On comment threads, every day.
This reflective exercise has saved me many excessive fixations. And yes, sometimes I do need to make that snarky overly-researched comment that nobody will see.
The meme is correct. These days, this is 1.0 release with planned patches and DLC for a fully realized 2.0 after 12-24 months.
They offer reputation. Career advancement is highly dependent on publication history and impact. Getting into a prestigious publication means your work will more likely be read and cited. Because highly reputable journals can charge high publication fees (because it’s in such high demand), they get to set the industry norm, which other less reputable journals/publishers get to follow. It does cost money to develop and maintain that reputation for rigour and impact (i.e. good science). But yeah it’s exploitative AF. There are attempts for less profit-motivated publications… But making those rigorous while still being democratic is hard
Maybe they will stop screaming when we stop murdering them. https://www.statista.com/chart/30779/map-of-trans-and-gender-diverse-people-killed/
Interpretation note: there is a smaller list of cases where it’s confirmed they were murdered for being trans. There is a gray area between likely and unlikely that trans-hate was the motive.
China’s EV’s putting brakes on oil demand
The difference is less that it’s in some circumstances only marginally better. Rather, it’s more that when you advocate for better coverage in EU, the pushback might be more along the lines of “that’s too expensive or an inefficient use of highly limited taxpayer dollars, but I’m open to continuing to evaluate the impact and economics of it”. In the US, sometimes the pushback is “you don’t like it? Then GTFO, you communist traitor!”
Gotta love how the more “Applied” a field is, the more “Impure” it is.
Ukraine is doing fine building their own drones. They seem to have a fast iteration cycle with their growing drone industry. Their priority for foreign aid is artillery shells, missile systems, and vehicles/planes which is harder for them to produce en mass
Of course, it makes perfect sense to describe Canadian products as North American, but OP asks about “American” RPGs. It would be strange to call Canadian Bacon “American food”.
BioWare is Canadian
You’re literally advocating for stereotyping people according to those immutable characteristics. Disgusting.
Nice try, but no. That’s really not what I was saying. The conversation is about how environmental context (culture, history, positionality) influences experiences and how individuals with different experiences can contribute uniquely.
I thought diversity was strength. Guess it’s instead “diversity specifically of the types I define is strength, provided it’s my unique definition of strength (read: intellectual homogeneity)”.
Diversity has its strengths and weaknesses depending on context. For example ethno nationalism can lead to powerful states of a kind, but as an ideology it is inherently oppressive and dehumanizing, so I’d argue it’s ethically wrong. Being a particular race or gender is never ethically wrong, but ideologies certainly can be.
More thinly-veiled bigotry, essentially saying that race and gender determine ideology. Gross.
Again, deliberately misinterpreting the statement. Nobody is talking about race/sex being deterministic of ideology and your little trap conflating social groups and individual identity is transparent and silly.
You fail troll.
Differences like race/sex being only “superficial” and therefore unimportant is a disingenuous strawman. These attributes are also associated with substantial differences in experience, epistemologies, and even ideologies (white feminists can differ in ideology from black and Asian feminists), all of which can productively contribute to more and better solutions than if those diversities were not present.
Ideological diversity while certainly beneficial, can also hamper collaboration. Especially when one ideology dehumanized or embodies an existential threat to other members of the team. Some shared ideology around shared humanity and collaboration is needed right. Relatedly, a single ideology amongst one group can also be a point of productive focus. For example anti-abortion movements or abolishing slavery.
The makeup of the best team for the best jobs depends on the project as well, whether it’s a political science textbook, a cross-cultural advertising campaign, or a piece of universal design. A team with some diversity along ideological, cultural, gendered lines while also sharing commonalities can be better equipped to tackle a range of problems by mitigating glaring gaps
I don’t know why you’re drawing this line between ideology, race, and gender. Shit is intersectional.
Here is your example. We have whole institutions dedicated to diversity of ideology. It’s called Academia. Diversity of ideology is the OG diversity. It’s the vanilla default status quo of diversity.
I don’t believe you.
It’s not about whether or not the meme is dismissive of philosophy. It’s that the writer clearly doesn’t understand the basics of these fields and the kinds of questions they ask/answer, including science. Heck metaphysics isn’t even a separate field, it’s a sub-field of philosophy.
“You like to watch actors act, why don’t you go act.” Or more generally “You like to watch X performer perform Y, why don’t you go perform Y.”
Spectating and performing are two categorically different activities.
Or simply “Don’t yuck my yum, asshole.”
Don’t you mean appreciating the beauty in imperfections?
For most things where the person you’re talking to should know better than you, e.g. marginalized groups, field experts, professionals, etc. I might go with something like “Sorry, I don’t quite get it. Can you look up a definition to help me understand better?”
The comic is not implying that every single time a woman says no to man, that man will do something bad. It is saying that often when a woman wants to say no to a man, they have to do an internal calculation to answer questions like “Can I trust this man to respond okay to a No? How likely will they say something rude, or escalate to harassment? What do I do if he gets physically persistent? Is he going to get pissed off if I say no and come after me when I leave?”
Usually the answer is “he’s probably fine”, but women do have to go through the calculation much more than men typically. And that’s kinda fucked up.
The comic is saying “just say no” ignores/dismisses the non-negligible risk of just saying no.
Just because not everything needs to be political doesn’t mean things that are inherently political stop being politically consequential when you say it doesn’t have to be.
Elon in particular has used his wealth to overtly become a political figure. His political power comes from his wealth. Therefore supporting his wealth through your economic choices inherently supports his political activity.