Even when I see Elrond in LotR, that’s actually just Agent Smith in a funny costume.

There’s a reason so many poker players wear sunglasses.

Anyway, try to preempt your emotional reaction. There’s always many different flavors of reactions we can have to something really negative, which normally depends heavily on mood. By default, this all just runs unconsciously, but it doesn’t have to. Of the many potential options, like anger, sadness, condescending disdain, arrogant bemusement or surprise, you can try to consciously pick one and channel your feelings towards it instead of just letting your feelings run wild.

Or you can just practice a proper poker face, but that can be really hard. Doable though, just takes a lot of practice. Playing poker would be an effective way to get that practice.

This thread is really making me realize how many people just don’t know what critical thinking is… :\

Problem solving is not the same as critical thinking. No puzzle or strategy game, that I can think of, has any significant critical thinking component to it.

Wait, just thought of one exception. Social deduction games, like Among Us, when played with live chat, will train critical thinking. Critical thinking is about figuring out if this information is lying to you (edit: or otherwise flawed in some way) or not, and if so, how.

That’s a region. It’s also not what you said, you said rust bowl. You know bowls and belts are different things, right? Belts hold your pants up, bowls are dishes you eat food out of.

You read too much bullshit. The US is the second-largest manufacturer on the planet, after China. We have quite a lot of industry still. Nor was “rust bowl” ever a term, which you’d know if you were an American.

If Russian production is so plentiful, where are all the T-90s? Seems to me a major producer of materiel wouldn’t be needing to field its T-64’s in a modern conflict.

… remember the Rust Bowl? lol You should do your homework a little better.

Now I will agree that it takes years, absolutely. Not decades though, which is what you said earlier. Also, fortunately, the process of scaling up armaments production was already started, about two years ago.

Scratch? No, not even close. A reduction and an elimination are not the same thing.

Decade? Probably not, unless you’re trying to spin up domestic production from nothing.

Few years maybe. Depends who you buy them from and how developed their industry is. S Korea does a lot of artillery production. US has its fair share if you want jets. Everyone’s got small arms, trucks, stuff like that.

You see, weapons do not grow on trees. Instead, you need to allocate resources, to either construct them yourself, or purchase them from other people who do. This is usually done with money.

… how many quail eggs are needed to make a decent sized omelet anyway? A dozen?

Finer point, but it’s not measuring independent reasoning, afaik they’re still fully incapable of that. This test is measuring esoteric knowledge, like hummingbird anatomy and the ability to translate ancient Palmyran writing.

Current LLMs should eventually be able to ace this sort of test, as their databases grow. They could still be incapable of independent reasoning, though.

A test for independent reasoning could be something like giving it all the evidence for a never-before-discussed criminal case and asking if the accused is innocent or guilty based off the evidence. This would require a large amount of context and understanding of human societies, and the ability to infer from that what the evidence represents. Would it understand that a sound alibi means the accused is likely innocent, would it actually understand the simple concept that a physical person cannot be in two different places simultaneously, unlike how a quantum particle can seem to be? A person understands this very intuitively, but an LLM does not yet comprehend what “location” even is, even if it can provide a perfect definition of the term from a dictionary and talk about it by repeating others’ conversations.

Anyways, still an interesting project.

Pretty much summed it up.

I think it’s often personal, as opposed to objective. A lot of people simply like it and do not want to lose access to something they like.

Certainly. But anti-elitist sentiment is broader than just this country, as is anti-capitalist sentiment. There’s a broad coalition of people that would celebrate something like this for a variety of reasons. I try to avoid taking people online purely at face value, since its so easy and commonplace to simply spin one’s opinions slightly into something that seems similar to solidarity with one specific position, but in reality is operating from a subtly different motive in an enemy-of-my-enemy sort of way.

That said, I do agree that a lot of it is from Americans. But it would be in the interest of a variety of different chaos-interested positions to amplify that in any way possible. To a communist, its class warfare. To a geopolitical rival, it’s a blow against stability. To the far right, it’s a blow against the liberal order. To social media companies its an enticing engagement. Etc etc etc.

edit for a typo and an extra example

It’s useful to remember that Americans are a minority on the English-speaking internet. There’s only 330 million of us, while the world has an estimated 1.5 billion English speakers. Probably much more if we include people that just know some of the language.

English is the global trade language, it’s frequently taken in school as a second language all over the world. If you learn some English, the amount of activities available to you dramatically increases.

Photos of the protest show they’re pretty large, especially for a country with such a low total population. Maybe people just want to be free?

edit: Photos actually remind me of the cease fire protests in Israel now that I think about it. Also a lower population country with a large contingent of upset people in it.

Any significant injury that results in paralysis would be a potential candidate. These become possible as soon as you become old enough to climb things like trees.

Very convenient when you’re the one making strong claims with no evidence or sourcing. I suppose I don’t really expect you to do anything asides blame someone else for all your problems though. That’s much easier.

Nope. Going ice skating and then out for sushi.

You yourself mentioned “fundamental truths”, not me. It’s not lies to call you out on it.

You don’t know why I ask for them, you’ve failed to provide a single one. This is likely due to you knowing they’re political in nature.

You know my point. Seeing the border kibbutz as armed jailors (and thus combatants) is ludicrous. While arms were certainly present, and local security forces certainly returned fire, a heavily armed, fortified camp would have provided heavy resistance. Instead, the attack swept through them quickly, killing many in their shelters. There is significant video evidence of this.

There you go again with “inarguable fact”. No fact is inarguable, that’s not how facts work. Proper intellectual rigor allows the challenging of even the most deeply-held belief, otherwise Einsteinian gravity would have never overtaken Newtonian gravity. In your case, you even misapply it, taking a very natural human reaction against security threats to an illogical conclusion that if those security threats escalate to a certain severity, then the Israelis will lose somehow. This makes no sense.

More cute deflections out of you. But no, again, your materialist philosophy does not actually provide for a concrete path to victory. Your long studies on the psychology of settlers is missing a whole bunch of psychology if all you can focus on is material security. Hate, for instance, is an emotion that can be taught generation to generation, and can motivate independently of material conditions.

Do you think 20somethings cannot be trained to be good soldiers? Do you think the IDF is smaller than 400k? Be clear. And no, you did not mentioned specific examples, except to repeat this claim that they “fall apart” in ground combat. That is not a specific example.

Has there been a widespread invasion into Lebanon that faltered? Or are you arguing they are too scared and weak to even try?

In the 1948 war, Israel had no air force. The Arab countries did. They still lost.

Quoting wastes space. I can recall our previous discussion, if you can’t it’s not hard to scroll back a little. Their goal of ethnic cleansing.

There’s still no path to victory described here. Israel does not have the world against them, because genocide just isn’t that big a deal across the world. You know India still trades with Israel, and has its navy active in the Red Sea area? Israel’s credit rating is still in the A range, it’s not being knocked down “every few months”. I don’t think you should be accusing me of being locked in a box of propaganda when your statements are this exaggerated and untrue.

So, you think Major Generals can frequently be found at checkpoints then…?

Routinely lose to the guerillas where? Using bombardment to prepare for an assault is nothing new, that’s pretty standard going back centuries. Losing the ground assault is notable though. Guerillas popping back up is just guerillas fighting a guerilla campaign, I assume you understand how that’s supposed to operate, and how it isn’t reflecting the IDF being defeated in a pitched battle.

More nitpicking details. Being crushed does not have to mean no longer present. The point remains that the ANC would have never accomplished their goals without international pressure. Had the international community not cared about Apartheid, it would have continued despite ANC resistance, into the foreseeable future.

Actually you did, right here:

otherwise you will be correctly recognized as someone that plays with fairy tales and seems to even believe them!

You could have easily checked this, but I guess you’re not putting much effort in.

You brought up materialism several paragraphs up, around 3 posts ago. You seem to want to give credit for expanding freedom movements solely to violent combatants, while saying nonviolent methods are ineffective. This is simplistic. You are ignoring other factors present.

I see, you cannot remember well. Sorry, but if I quote everything too, for your convenience since you are reluctant to reread I suppose, then these replies will simply get longer and longer as yours have. You’re now up to two full size comments, all because you are wasting space quoting me when I can fully remember what I said. You don’t have to. I won’t start.

We were discussing whether American nonviolent protest was a significant factor in ending the war. I said yes, you said no.

Most of the rest of that looks like trolling and more nitpicking pointless details like me saying “hamas” instead of “Palestinian resistance”. I suppose your rigid mind might actually lack the flexibility to bridge the two, though. You also seem to blame me for confusion when you cannot remember or reread and thus need me to provide quotes for your convenience.

No, not everyone engages in propaganda. It is possible to analyze factual events without applying value judgements, which are a necessary component of propaganda. We are engaged in a propagandistic discussion, certainly, that’s unavoidable I think, but it is not some unavoidable thing.