I used to not want chat bots because they were bad. I can imagine situations where I would prefer a chat bots over humans. For example, if it's a niche problem that a human would be unaware of and would have to look up, read, and verify taking a long time to respond, I would definitely want a chat bot or a bot assisted human.
You can do it with whatever is claimed as "scientifically approved" and works every time... because the only time one has to invoke such nonsense is if it doesn't really work... so then it has to involve your placebo and biases.
Frederick Matthias Alexander (of the Alexander Technique fame) used 3 mirrors to diagnose and fix his bad posture leading to vocal rsi, so I am certain that this is a great idea. It would be nice if someone came up with a more smarter solution for this.
True. And nothing of value will be lost for most people and they will be less prone to propaganda-driven thinking... freeing them from many mental prisons. True bilinguals are naturally free of this, as I have written here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35684559
Dollar is backed by the US military. A credible dedollarization threat will mean that the US will use it's military might to stop it in any way it can. Saddam tried it, Gaddafi tried it... Iran and Venezuala have been trying it and Russia, China and now some middle eastern superpowers have been toying with it.
So far, none of them have had any teeth and it is unlikely that it will happen anytime soon (not in the next 50-100 years).
The dollar is also backed by everyone already having infrastructure set up to accept USD, and both the people to buy from, and the people to sell to already having USD, or wanting to get USD.
sure but the Libyan people started the civil war and there is no evidence any of Gaddafi's crazy gold schemes had anything to do with the civil war (or later western intervention)
With enough weapons, psyops, and funding, you can start a civil war anywhere. With overwhelming military force, you can make the civil war end in the way you want.
Consider that if the US was in Libya's relative standing, an external actor of such magnitude could easy have interfered to make Jan. 6 into the start of a civil war. If then you have a foreign country getting involved militarily, it can end however you want. This is true of basically any country in the world.
The parent comment is conspiratorial.
The Iraq invasion was stupid and immoral but there's no evidence it had anything to do with currency plans.
The Euro is indeed most likely to overtake the US dollar (although not anytime soon) but they are likely to remain close allies and the dollars status as a reserve currency isn't all upside anyways(it makes our exports less competitive)
Because control of the Euro is split between lots of argumentative, economically-varying countries who are instinctively more interventionist than the US.
The article you link seems to be criticizing it for their criticism of Ukraine for human rights abuses. It has been documenting what has been happening in Ukraine for a long time, in the Donbas and Luhansk regions. It has significantly reduced it in the past few years.
It's a faux agency used for corrupt western influence in the guise of "human rights". India banned it for good reasons.
> It has been documenting what has been happening in Ukraine for a long time, in the Donbas and Luhansk regions.
Just so we're all clear — what has been happening in Ukraine for a long time is russian soldiers have been using force to try to annex Ukrainian territory.
The kremlin denied this for the better part of a decade, but have recently admitted that those little green men were actually russian soldiers.
Amnesty International don't get even half the criticism they deserve.
AI didn't criticize actual human rights abuses by Ukraine. They criticized Ukraine using abandoned civilian infrastructure as military bases near the frontlines (empty schools, malls etc).
The best possible interpretation is that it was hopelessly naive ("why don't they just camp in a empty field so Russia can kill them more precisely?") but more likely they tried to both-sides a war which simply does not have two valid sides.
Being able to think in multiple languages frees the mind from thinking in language altogether. This is easy to deduce with reasoning and I can confirm it (to myself) from experience. What psychological "science" has to say about it makes me question their study than anything.
It is important to remember however that not all bilinguals are equal. The languages have to be different enough. English, German and Swedish (all Germanic languages with very similar grammer) doesn't give you much freedom in comparision to German and Mandarin.
Find people who are fluent (i.e. they can think in different languages) in two languages that are far apart in the language tree and run the study again.
Aside from that, don't underestimate the amount of thinking we do without language. What do we call that - raw braincode? So in that sense, we're all bilingual, even those only speaking English. I.e. you can think "I'm going down to the post office to post a letter with a stamp on it" without language.
True. But for single-language speakers (and even some bilinguals who haven't thought about this), it is easier to conflate the raw thinking and the language they associate with it (which we know happens after the fact)... because they only have one language to work with. A bilingual on the other hand will understand the concept instantly if they were to think about something as themselves in one language and the same thing as themselves in another language... and they don't have to rely on poorly designed studies to know these things.
Also, depending on how integrated the different language personalities are (probably depends on whether they learnt the language as a child or as an adult), they should also easily be able to see that they are not one personality but at least two personalities embodied in one being (which can then be taken further into understanding that what we think of our "self" is made up of many different personalities based on different contexts... which is all acquired from upbringing).
