Adam Conover, yes. He is a comedian who made a show about explaining science and politics, and somehow his major is philosophy, something that has nearly nothing to do with comedy OR the topics he covers, which explains why he isn't funny OR good at presenting his information
I couldn’t force myself to watch that stream. AOC reminds me too much of my older sister, where she’ll do something new so that guys will drool over her doing something that they do. Meanwhile, I try to talk to her about anything I enjoy that’s similar and I get a handful of indifferent “That’s great”s and even flat out mockery. So transparent that this is solely a popularity move to seem relatable, but I will never feel relatable towards someone who uses her overpriced job to commit fraud on the dime of others.
".... while 27% think laws should strictly follow the teachings of the Quran." This statement refers to only Nigerian muslims. In other Islamic countries, it's usually higher.
This has nothing to do with CRT, in fact it's opposite of it; CRT believes that the majority racial group (white) is genetically preordained to oppress other groups, i.e. certain racial groups are inherently evil. In fact, the rules state that talking about simple racial facts ARE allowed. Stuff like black predisposition to more likely have sickle cell anemia or more fast-twitch muscle fibers. However, you CANNOT, for example, use these facts to argue that black people are BETTER or WORSE than other groups, because it's a superficial measurement of "goodness", as well as spits in the face of the traditional view of "all men created equal". Like James Damore stated in his memo, certain groups may behave differently, but we can use those differences to find alternate points of view or make products with different foci.
He’s part of the larger FunHaus channel, which used to be Inside Gaming. Funhaus was pretty good because it wasn’t as afraid to be non-PC with jokes compare to their parent company’s other channels, although it’s apparent how they lean based on some of their jokes. He was one of the original members that’s still there. Thankfully the funny ones that left have some good solo stuff and I can ignore the others that rotated in to replace them.
So at best they did the cardinal sin of programming and didn't test it. I'm not a CS guy, but couldn't they work around this by multiplying the input by 100, using an int instead of a float, then subtracting 75000, making it a float again, then dividing by 100?
The problem is that they just don't know, because most middle/high school classes don't tell you. You hear "Hitler was a big meanie face who tricked everyone into being fascists" or, even worse "Nazis were bad and everyone knew it and all the German soldiers were bad" and people just take that at face value and never think about how illogical that is. The big point I think most people miss is that part of the fears that allowed the Nazis to grab so much power was that Russia-funded communists tried to destabilize the government, tried to set the government buildings on fire, and made their own Red Guard IN Germany, and most Germans didn't want to make their country a puppet state for Russia. I only learned about this in college, and even then my big-brain teacher said "This wouldn't have happened if they just gave the power to the communists".
At least they're admitting that the sweeping crackdown was somewhat psychologically detrimental to the individual, but I'm not thinking they're gonna be giving any apologies for the net suffering they caused any time soon, or admitting the obvious truth of the benefits of having both social and familial relationships to create rational and stable human beings. Also, the subtle irony of a Stalinist hoarding of power that made nearly everyone's life worse is seen from the viewpoint of its supporters as "Hey, this group we defined as having a below-average life is now looking more in line with the average!"
I have a theory that the optimal healthcare system is being able to have both. This is what makes Canada "good" at healthcare. They can pay for the emergencies and anything you can wait for, but for the expensive, life-altering treatments that the government is unwilling to pay for, you just hop down to America and give them a nice check. Too bad living in Canada means having to pay more taxes, live in worse climate, have immediate access to less businesses, and limited freedom of press.
What an absolute malarkey title given how brutish China has been on allowing their companies to violate any foreign copyrights. China is stealing and has been stealing practically as much as possible from non-Chinese companies by disregarding international law and then using the fact that they have a huge market to get every big company on earth to bend over backwards for them to get in on it. Also this article touches on how having mostly foreign tech students is a problem but is too cowardly to say that this was a problem caused by colleges taking short term pocket money from foreign powers rather than investing in the future of America like IT IS MEANT TO DO.
BTW "the one with animals" is bestiality. and "No Human is Illegal" is a clear attempt to rewrite "illegal immigrant" with a more PR-friendly name like refugee or displaced person or some other romanticized name, but we should just as easily call them foreign criminals.
Erik is either incredibly ignorant or morally bankrupt. Killing a slaveowner for imprisoning you is self-defense (so slave rebellions can be morally justified but John Brown was a abolitionist terrorist that set back the movement several years), killing a random citizen (not a fascist btw, just a regular Republican) due to their political ideology is TERRORISM. But let's just assume he was a fascist, which is incorrect, but let's imagine. HE. HAS. NO. POWER. OVER. YOU. He's just a guy with a regular job letting other people know how he thinks. He's not a celebrity or politician or some puppeteer directly or indirectly causing harm to you. Killing him SETS YOUR MOVEMENT BACK. The "fascists" lose a man but gain 10 more after people realize that you kept saying "you're either with us or against us" and you committed LITERAL TERRORISM.
I'm not OP but that could be considered a different type of condidtioning, maybe even the reverse type as the one previously stated. Acting "grown up" from a young age usually signifies a environment where the child was told and given responsibilities that some his peers wouldn't experience until later in life, like possibly working at a family business or raising his younger siblings. Sometimes this maybe due to a single-parent household and poverty, but it may also be due to parental abuse, with the mother thinking it's the child's job to grow up, maybe giving them difficult or impossible tasks and then berating the child for not doing them perfectly. The parent gives the child too much agency for their actions; when you're smal land weak and relatively unskilled, you can't do that much. Soyboy conditioning I think is somewhat the opposite. It's often the symptom of helicopter parenting, where the mother does EVERYTHING for the child to a manic level. The mother gives them NO agency, so they continually act like a child. If you never have to cook for yourself, then you never learn to, and you become 30-year-old virgin who can button mash like a pro but can barely make a bowl of Mac and Cheese.
So Merriam-Webster has committed the cardinal sin of dictionary entries by using two opposites to define each other. Let me explain. If you define "impossible" as "not possible", that's fine if you use the entry for "possible" to explain what it means, but if you instead define it as "not impossible" you are no longer able to understand either concept if you didn't know either word before using the dictionary, and you've failed to do the one thing dictionaries are supposed to do. This kinda just shows how bunk PC/SJW/Queer Theory actually is; they've dumbed down what male/female identity is so much that you can only define either one as the reverse of the other, when for forever we just said the obvious. Males are sperm-producing, penis-having individuals and females are egg-producing, vagina-having individuals, and traits that are deemed masculine/feminine are ones that are more often than not seen in one sex over the other.
I can't believe the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM forgot "there's no such thing as a free lunch", one of the most common phrases repeated in Econ 101 lectures.