numerous pieces of evidence to the contrary:

people finding out: https://github.com/...

people highlight the opt-in dialog text: https://github.com/...

there are no commits in between; it could not have been changed to opt-in "when people found out" as you claim.

For one thing the Nuremberg Laws (1935) prohibit interracial marriage. That alone is bad. I also believe laws that restrict citizenship are bad. Of course I see a big problem with allat.

There were also many more "incidents" in the four years following the Nuremberg Laws... Audacity, none.