Short on the AI stocks before it crash!

On short term the Nazis may have profited, but on the long term, all the potential talents were killed and brain drain occurred even before the war.

Yup. I have a similar argument before. If one reads more about Hitler and the Nazis, they are actually not different to any of the standard third world dictators like Idi Amin and Muammar Gaddafi. The difference is that the Nazis were only more powerful because they inherited a working institution-- especially the Prussian-based military-- while third world countries had to start from scratch after decolonisation.

The Nazis like other dictators are very inefficient. I am reading Hannah Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil”. The book goes through the convoluted bureaucracy and logistics of the Holocaust. Different pen pushers and administrators arguing who should be able to use the trains for their own departmental needs. What struck me the most is that the Nazis wasted so much effort transporting so-called undesirables to concentration camps, when their own soldiers are struggling to get supplies and reinforcements to the frontlines!

More importantly, as you correctly mentioned, Nazi Germany struggled to feed their own people. As a matter of fact, there is strong evidence that Hitler started the war in Europe to stave off the looming economic crisis, which his own economic minister warned him of, thanks to endless government spending particularly with the re-armement. That economic crisis had been warded (temporarily of course) by plundering the resources of their conquered territories.

Yes, for the general population. Otherwise, companies will stop the psychological pricing. Same with corporate snooping to see our shopping and grocery habits and then send us with targeted ads.

It never works on me. I was taught at a very early age that pricing down by one cent of one dollar is a psychological trick and that I should round up to the nearest whole number.

To be fair, Giorgia Meloni has somehow been acting more moderate than expected.

Some people are just that daft. They change or adopt an entire worldview simply because of one pet peeve they have.

It was brought up in the movie, “Lincoln”, that the “Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection” by Charles Darwin was already published at the height of the US Civil War. Somehow, I disassociate the two events as being on completely different time period.

Trump is very unpredictable on Ukraine. He said he will support Ukraine but who knows. But some say he will withdraw support from Taiwan, which is unlikely because he never had good relations with Xi and China. As for Israel-Palestine, we know where stands on that.

For me as non-American, I am more concerned with geopolitics. I wish Trump would provide support to Ukraine. But if he doesn’t, at least he will stand against China. I understand many Americans are tired of over twenty years of hawkish foreign policies with corporate and imperialist agenda, but if Trump withdraws from Europe, at least he should pivot towards China. It balances out between complete isolationism and imperialism (I believe on a case by case basis of interventionism as part of just war theory, like the US entry into World War 2 and intervention on Yougoslavia).

Why are American conservatives such a bunch of loonies? Conservatives in other developed countries allow abortion in cases of clear danger to the health of the mother and/or the fetus/baby. American conservatives is as bad the Taliban.

And yet they wonder why populism and extremism is on the rise…

For example, I definitely see the decrease in frequency, or not at all, on Reddit philosophy getting into frontpage despite having millions of subscribers. Many posts from r/philosophy often would gain thousands of up votes landing them into the front page. However, since Reddit’s crack down on bot activities, I see r/philosophy posts getting only a fraction of the number of up votes they used to get, which makes almost none of the posts go into the front page. It is clear evidence that bots manipulate the votes.

I don’t know about you, but others also noticed completely innocuous and benign comments just getting a downvote. Before I would chalk it up to people just down voting for no reason or to downvote others to propel their own content at the expense of others; but after what transpired with Reddit’s crackdown on bot activities and user participation just so happened to decreased significantly? One would have to admit or acknowledge there is deliberate manipulation on what contents get to be seen or promoted long before and even as we speak.

I know some people down vote and don’t discuss, but it’s very strange in a political discussion when you don’t get a pushback but getting so many downvotes.

My dude, there are plenty of actual automated bots on Reddit. IIRC when Reddit cracked down hard on bot accounts recently, over half of users and participation in many subreddits also decreased. That alone says that there is artificial engagement on Reddit rather than genuine human interaction (which vindicates the dead Internet theory). It explains a lot as to why a very innocent and neutral comment somehow gets a downvote: they are just bots downvoting.

Even here in Lemmy, there are downvotes on the same benign comments and no explanation as to why someone would disagree. But even if the comment is political in nature, there are downvotes but no feedback as to why one would disagree. There is a post on c/climate on European Greens calling for Jill Stein not to run for US presidential elections because she would just siphon the votes from liberals and progressives even though she will not win. And many comments on that post are getting half or a third of downvotes, but there are no accompanying disagreeing comments to explain the disagreement. It is clear that there are bots in that post who are trying to downplay the repercussions of Stein running to US elections and democracy.

I wonder what the biodiversity was like in that period.

I just want to say, what’s up with the comments here getting copious amount of downvotes but no feedback as to why they disagree with the comments? Could it be bad faith actors trying to downplay the criticism of Stein, and wants her to stay on the race?

I was going say that maybe Putin has a kompromat on Stein which is why she is buddy with an autocrat, but now that you mentioned she took away with donations, Stein is just a genuinely greedy thief.

To play the devil’s advocate, if you are an employer you would want to find out why the person has been unemployed. Was he unreliable as a person before? Was he combative with his previous employer and colleagues? Was he actually in prison all this time? What if this guy is a corporate spy?

There is plenty of anti-work circlejerk in lemmy, and they are not completely wrong, but there are employers who do act in good faith. And certainly as an employer, they do not want to hire a person who was fired for stealing from their previous workplace. Which is why a huge employment gap is certainly a red flag from an employer’s perspective. And which is why it’s always important to leave a company on good terms. Because even if you left the previous job to genuinely care for a family member, you have someone to vouch for you to the prospective new employer.

Of course there is more tit for tat deal, but North Korea will not send troops to combat if they think they will not gain anything from it militarily.

Right, people scoff at North Korean presence, but I doubt the North Korean soldiera would be used in human wave tactic as the Russians do. North Korea is still an independent sovereign entity, and the last thing they want is to let their troops be used by Russians in a shitty way. It obvious that North Korea will want to gain combat experience, the same way that South Korea sent troops to Vietnam fifty years before.