Da Wei: gives step by step instructions only for players to ignore them and get stuck (reading is hard).

Also Da Wei: designs a fast, strong and tough endgame boss only for some psycho to hit-stun her, yeet her around the arena, kill her by fall damage and post it on Bilibili for the lolz.

No it’s like a duel where one person keeps shooting himself in the foot and the other gets increasingly confused.

If you lose enough money, you trigger an integer overflow and end up with a profit!

As far as we know we have not found the colonialism gene, and there is no evidence that Europeans are somehow genetically different at this locus. So we can, at least for now, ignore the possibility that Europeans are inherently evil, or predisposed towards colonialism. Rather, the actions of any people must be understood as a consequence of their circumstances and culture.

due to all that’s happened in history, white people today are, while not intrinsically or genetically evil, tainted by the colonialism that has already happened and are therefore more likely to be the exploiters than the exploited due to their historical advantage.

White people are not only the beneficiaries of the colonialism that has already happened, they are often also the beneficiaries of colonialism that is currently happening. The CIA didn’t coup random Central American countries because they were bored. The IMF and World Bank don’t give loans to African countries for humanitarian reasons.

But human societies are not species and human-human interactions are not strictly ecological. For one, human societies have overarching coordination and collective will that species don’t have, and human societies as a whole often show more characteristics akin to a single organism than a species (though even that is apples to oranges)

I feel that the same principles that govern other animals should apply, more or less, to humans too. Although it might be more appropriate to compare human societies to populations of social animals (such as ant colonies or beehives) than to different species.

Does that imply that Imperial China was less evil than Imperial Europe? Or are they just as evil but in a different way (land-based conquest instead of sea based)? Or did they just not have the resources to do what Europe did but absolutely would have if they did? I don’t know hence why I’m asking.

I think the difference is that historically China had excellent agricultural land, a relatively modern and stable economy, and was surrounded by poorer and less advanced countries. So people had all the resources they wanted, and had little incentive to go far away. In contrast, Europe was fragmented, with Scotland, the Netherlands and Portugal actually having poor / too little land, and so there was a push for both raw materials and markets.

As far as I know, no one was forced to change their religion (Uyghurs aren’t even the biggest Muslim group in China, that’s the Hui) and there was no mass murder. I believe some innocent people who were wrongly suspected of being terrorists were strip-searched, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the attacks.

Yogthos, Cowbee etc. have given very detailed answers below. From what I know, the things they said are mostly correct. However, one point to note is that a very small minority of Uyghur people, who were influenced by fundamentalist Wahhabi teachings, carried out terrorist attacks against non-Uyghur people in the 2010s. So there was an atmosphere of fear and suspicion against all the Uyghurs, and many innocent people were subjected to searches, arrests, and so on. This has been documented by the UN. Of course, this is not dissimilar to the way Muslims were treated in France or the US after terrorist attacks. In fact, representatives from Muslim countries who visited Xinjiang praised the government’s response, as it included a lot of job creation and infrastructure projects to turn people away from extremism.

Every country is ‘authoritarian’. That’s pretty much the practical definition of a country - that they, and they alone, can use force within their borders.

If you travel to another country, you should of course consider your own safety, as well as whether that country crosses something you see as a red line. To give an example, I oppose state restrictions on religion (unless they are dangerous to the public), am a republican, and support Palestinian independence. But I would visit France, the UAE or Germany if I got the chance, and I would try to understand why they have those policies (restrictions on Muslims’ clothes, monarchy, and ban on criticising Israel). But I would not go to the US, since getting shot by a random madman is not good for health.

This is simplistic. If reform works, do it. If it cannot, use force. Even Marx, if I remember correctly, supported the reformist Chartists in relatively democratic countries like England (while supporting revolutionary methods in feudal Germany).

Euro won’t work. For other countries to use the Euro, they need to have Euro stocks. For this, the EU needs to (1) run a deficit, and (2) manufacture something of value to the rest of the world. But the EU won’t run a deficit, and its manufacturing sector is collapsing.

Ah, sorry. On the phone, open Settings and go Apps -> Manage Apps. Then choose an app and click the three dots on the top right. Select App Info, and look under App Name. This is equivalent to what UAD shows.

Oh that’s nice. No need for the computer then.

It has a GUI, and clearly shows what apps can be safely removed versus whst apos are load-bearing.

Yes of course.

Edit: Lot of third-party apps rely on Google Play Services, so removing this is not recommended.

It’s a Redmi something.

If it is still using the default OS (HyperOS / MiUI), you can uninstall both the Xiaomi and Google Photos apps. The easiest method nowadays is to install Universal Android Debloater on to your computer (any OS), connect your phone to it, enable USB debugging on the phone, and remove the apps you don’t want.

Materialism is the ultimate means of oppression.

Materialism was historically just one way of understanding the world. Over time, it got accepted more and more because it could make testable (and useful) predictions, and they turned out to be right.

And it’s something you’ve been conditioned to believe in since birth.

Because it works.

Socialists, communists etc. still rely on materialism to drive their ideology

Because it works.

To make clear the point Cowbee made, consider these three scenarios:-

1. The different parts of the country have different levels of natural resources / infrastructure / educational facilities. Co-ops i the wealthier areas are doing well, and all their employees are prospering. But those in the poorer areas are struggling, and all their employees are struggling.

2. There are five co-ops making the same type of product (say, radios). They each have their own design office, factory, sales networks and marketing. Would it not be more efficient to consolidate them?

3. There is a co-op that works in digging coal and running a thermal power plant. The society as a whole would benefit from switching to solar panels, but this co-op keeps blocking all such efforts since it would hurt them.

Not sure about this specific model, but I read elsewhere that BYD is developing long-lasting fast charging batteries by combining lots of small cells and liquid cooling.

We actually have the tech - you just need to manufacture a CO2 scrubbing material and pass lots and lots of air through it. The hard part is the energy - you shouldn’t be producing even more CO2 in the process. In other words, getting enough solar / nuclear power, and funding to actually build the thing.

A cheaper alternative would be to pump nitrate and phosphate into some remote ocean, so as to cause an algal bloom. When the algae die, they sink to the bottom of the ocean, and take the carbon with them. But the local ecosystem will be fucked up in all sorts of ways.

Unfortunately the CO2 already in the atmosphere will continue to warm the earth for several decades even if we stop all further emissions.

We’ll need to massively deploy technology that can suck CO2, trap it in something like silicate, and bury it deep underground.

Or shift to a diet with less meat so land can be restored (this will suck some CO2 into biomass and soil).

Yang Wen-li my beloved.