Barzaria

The UK is holding it down on a per landmass basis.

I put Linux mint on it, cinnamon mode!

I am curious about this. Would you please discuss it further? I like the idea of mental models that can be used in useful ways, or programmed in some way. The method of loci comes to mind. I have a mental representation of a semi permeable membrane that helps me intuit about which way osmotic pressure will push fluid in a given system. Some other useful mental models: SCP cognitohazard (to think of/perceive a cognitohazard is hazardous), mental models of triangles are useful for estimating load angles when rigging heavy machinery, tenth thicknesses are a useful model to determine how much radiation shielding is needed for a given radioactive source of x rem strength. Mental models can be very powerful tools, and the best part is that they have a very low cost of replication, being information. They exhibit the property of medium independence, being able to be replicated as a series of interactions that serve as the holding media of the information. Your brain holding the mental model of the item is an example. I have mostly pondered the mental models relating to straight lines and closed regular geometric forms. Help me ponder the orb.

I just put GNU/Linux on a Celeron II 4 core single threaded CPU. It's running along fine. I didn't even have a use case, but just felt bad to let the old technology go to waste. This was within the last two weeks.

Or bodies are in a constant state of getting older and undergoing collapse. I think that believing in the good old days is a reaction to getting old. I think that believing in some golden past is it reaction to our own bodily degeneration. Fear of our mortality is a powerful force, and I think that a large amount of people externalize/project that fear onto their perception of society.

I don't want to do fascism. I'm going to vote like fascism is right here, because​ it is.

Not a thing sadder than an orb left not to be pondered upon. Agreed.

💎exacta-mundo friendileeno

Egypt would be more valuable than Israel. Egypt was not an invented country and so would not be easy to get military access to. The naval access is used as part of a defensive military plan called projection of power. Naval access is what the US uses now to project military power into the region. In the event that the canal is closed, then land access will be required to project power in the region for projection of power. Either way, to field an offensive campaign in the east would require Israel. We need land to land tanks. Ad hominem attack is ineffective. I have nothing to prove to you and am not obligated to describe whatever inane things you have decided to require for your personal satisfaction.

I have attached a screenshot of the middle east. Israel affords the US Access to the middle-east without needing to access the Suez channel. This is of strategic importance because the canal is tiny and our navy has to send ships through it to bomb Iran through the Persian Gulf. If the canal were to be closed, we would have to take carrier strike groups around Africa to go east and access the Gulf. This is important to projecting power into the region. If ever there were a land war, the US would need Israel to put big land stuff into play to fight China/Russia/Iran. Thank you for challenging my thinking.

Level password VXBB for level ~30ish is forever burned into my memory.

Israel is used as a weapons testing platform by America. We are fighting a proxy war with Iran/China/Russia without risking American lives. Our proxies in the middle east and west of Russia act as physical separation and plausible deniability for our violent acts. The reason that the genocide is tolerated is because America benefits from the fighting. The Israel conflict acts as a forever war between our constant other armed conflicts, allowing us to generate income and research technology through private industry. We invented Israel to accomplish American goals in the middle east. To invoke the moral defence is to engage in a bad faith argument. The genocide is immoral on its face, but the language of power informs American policy decisions. Even the moral arguers that are allowed into the halls of power are allowed there as part of the production. That is manufactured outrage. Manufactured inso that the power forces allow the dissent to be visualized within their body to show fake deference to the filthy truth: power beats morals in America. Imploring moral righteousness from the powerful is useless. Worse than useless, it strengthens the powerful's play by making them appear tolerant. If you want change, violence and power are the language spoken. I do not support genocide and I do not allow my thoughts to be used as a tool of oppression by placidly stating the obvious. The correct action is action and fear of being able to do that action is the boundary of power. Imagine even saying that American cities should be bombed by their own inhabitants if the genocide doesn't stop tomorrow. You can't? That's power. If you're afraid reading this, that's power.