Yeah it’s essentially letting China win by default…

That’s one pair of philosophies that creep me out both ways. Both the anti natalists and pro natalists.

Deciding for yourself is one thing, imposing your choice on others is maddening.

I don’t know if the comment quite raises to the level of anti natalist though. Maybe it’s grading on a curve of reading some more hard core anti natalists, but that comment felt tame and felt like they wouldn’t necessarily object to a couple having one child or even two, being somewhat below the replacement level…

Well, here’s me pinning my hopes on your interpretation. A few more moderate leaders in the world would be a gigantic relief after so many years of how things have been going. I mostly grew up the last time the world swung a bit more moderate and would be ecstatic to feel that way again.

Is it the case that the “they” that want a more moderate leader are consistent with the “they” that actually get to make the call?

I think the US has sunk it’s own ship without any particular effort by BRICS frankly.

But what frame of reference?

Or stealing someone else’s spaceship time machine

They will require the requester to prove they control the standard http(s) ports, which isn’t possible with any nat.

It won’t work for such users, but also wouldn’t enable any sort of false claims over a shared IP.

If you can get their servers to connect to that IP under your control, you’ve earned it

Yeah but their violence in Ukraine dilutes NATO military attention, even if they aren’t that powerful a direct military ally.

I suspect the concern is that no one, including China itself knows how strong they would be in a military conflict, since they haven’t been in an at scale conflict in living memory, using economic power instead to great effect.

If they are really wanting to violently assert their view on Taiwan, they want global attention divided.

So your take is that because the US has misbehaved, then Russia should misbehave harder? Not that the nations should behave better in general…

With the caveat that we can accommodate everyone so long as sufficient people put in their fair share of effort. In an ideal world that will mean very short working hours and/or nicely early retirement/late entry into the work force.

Certainly the usual talking heads are spoiled rich guys that have never known labor and have not done their fair share, but it is a difficult thing to balance to make sure we do take care of each other but make sure enough people are engaged to successfully do that

Having a head of state immune from criminal prosecution seems to be a thing Americans wouldn’t abide… right?

Simple, you are so awesome, remember that you owe god one and even when a bunch of people are saying to be careful, listen to me because I’m the word of God, even though I’ll try to assert some false humility by claiming I’m not persuading, just “encouraging” you to do the things I say god says…

The whole “my word comes from God” should be one of the biggest sins of they were at all close to reasonable.

You have many voices speaking to you Sir, but there is only ONE voice that matters. HIS voice

And, conveniently, since he isn’t actually talking to you, I’ll let my voice tell you what HIS voice is saying.

This sounds like a whole lot of convoluted bullshit to use Plex locally and “looking local” through VPN solutions when you could just roll a Jellyfin instance and do things a more straightforward way…

I don’t personally know, but as far as I could tell, people in the USA were largely ok with the Vietnam war, until they started to draft people to send to Vietnam who never wanted to be in a military.

If a protest of a billion people happens, then it cannot be ignored by the media.

I know, it was hyperbole, but the point is that if 12 million people are on the street, it’s not that the 12 million people need to get people’s attention, they are indicative that the people already have that perspective and are showing it in the streets.

A small protest has a goal of getting attention on a problem that people may lack awareness. A multi-million person protest isn’t about a need to raise awareness anymore, it’s about showing the awareness and commitment that is already there. For whatever volume of people actively protest, you can be sure there’s a singnificant multiple of that number of people who agree with the protestors but didn’t take it to the streets for one reason or another.

Well I meant the more rhetorical “pushing”, but yes, some of the activity of the claimed non-violence seems a bit violent.

I would say that I doubt you can have millions of people protest and manage to be completely non-violent. Some folks will take it to violence in the name of the cause, some will opportunisticly do it under the cover of the movement, and finally some might “false flag” to try to discredit the movement.