Imperialist west/US is totally taking part in that, either funding or leading in some way. Go and make your demands; but demanding the CPC down, that is demanding a liberal, US-like model, will just destroy China (that is all US wants). So these protesters are acting in bad-faith or were brainwashed and don’t have enough information.
Besides socioeconomic issues, I’d also correlate that to neofacist forces.
in part due to the global pandemic, lockdowns and the economic impact of these.
Most of the violence women and girls face is at the hands of intimate partners and family members, and it begins at an early age. Studies show that one in four young women (aged 15-24 years), who have been in a relationship, will have already experienced violence by an intimate partner by the time they reach their mid-twenties.
Is there any scientific evidence Esperantano is more efficient, has significantly superior user experience/usability? What about that in the context of using it for software engineering? People seem to have developed it in the 1800s; so outdated. Also many issues https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto#Criticism like bias and the gender non-neutrality; I would discard it. I would suggest to come up with a better language for the 21st century. This one seems better https://www.globasa.net/eng
Also, isn’t this an XY problem? The problem is that many people do not know the current dominant language that people use in science, technology, so on. So you propose Esperanto. Well, now you gatekeep it to people who know Esperanto, which is a way less demography than English. But since learning languages that are more close to one’s native language is easier, that would allow people from Latin/Roamance/Germanic-based languages to possibly learn it faster? That would not be true to Asiatic languages, …
Why another language is the correct solution? Why not improve current education systems? Why not machine translation? Why not improve translations? If the US switches its official language to Esperanto, wouldn’t it be imperialist as well? Language dominance is linked to socioeconomic development. You need countries like US to actually adopt it; otherwise it would be just another language to learn besides English. You are just making it harder.
Just make some points so people can understand your views better.
https://codeberg.org which is a non-profit organization. It is free of charge, so it is democratic enabling people to use its services. You can even join the foundation https://join.codeberg.org/
BUT it uses Gitea, which registered two for-profit companies in Hong Kong… Codeberg is soft forking it because the now Gitea shareholders / trademark owners made it clear they want to maximize profits.
If you care about promoting a democratic platform for everyone, do not use sourcehut. They will charge later on; their current free model enables both gathering users (potential clients) and making you a free tester/qa for them. I believe “financial aid” is undemocratic; free should be default. If anything, it should just require commercial, for-profit entities to pay; because then by default there is no processual need for “financial aid”. We should not trust any for-profit, commercial organization anyway for such important services/platforms (version control system hosting is crucial).
From the beta onwards, unpaid accounts will be limited to read-only access to their own projects. Affected users will be emailed at least 60 days in advance of the transition. Users who host their own instance of Sourcehut, on their own servers, will be unaffected by this. Additionally, financial aid will be provided to those who cannot pay; no one is going to be priced out.
built from traditional distribution packages, but deployed via images.
Hell no. https://nixos.org and https://guix.gnu.org ftw
they have the means and are not afraid to take the capitalists down. they have take down exploitative industries already, like the private lectures industry, crypto, jailed for many years some capitalists, and so on… but of course they will not do that to an extent to destroy their own economy; that would not help them to achieve 1st place superpower taking US position.
Thus, the entire property insurance world have had economists working every angle for decades now. Do you know the saying: “The casino always wins”? From what I’ve seen/heard inside the insurance agencies, they are going to make a fortune from the devastation caused by the effects of climate change.
Fucking insurance industry scam. I would love to see it banned. Anyway, that is why sometimes I think not a “democracy” but only something like China would be able to enforce such a change (I know they won’t really do that because economy/capitalism…). US the worst of all this; the heart of capitalism.
in short there is no evidence whatsoever for the beginning of the universe. people confuse universe expansion (which there is evidence for) with the beginning of the universe (no evidence).
Big Bang #1 the beginning of the universe […] is what we find in the mathematics of Einstein’s general relativity if we extrapolate the current expansion of the universe back in time. The equations say that matter and energy in the universe becomes denser and hotter until, eventually, about 13.7 billion years in the past, both density and temperature become infinite. We cannot extrapolate any further back in time, so it’s fair to say that this event, if it happened, would be the beginning of the universe.
Einstein’s theory breaks down about 10-43 seconds before the mathematical singularity, a unit also known as the Planck time. Since physicists don’t believe the singularity is real, the phrase “Big Bang” has come to refer to whatever event might replace the singularity in the to-be-found theory of quantum gravity in this Planck time. Let’s call it just that—the Big Bang Event.
We have no evidence the Big Bang Event happened. We cannot look back in time anywhere near that long ago. The earliest direct observation we have is the formation of the cosmic microwave background, which was formed about 400,000 years after the hypothetical Big Bang Event. Be careful: If you Google for the time at which the microwave background was formed, you will get the answer that it was formed 13.7 billion years ago and that might look like it was formed at the Big Bang Event. But that’s because the figure is rounded.
The James Webb Space Telescope doesn’t tell us anything about the Big Bang Event.
We understand quite well how matter behaves at energy densities somewhat above those at which the microwave background must have formed, so we trust that our extrapolations back in time are correct until we reach an energy density that roughly corresponds to that which the Large Hadron Collider probes, which brings us to about 10-12 seconds before the hypothetical Big Bang Event. We know nothing about what matter does at higher energy density—even the density in neutron stars is lower than that.
Now, 10^-12 seconds isn’t much in human terms, but to get from there to the Big Bang Event, we’d still have to extrapolate over more than 50 orders of magnitude in energy density. That’s 50 orders of magnitude for which we have only speculation. This means the Big Bang Event might happen in our mathematics, but we have no observations that can tell us it happened in reality. Indeed, I think we will never have any observations that confirm the Big Bang Event. Some of my colleagues in astrophysics may disagree. But be that as it may, at least for now we just don’t know how the universe began.
That we have no evidence for (or against) the Big Bang Event is the reason why physicists have a large number of different hypotheses for the beginning of our universe. Besides the Big Bang Event, our universe could have been born out of a black hole; or it could have come about in a collision of higher-dimensional membranes; or it could have started as a big network in a non-geometric phase; or our universe could cycle through eons, as Roger Penrose has proposed. The most popular idea now is that our universe was born out of a fluctuation in a quantum field. All these alternative ideas to the Big Bang Event are possible because we cannot look back in time far enough to tell them apart.
The James Webb Space Telescope is an amazing instrument. It looks at young stars and galaxies that were formed long after the cosmic microwave background, at about 200 million years. That’s impressive, but it doesn’t tell us anything about the Big Bang Event, or its alternatives.
The problem has long been that the term Big Bang is used to refer to the expansion of the universe in general, and not to the event of the creation of the universe in particular. These are, however, two separate scientific hypotheses. We have overwhelmingly strong evidence that the universe expands (call it Big Bang #2), and we are confident about its history back to about the time of the electroweak phase transition, which is what the Large Hadron Collider probes. We have to date zero evidence for the beginning of the universe, whether it was a Big Bang Event or something else.
Historically, the first evidence for the expansion of the universe was Edwin Hubble’s observation that the light from other galaxies is systematically shifted to the red, indicating that they all recede from us. While this may have been the first evidence, the decisive evidence for the expansion of the universe was the discovery of the cosmic microwave background that ruled out the competing hypothesis, the “steady state” universe.
Likely most? Besides I suspect most of these performed scans have no real insights but they will continue diagnosing random mental illnesses and drugs that have horrible side effects anyway.
That is just what I think. I would need to read more scientific literature on the subject…
I see this “use random drugs until one clicks even if you don’t actually need it” approach mostly as a way for maximum profits while not developing better, more efficient treatments which would require greater investments likely, undermining profits… Capitalism at its best. Last I read psychiatry is one of the most well paying health related professions…
health systems that integrate mental and physical health care, especially at the primary care level. Mental and physical well-being are inextricably linked—physical illness and pain can cause depression and anxiety, and conversely can mask underlying medical conditions, especially when doctors interpret these experiences solely through the lens of a psychiatric diagnosis.
Any treatment has to start with a focus on the whole person. We need appropriate community-based care and holistic solutions that take social, economic, and cultural factors into account. We also need to broaden our understanding of recovery to mean a person’s ability to live a good life on their own terms, rather than defining it as the absence of certain symptoms.
Finally, we have to start treating mental health as a social justice and human rights issue. That’s why Mental Health Europe advocates for a psychosocial model that acknowledges the profound impact of lived experience and social environment in shaping mental health. We know that poverty, racism, and violence put people at higher risk of developing mental health problems—so that means we need population-level interventions which can focus on fighting the root causes of this public health crisis.
I generally use Alpine for containers and I find it pretty good at that. I tried using it for some lower resources devices, but it missed many packages which I needed then. Need to give it a go again and see.
How do I contact the Wolfree Developers on the Fediverse?
Send your message to the inbox:
hmmmm
You aware if they wanted to stop piracy they would just limit its functionalities right? They know better about their app than anyone here. In any case, that is just another reason why e2e should be default on Telegram.
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/why_not_signal.md
I’d also add Jami to the recommended list, even though it is a bit buggy.
well i won’t be using anything google.
If the US historically had not take part in such activities worldwide I would not have made that claim. Because the US have done so much imperialist activities that lead to war, military dictatorships, … it is only logical to assume US involvement.
And it is not the first time US tries to fuck up China specifically
Also of course some people in China will be legitimately angry with the regime (ever saw that nail houses thing?), but not assuming US involvement is naive.