Infinitely better and more honorable than all the olympic gold in the world. Slava Ukraini.

Well hopefully the Likud lose power this year so that a better deal can be worked out and implemented

I agree. I think a good starting place would be assessing the cost of living by region or district, and then anyone who makes below that amount should receive a supplementary allowance (funded by the wealthy, of course. If they were paying people fairly then nobody would be making below the cost of living).

Other things should be in the purview of public goods, of course. For countries that don’t already have it, healthcare and education should be top priorities. They should be seen as investments in a healthy society, not as merely handouts to individuals.

Eventually food should be produced and distributed by public (state-owned) entities, at-cost rather than for-profit. But that’s a longer-term goal that needs careful planning and implementation, so pushing too hard for it too soon could derail progress on other priorities like healthcare, education, and guaranteed basic income.

I see. Yeah, that makes sense.

I view arts and humanities as occupying the top of Maslow’s hierarchy. A healthy arts and humanities scene is a sign that society is flourishing. Someone who can pursue those as careers instead of hobbies is self-actualized.

I think public patronage of the arts and humanities is ultimately a good thing, and should happen in addition to all the other, more basic needs. Food, housing, and utilities should be prioritized, and the jobs that provide those things. Then healthcare, education, social work, public servants, parks & rec, etc.

Arts and humanities shouldn’t be neglected, but the fabric of society should be built from the ground up to support a healthy arts scene.

Art is a skill that takes time and dedication to cultivate, and often at least a seed of talent to boot.

I can’t just wake up one morning and say “I’m an artist now” anymore than I can wake up and say “I’m a doctor today.”

Palestine should have sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza. Too bad the Oslo Accords fell apart.

Too many people get caught up in what it’s “supposed to be” about, and they’ll skewer anyone for pointing out how it actually plays out.

“MeToo isn’t about falsely accusing men! It’s about getting victim’s voices heard!” Okay? That doesn’t change the fact that the momentum has been abused to paint with a broad brush and verifiably false accusations have ruined people’s lives.

People need to understand that if you want to press charges, you need to present evidence in court. Which means victims need to go to the hospital and get a forensics panel done within 72 hours of the incident, and the sooner the better. It has to be done before washing, too.

I understand that can be uncomfortable, and the system should be designed to keep them as comfortable as possible during the process. But it’s the only way to prove what happened in court, unless it’s on video.

And people will say I’m victim blaming by saying that the victim has a responsibility to gather evidence, but it’s the cold hard reality and I couldn’t change that even if I wanted to. And if I was a rape apologist then why would I encourage actual victims to gather indisputable proof of what happened?

But if you get falsely accused and say “There’s no evidence of that because it didn’t happen,” then people will counterintuitively perceive your denial of evidence as an admission of guilt for some reason. It’s like when they say using the word “alleged” means you’re actually guilty. No, it means something was alleged. Pointing out that something was unproven or unprovable is not a confession of wrongdoing.

It’s reached the point of absurdity to be honest, and I feel like the ones knowingly leveling false accusations are the most vehement about it, because they don’t want to get caught out in a lie. “How dare you demand evidence?” That sorta thing.

And it doesn’t help actual victims, because who’s going to take them seriously when they’re drowned out in a flood of shamelessly false accusations?

Weaponizing MeToo against innocent men as retaliation for perceived slights is counterproductive and contributes to the culture of not believing victims.

But you can’t even address these issues without someone saying “seems sus”

What license is FreeBSD under?

People downvoting you cause they can’t handle the truth that stuff like that actually happens. It conflicts with their worldview in which women never lie and men are never falsely accused.

Say this in some places and they’ll either call you a rapist or a rape apologist. It’s the same as when cops say “If you’re not doing anything wrong then why do you need rights? If you don’t have any drugs then why won’t you let me search your vehicle?”

Ask them if people should have believed Emmett Till’s accusers and they’ll say “THAT’S DIFFERENT” without really being able to explain how…

P.S., Epstein is a scumbag and all his associates should burn. Nothing in this comment is intended to be read as an excusal of them, but rather as an argument against overgeneralizing it to treat all men as guilty unless proven innocent

Blender?

They only have a problem with “honor killings” when they’re done by brown people.

These people view their children as property, and believe “I brought you into this world and I can take you out of it” at literal face value.

“I didn’t say ‘checkmate,’ I said ‘check, mate.’”

I see. That almost makes sense, but pi radians = 180°

Also, the value of one internal angle of a regular polygon is (n-2)×(π÷n), in which case π÷n is infinitesimally small. In other words, substituting infinity for n would be incalculable, and even if it were, adding them together wouldn’t equal infinity because the larger n is, the smaller each individual internal angle.

It’s not about colloquialism or language, there are immutable principles of geometry, and adding the internal angles of a triangle gives you 180°, whether you express it as such or as π radians or 3200 mils or something completely different doesn’t matter. That’s just changing the unit of measurement but the underlying principle is the same.

Circles can be confusing and counterintuitive, but that’s why they need an irrational number in order to be expressed. If you’re measuring the internal angle you’ll probably express it as an arc, because infinite and infinitesimal numbers are impossible to express rationally.

Take for instance, calculating angular momentum with a circle. You have to calculate it based on the tangent because the circle itself doesn’t give you any constancy otherwise.

Except that the angle of a circle’s circumference is measured as an arc with the vertex at the center, and to include an infinite number of angles you would need to reduce the degrees accordingly to avoid overlapping

A circle has 360° discreet 1° angles. While there’s a theoretically infinite number of angles within a circle, those angles would need to have an infinitesimally small fraction of a degree. If you divide a circle into 3600 angles, each angle would be 0.1°

A segment of a circle is also measured as an arc corresponding to a vertex facing outwards from the center. A triangle’s vertices on the other hand face inwards. The sum of those angles is always 180°. If you juxtapose a circle on top of it, yes, it goes all the way around since it’s a closed shape. But if you place the three vertices side by side so that their lines line up, it’ll only cover half of the circle.

There’s no inconsistency.

That’s an interesting claim and the first time I’m hearing it. Do you might citing specific examples?

“Something something, worn-out cliché, HA HA HA!”

That’s awesome!

You think you’re smart with your making up things I didn’t say.

If they just want to be anti-genocide, they should find a slogan that doesn’t advocate for ethnic cleansing. And if they don’t know the meaning of the slogan then they should be informed. That’s all I did, and you won’t stop being butthurt about it. Goodbye.

All you’re doing is moving goalposts, twisting the things I’ve said, and pretending you’re the one being rational. Calling me racist and anti-semitic isn’t going to change the complexity of the situation, and trying to force your overly simplistic solutions is only going to complicate things further.

There’s no point answering any questions you ask if you’re only going to take everything I say in the most uncharitable light because you’re allergic to nuance. I’m done with you.