I just skimmend the article and the accompanying report. But the analysis of what happened is contrary to my understanding. As far as I’m aware voter turnout in swing states (aka the ones that are actually important) was actually higher in 2024 compared to the few last election cycles.

Compared to Clinton and Biden, Harris was able to draw from the not-voting pool in states, where it mattered. Just Trump did it better.

The conclusion, that following the populist narrative of your enemy instead of drafting your own looses you votes, may be right, but I think the analysis, how they got to that conclusion is not what actually happened.

Not a US citizen or particularly versed with US politics, so I would be happy to hear something contrary.

“Importance: High”

Are you confusing BlackRock and Blackstone? The core business of BlackRock is selling ETFs and other funds containing shares and bonds. Blackstone, on the other hand, is directly involved in the real estate and private equity markets.

Both are problematic, but it’s important to address the issue accurately

The person I am replying to lumped all citizens of the US into a singular belief

Nope they didn’t do that. Neither did I. But maybe you should look up, what it means to be a citizen.

But, that aside, to answer your question; No, not at this time.

My question was rhetorical, and this doesn’t even answer it in the slightest.

I’m not from the US, but I believe the last time one of those entities meaningfully strayed from the line of the US government was 164 years ago. So, saying the US is basically a confederation with its members acting independently on the world stage is a bit of a stretch, don’t you think?

An integral is usually written like ∫ f(x) dx or alternatively as df(x)/dx. Please note that this is just a way to apply the operation ‘Integration’, like + applies the operation ‘Addition’. There is no real multiplication or division.

But sometimes you can take a shortcut and treat dx as a multiplied constant. This is technically not correct, but under the right circumstances lands you at the same solution as the proper way. This then looks like this ∫ f(y) dy/dx dx = ∫ f(y) dy

Another thing you can do is to move multiplicative constants from inside the Integral to in front of the Integral: ∫ 2f(x) dx = 2 ∫ f(x) dx. (That is always correct btw)

What anon did was combine those two things and basically write ∫ f(x) dx = dx ∫ f(x). Which is nonsensical, but given the above rules not easily disproven.

This is more or less the same tactic used by internet trolls just in a mathy way. Purposefully misinterpreting arguments and information, that cost the other party considerably more energy to discover and rebut. Hence the hate fuck.

While I agree with the Duopolies are bad statement. I don’t see how Brazil or China would be able to break this in the near to medium future.

Brazil/Embraer are quite happy in the regional/ business jet niche. Their CEO recently said that they have no plans to break into new markets. And even if they would start developing a new narrow body aircraft, they would need at least a decade before they could deliver it.

China/Comac theoretically have a narrow body aircraft in production, but they seem to have lost the ambition to get this aircraft certified outside of China. Looks like they are unable to meet international safety standards with the C919. For the C929 or the C939 to be competitive , they would need to fly international and thus fulfill even higher standards than the ones already missed by the C919.

Bombs in WWII were both inaccurate and relatively unreliable. Something around 10% of bombs dropped didn’t explode and of those that did explode only ~5-10% did so on target.

The answer was to just drop more bombs, increasing the amount of duds even more. Roughly 2.5 million tonnes of tnt equivalent were dropped over Germany alone, mostly in 50kg to 500kg packages.

Additionally factors like muddy grounds both increases the chance of malfunctioning trigger mechanism and the bomb simply burrowing into the ground, hiding from visual detection.

I leave you with the math on how many duds are potentially buried.

To me it is a form of memorial on why war, especially large scale war, just sucks. Society still has to pay the price of the actions of people that are mostly dead by now. And I’m scared that more and more people in the world want to revive the ideology behind those actions.

Other than the medieval church, global academia has the fundamentals right, imho. The methods are flawed but the general goal is the right one.

The problem in the US is not a fundamental flaw in academia, but lack of political understanding that a state benefits from educated citizens and fundamental research that isn’t immediately monetisable. That resulted in this weird situation, where the most prestigious facilities are just sport centers with a side hustle in education.

In the future the methods of today’s global research will more likely be seen as something like greek philosophers. The goal of generating knowledge was right. The method of just writing down what your two remaining neurons, that haven’t drowned in wine yet, produced and never verifying it, was… let’s call it flawed from a modern perspective.

The word you are looking for is enthnicity. Enthnicity describes the (self-)perceived belonging to a population group. This is of course highly subjective.

There is undeniably perception of grouping in the US based on heritage, where it doesn’t really matter when your ancestors arrived, just from where. So from an American POV it makes sense to call him Italian, because he is in the same perceived group as all the people from Italy.

On the other hand from a European POV it doesn’t really matter, where your great grandparents come from. You are part of the US-Group, so you are American.

This is not an exclusive US Problem, but a general migration problem & it happens everywhere. Comments like yours are the reason, why people from migrated families feel like they are in-between cultures. Instead of writing snarky comments on the internet, just accept that your perception of ethnicity is part of your ethnicity and other people can have other perceptions.

The location of New Zealand is in a superposition that collapses, when observed (i.e. drawn on a map). The crux is that the superposition doesn’t just encompasses earth

There is a fine line between valid criticism of gender roles & sexism.

An example of the former would be, “Men are dangerous for women”. Of course not all men are dangerous, but it describes the experience of many women & how they have to navigate the world, to not be assaulted.

This one describes the dynamic of a relationship between individuals & assigns a thought pattern to one of those individuals, based on their gender.

Maybe I missed some nuances here & I would be glad to be enlightened, but this looks like plain sexism.