That channel had a similar back and forth with badempanada if anyone is curious. I don’t remember the exact details but the video was something about downplaying climate collapse so I think their source of funding is red herring because regardless of where it comes from, they push out ridiculously bourgeois propaganda.
I started exercising again a little more than a week ago after recovering from a deadlifting injury. Taking it a bit slow and hoping I don’t hurt myself again.
I really hate the gym I am going to. They play very loud music. But I don’t have to pay to go there so not complaining too much.
UK seems very pathetic with how they have nothing but financial capital in their name but do not have the military to back it up and force other countries to play by their rules. They resorted to being US’ dogs for now but how long will this go on for?
Is there anything that Larouchites advocate for or against for the right reasons? Ever since their turn to “MAGA communism” and pandering to the reactionary white upper middle class Americans they have become indistinguishable from any other right-wing collective.
Yeah there is definitely a psychological element that pervades culturally. For example, for wisdom tooth removal, in most cases you don’t need general anaesthesia. Local anaesthesia suffices. But in the US at least general anaesthesia is chosen when it is not required. I am not sure if it is because people are scared of being operated while still being awake and aware, or if dentists (most of which are essentially small businesses) are doing it to milk more money out of people.
Most insane part for me is that the US gives zero fucks about this. Wealthy European countries at least have a facade with major cities having public transit and infratructure for bikes and things like that whereas the USA looks like it is making every citizen contribute to speedrunning climate collapse.
Due to World Bank’s and IMF’s designs a lot of poor countries are dependent of foreign aid for food. Practices used by Western Big Ag are unsustainable so it feels like the food basket for a large portion of the world is on a knife’s edge and will tip over with a single major weather event.
This is obviously written by a very young child. Why are they writing about topics like this? Seems a bit strange to make a 12-14 year old write a political epitaph.
Right now I’m just trying to get back to gym first. Because of an injury I haven’t exercised in a while. But it is super cold in the mornings which is making things very difficult.
I think it’s going to be reviewed better than that. I am thinking it will be 85 on Metacritic at least. The reason is that it is the first actually AAA looking game in the franchise as of late. With the way Sony is involved in it I expect it to be a decent single player game.
I actually Googled this and read some answers on Quora and Reddit. They say that the Weasley father worked in a department related to investigating objects ruled by muggles which was looked down upon and he did not get along with Draco Malfoy’s father and one more Ministry figure whose name I can’t recall. He was the sole breadwinner and had many children because of which he was poor. No one knows why the mother despite being a decently talented witch does not work. So it just looks like they are poor for the plot. Same reason why Harry does not use his inherited wealth to help Ron and his family, depsite them taking care of him as he were a part of the family. They are poor because they were meant to be poor. It is not because of any injustice. Some people are rich and some people are poor and the poors should just accept it and embrace the cutesy quaint and rustic aeathetic that comes with being poor.
It’s not exclusive to HP but in it not describing the epistemology leaves a hole noticeably larger than other franchises.
In Witcher 3 for example there is magic but its much more limited in scope. There are kings and queens with armies so you can guess the class structure of the society.
In HP the reaches of magic are like Calvinball where it doesn’t follow any rules and just does whatever the author felt like. A young girl has access to a handy widget that can turn back time with no side effects at all. HP is extremely poorly thought out.
Recently ran into someone'e personal website. This is the footer on it:
Clicking on the hyperlink takes you to:
This gave me the idea to add a similar prompt directed towards Americans that links to: https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html
I didn't know that the American Christian movie industry had the resources, time or know-how to make a knockoff of Finding Nemo. I guess it makes sense considering it's the religion of choice of the settler population there and is used as a cudgel to enforce "American values" or whatever.
Well it's true that emissions from flights of all kinds are a massive problem. But I am trying to think of a scenario where this is helpful and I can't. Seems entirely performative.
I would much rather be able to take high speed rail than a flight.
The US has introduced sweeping export controls that will severely complicate efforts by Chinese companies to develop cutting-edge technologies with military applications, in one of the toughest actions President Joe Biden has taken against China.
The commerce department on Friday unveiled restrictions that will make it very hard for Chinese companies to obtain or manufacture advanced computer chips and will slow their progress in artificial intelligence.
The measures are also designed to make it much tougher for China to develop supercomputers with military applications that range from modelling nuclear weapons to development of hypersonic weapons.
The controls mark a new attempt to decouple China from the US in cutting-edge technologies. They come days before the Chinese Communist party holds its 20th national congress at which President Xi Jinping is expected to seal a third term as leader.
Paul Triolo, a China and tech expert at Albright Stonebridge, a consultancy, said the action was a “major watershed” in US-China relations and in the increasingly intense technology competition between the two countries.
“The US has essentially declared war on China’s ability to advance the country’s use of high-performance computing for economic and security gains,” said Triolo.
The controls will hit Chinese companies in multiple ways. They will bar US companies from exporting critical chip manufacturing tools to China, which will affect groups such as Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp, Yangtze Memory Technologies Co and ChangXin Memory. They will also prohibit US citizens and companies from providing any kind of direct or indirect support for semiconductor fabrication plants in China.
The US also put YMTC — along with 30 other Chinese entities — on a list of “unverified” companies, paving the way for possible inclusion on a separate blacklist called the “entity list” that would effectively bar US companies from supplying them with technology.
“The administration’s strategy is to deny China the capability to indigenise its semiconductor industry. If the US is successful, this causes a huge problem for Beijing’s strategy to be a world-class player,” said Martijn Rasser, a security and technology expert at the Center for a New American Security, a think-tank.
Underscoring the scope of the controls, the US is using a far-reaching mechanism called the “foreign direct product rule” to make it harder for China to develop and maintain supercomputers and AI technology.
The rule — which was first used by the Trump administration against Chinese technology group Huawei — in effect bars any US or non-US company from supplying targeted Chinese entities with hardware or software that contains, or has been manufactured with, American technology.
But in an effort to reduce supply chain disruptions, the administration will carve out an exception for chipmaking facilities in China owned by companies from the US or allied countries that are exporting chips.
“The PRC [People’s Republic of China] has poured resources into developing supercomputing capabilities and seeks to become a world leader in artificial intelligence by 2030. It is using these capabilities to monitor, track and surveil their own citizens, and fuel its military modernisation,” said Thea Kendler, a senior commerce department official. “Our actions will protect US national security.”
Analysts said China’s memory chipmakers, including YMTC and ChangXin Memory, would feel the most immediate blow.
“They are basically doomed,” said Mark Li, a semiconductor analyst at Bernstein in Hong Kong. “It will be very difficult for them to get the equipment they need.
But the ban on the export of semiconductor tools could significantly hurt Chinese chipmakers more broadly because US equipment makers have a stranglehold in a few key niches.
Triolo said there would be “many losers”, including US chip design leaders such as Nvidia and AMD, and tool makers including Applied Materials and Lam Research. He said the rules would also hit non-US players, including ASML, the Dutch company that produces the most advanced semiconductor tools, and TSMC, the Taiwanese contract foundry company.
One chip industry executive said the US was attacking China “from all angles”.
“The stunning thing about this move is that they have assembled a whole array of tools,” the executive said. “They are not just targeting military applications, they are trying to block the development of China’s technology power by any means.”
For those unable to watch, the clip is from before the war began. Biden says that in the event of a Russian invasion into Ukraine, there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. "We will bring an end to it."
The reporter asks how they would do it since it's outside US jurisdiction. "I promise you we will be able to do it."
Edit: [Full interview (03:42)](https://piped.kavin.rocks/watch?v=OS4O8rGRLf8)
> The Family Code went through a rigorously democratic process. From the first process of consultation, where more than half of the Family Code was modified, to the second part where through the mass participation of Cuban people over 40% was modified, the collective process of the enactment of legislation becomes clear.
>
> The Family Code was also written in understandable language so that the Cuban people could easily comprehend the legalities involved. The code is intended not just for use in courts of law, but also as an educational document for families to use as a guideline to understand their rights and responsibilities.
>
> The final step of the process, the national referendum, will serve to legitimize the Family Code. It doesn’t impose any kind of model on Cuban families; rather, it protects all people and families, and future families, as required under the Cuban constitution.
Tweet:
> BREAKING: China has announced the end to the following cooperation with the US
>
> 1) Calls with leaders
> 2) Defense meetings
> 3) Maritime Security Consultation
> 4) Climate Change Talks
> 5) Anti-Drug cooperation
> 6) Transnational crimes
> 7) Illegal Immigration
[**Official announcement from the Foreign Ministry of China.**](http://new.fmprc.gov.cn/zyxw/202208/t20220805_10735604.shtml)
::: spoiler Full article
*August 2, 2022 at 10:52 a.m. EDT*
Some 43 years ago, the United States Congress overwhelmingly passed — and President Jimmy Carter signed into law — the Taiwan Relations Act, one of the most important pillars of U.S. foreign policy in the Asia Pacific.
The Taiwan Relations Act set out America’s commitment to a democratic Taiwan, providing the framework for an economic and diplomatic relationship that would quickly flourish into a key partnership. It fostered a deep friendship rooted in shared interests and values: self-determination and self-government, democracy and freedom, human dignity and human rights.
And it made a solemn vow by the United States to support the defense of Taiwan: “to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means … a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States.”
Today, America must remember that vow. We must stand by Taiwan, which is an island of resilience. Taiwan is a leader in governance: currently, in addressing the covid-19 pandemic and championing environmental conservation and climate action. It is a leader in peace, security and economic dynamism: with an entrepreneurial spirit, culture of innovation and technological prowess that are envies of the world.
Yet, disturbingly, this vibrant, robust democracy — named one of the freest in the world by Freedom House and proudly led by a woman, President Tsai Ing-wen — is under threat.
In recent years, Beijing has dramatically intensified tensions with Taiwan. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has ramped up patrols of bombers, fighter jets and surveillance aircraft near and even over Taiwan’s air defense zone, leading the U.S. Defense Department to conclude that China’s army is “likely preparing for a contingency to unify Taiwan with the PRC by force.”
The PRC has also taken the fight into cyberspace, launching scores of attacks on Taiwan government agencies each day. At the same time, Beijing is squeezing Taiwan economically, pressuring global corporations to cut ties with the island, intimidating countries that cooperate with Taiwan, and clamping down on tourism from the PRC.
In the face of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) accelerating aggression, our congressional delegation’s visit should be seen as an unequivocal statement that America stands with Taiwan, our democratic partner, as it defends itself and its freedom.
Our visit — one of several congressional delegations to the island — in no way contradicts the long-standing one-China policy, guided by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, the U.S.-China Joint Communiques and the Six Assurances. The United States continues to oppose unilateral efforts to change the status quo.
Our visit is part of our broader trip to the Pacific — including Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan — focused on mutual security, economic partnership and democratic governance. Our discussions with our Taiwanese partners will focus on reaffirming our support for the island and promoting our shared interests, including advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific region. America’s solidarity with Taiwan is more important today than ever — not only to the 23 million people of the island but also to millions of others oppressed and menaced by the PRC.
Thirty years ago, I traveled in a bipartisan congressional delegation to China, where, in Tiananmen Square, we unfurled a black-and-white banner that read, “To those who died for democracy in China.” Uniformed police pursued us as we left the square. Since then, Beijing’s abysmal human rights record and disregard for the rule of law continue, as President Xi Jinping tightens his grip on power.
The CCP’s brutal crackdown against Hong Kong’s political freedoms and human rights — even arresting Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen — cast the promises of “one-country, two-systems” into the dustbin. In Tibet, the CCP has long led a campaign to erase the Tibetan people’s language, culture, religion and identity. In Xinjiang, Beijing is perpetrating genocide against Muslim Uyghurs and other minorities. And throughout the mainland, the CCP continues to target and arrest activists, religious-freedom leaders and others who dare to defy the regime.
We cannot stand by as the CCP proceeds to threaten Taiwan — and democracy itself.
Indeed, we take this trip at a time when the world faces a choice between autocracy and democracy. As Russia wages its premeditated, illegal war against Ukraine, killing thousands of innocents — even children — it is essential that America and our allies make clear that we never give in to autocrats.
When I led a congressional delegation to Kyiv in April — the highest-level U.S. visit to the besieged nation — I conveyed to President Volodymyr Zelensky that we admired his people’s defense of democracy for Ukraine and for democracy worldwide.
By traveling to Taiwan, we honor our commitment to democracy: reaffirming that the freedoms of Taiwan — and all democracies — must be respected.
:::
---
This was the basis of a tweet her account posted as well. She says:
> Our visit [...] in no way contradicts the long-standing one-China policy
However there is stuff like:
> By traveling to Taiwan, we honor our commitment to democracy: reaffirming that the freedoms of Taiwan — and all democracies — must be respected.
Can't think of this as anything but a provocation. Also Washington Post being literally just a mouthpiece of the US state. Not that it's new or surprising.
>@IntelWalrus
>
>👀 Apparent confirmation that SPAR19 is actually heading to Taipei from an ACARS message that was ust sent! Mission controllers asking about IFF encryption also included the flight's destination of 'RCSS' which is Taipei Songshan Airport (ICAO: RCSS). #Pelosi #Taiwan
EDIT: Apparently she has landed: https://nitter.42l.fr/IntelWalrus/status/1554478603974447107#m
::: spoiler Article
HONG KONG—Billionaire Jack Ma plans to relinquish control of Ant Group Co., people familiar with the matter said, part of the fintech giant’s effort to move away from affiliate Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. BABA 1.32%▲ after more than a year of extraordinary pressure from Chinese regulators.
The authorities halted Ant’s $34 billion-plus IPO in 2020 at the eleventh hour and are forcing the technology firm to reorganize as a financial holding company regulated by China’s central bank. As the overhaul progresses, Ant is taking the opportunity to reduce the company’s reliance on Mr. Ma, who founded Alibaba.
Mr. Ma, a 57-year-old former English teacher and one of China’s most prominent entrepreneurs, has been the target of government action that appears designed to reduce his influence and the power of his companies. He has controlled Ant since he carved its precursor assets out of Alibaba more than a decade ago. Over time he built it into a company that owns the Alipay payments network with more than one billion users, an investing platform that houses what was once the world’s largest money-market fund, and a large microlending business. Ant was expected to be valued at more than $300 billion had it gone public.
Advertisement - Scroll to Continue
Diminishing his ownership could put back a potential revival of Ant’s IPO for a year or more. Chinese securities regulations require a timeout on public listings for companies that have gone through a recent change in control.
Mr. Ma doesn’t hold an executive role at Ant or sit on its board, but is a larger-than-life figure at the company and currently controls 50.52% of its shares via an entity in which he holds the dominant position. He could relinquish his control by transferring some of his voting power to other Ant officials including Chief Executive Eric Jing, after which they would collectively control the company, some of the people said.
Ant told regulators of Mr. Ma’s intention to cede control as the company prepared to convert into a financial holding company, the people familiar with the matter said. Regulators didn’t demand the change but have given their blessing, the people said. Ant is required to map out its ownership structure when it applies to become a financial holding company.
The People’s Bank of China has yet to officially accept Ant’s application to become a financial holding company. Any change of control isn’t likely to materialize until Ant’s restructuring is complete.
Advertisement - Scroll to Continue
Mr. Ma has personally contemplated ceding control of Ant for years, some of the people said. He’s been concerned about the corporate-governance risks arising from being too reliant on a single dominant figure atop the company, those people said.
The charismatic founder addressed those risks at Alibaba years ago by setting up a partnership structure to ensure a sustainable succession as its first generation of leaders moved on. He gave up the CEO job at Alibaba in 2013 and stepped down as chairman in 2019 when he retired from the company. He currently holds less than 5% of Alibaba’s shares.
The need to end Mr. Ma’s control at Ant gained new urgency as the souring regulatory environment spurred Ant and Alibaba to cut their ties. On Tuesday, Alibaba revealed seven top Ant executives had stepped down from the Alibaba Partnership, the top echelon of management at Alibaba and its subsidiaries. The two companies also terminated long-running commercial and data-sharing agreements that had given Alibaba an edge.
Mr. Ma previously held back from giving up control of Ant because he didn’t want to delay the company’s plans for an initial public offering, some of the people familiar with the matter said. The scuttling of those plans—after Mr. Ma laid into financial regulators in a speech—removed that obstacle and created a fresh opportunity for Mr. Ma to resolve the matter, those people said.
Advertisement - Scroll to Continue
A change in control could mean that Ant will have to wait a while longer before it tries going public again. Chinese securities regulations state that companies can’t list domestically on the country’s A-share market if they have had a change of controlling shareholder in the past three years—or in the past two years if listing on Shanghai’s Nasdaq-like STAR Market.
Hong Kong also imposes a waiting period but only for one year. Ant’s scuttled IPO plan included simultaneous listings in the former British colony as well as Shanghai.
Ant is in no rush to attempt an IPO again and intends to keep its options open, some of the people said. The company could consider other moves including spinning off units that could in turn be listed themselves, those people said.
Mr. Ma controls Ant through an entity called Hangzhou Yunbo Investment Consultancy Co., which in turn controls two vehicles that together own a little more than half of Ant’s shares.
Mr. Ma has a 34% stake in Hangzhou Yunbo. The other 66% is split evenly among Ant’s CEO, Mr. Jing, former CEO Simon Hu, and veteran Alibaba executive and former Ant nonexecutive director Fang Jiang.
The billionaire originally owned all of the entity. He transferred two-thirds of the shares to the three executives in August 2020 before Ant filed its IPO prospectus. At the same time, Mr. Ma was given veto power over Hangzhou Yunbo’s decisions, according to the prospectus. The arrangement was designed to give the other executives more say in Ant’s affairs without triggering an effective change in control that could delay the IPO, a person familiar with the matter said.
Advertisement - Scroll to Continue
Mr. Ma could cede control of Ant by diluting his voting power in Hangzhou Yunbo via giving up his veto and transferring some of his stake to other executives, the person said.
Mr. Hu, who resigned as Ant’s CEO last year and recently retired, and Ms. Jiang, who left Ant’s board last year, will likely exit Hangzhou Yunbo and be replaced by other Ant executives. In addition to Mr. Jing, Ant’s most senior executives are now Executive Vice President Xiaofeng Shao, and Chief Technology Officer Xingjun Ni. Mr. Shao is also the general secretary of Ant’s Communist Party committee, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Ni was instrumental in founding Alipay in 2004.
Mr. Ma’s control over Ant goes back more than a decade to the period when he was CEO of Alibaba. In 2011, it emerged that he had carved the payments business Alipay out of Alibaba without the knowledge of key shareholders including Yahoo Inc. and SoftBank Group Corp.
Alibaba argued the transfer was needed for Alipay to secure a Chinese license that might not have been granted if the company had foreign shareholders. Following the move, China’s central bank in May 2011 gave Alipay a license to operate as a payment-services company. Yahoo and SoftBank were later compensated by an agreement that allowed them to share economic interests in Ant through their ownership in Alibaba.
In 2014, Ant Financial Services Group was created to hold Alipay and other financial businesses including consumer lending. The company in 2020 changed its name to Ant Group.
Write to Jing Yang at Jing.Yang@wsj.com and Raffaele Huang at raffaele.huang@wsj.com
:::
Tweets:
> The propaganda over Sri Lanka is ridiculous. US state propaganda outlet VOA, British mouthpiece BBC, and Indian media are blaming China for a supposed "debt trap"
>
> But in reality Sri Lanka owes more external debt to the US-dominated Asian Development Bank, Japan, and World Bank
Earlier in the thread (only two tweets in it) he also talks about how media is trying to show the protests as pro-US when they are not:
> [Derek J. Grossman] worked at the CIA, DIA, and NSA, and is at Pentagon think tank the RAND Corporation, and he is portraying the protests in Sri Lanka as an anti-China (pro-US) color revolution 🧐
> This bill requires the Department of State to periodically report to Congress on whether and how China's government, the Chinese Communist Party, or any other Chinese entity has provided support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The report must address specified matters, including any efforts to (1) help Russia's government or Russian entities evade sanctions or export controls, (2) provide Russia with technology to support Russia's military or intelligence capabilities, or (3) further Russia's disinformation and propaganda efforts.
NATO alleged that Russia messacred civilians in Bucha in cold blood. The images which served as evidence were pretty gut wrenching. You would expect that the media woild talk about it for more than two days but nope. You won't hear about it anywhere.
Was there any investigation done into it?
It might a bit conspiratorial on my part but this post is super uninteresting. Feels like some intern at a Marvel PR department made this post on a schedule and then it got upvoted by bots to drive engagement. The comments in the thread are just as uninteresting as the post.
[Link to thread.](https://reddit.invak.id/r/Eldenring/comments/txc8sb/11_years_later_and_we_still_get_wrecked_in_pvp/) At least some replies are funny.
.png)
Thank you so much