Linux (windows at work tho).
Late-Permian extinction. Not very imaginative, but I find it cool that there are so many hypotheses even about the largest mass extinction ever.
Western companies outsource much of their production to countries with cheaper labor, so the really important things here are cheap raw materials and state subsidies. Since the Chinese state owns many of the large companies there, they can reduce profits throughout the supply chain or move them to other companies in the form of these subsidies. As well as use that money to build transport and green energy infrastructure, further lowering manufacturing costs.
Investors always seek short-term profit, so playing the long game is something you need aggressive policies for.
I'd say it's too soon to see if China will take an imperialist approach. The US and Europe seem to be decoupling from them, so they are in desperate need of well-developed markets that will buy their products. It's in their own best interest that African nations develop quickly (which also hurts the US and Europe, making it harder to get cheap raw materials, thus doubly good for China).
It would be a win definitely, but unfortunately resolutions made by the General Assembly are not binding.
I used to be afraid of looking at mirrors at night. Idk what it's called, spectrophobia maybe? Well, anyway, one night I took acid and happened to look at a mirror while blasted off my mind. Staring at it felt so disappointingly mundane that I laughed at myself for expecting anything to go wrong. Lost my fear permanently.
When returning from kernel code, one should issue Drop Execution Ring Privileges, of course.
Very interesting. I'd say China will only increase and cheapen its production even more, which will allow them to push their influence. They have been focusing on doing exactly that, by building efficient transportation networks, putting increasingly more companies' equities in the hands of the state (and therefore sidestepping investors), and, recently, setting up abundant facilities for cheap, green energy production. All three of those policies rely for their swift and massive realization on what US policymakers nowadays seem to refer to as "non-market" dynamics, which are basically out of the question for them.
Chemical damage to our bodies mostly consists of both oxidation and Maillard-like reactions. So we're both slowly burning and getting cooked!
Imagine a situation wherein everyone has more or less the same amount of money. They can afford the same number of houses, let's say, two small, or one larger house. Even if there's some inequality, it's not hard to imagine people buying larger or smaller homes and yet everyone being able to afford one. Renting is an afterthought in this scenario.
If inequality grows larger, some people will not be able to afford ownership, and then renting becomes profitable; those who can afford more than one house will buy more than they need, increasing demand and then offering those homes for renting and getting profit. This in turn increases inequality, but as long as the forces pushing it down prevail, this state can last for long.
The crisis breaks out when these mechanisms eventually come out of balance, pushing a large share of people out of the market, and homeownership starts concentrating.
The idea is that investing is only profitable when people don't have what they need; any solution that gives them that (increasing public housing is a popular proposal here) will reduce profit. In fact, profitability is at a maximum now because of the housing crisis, and even just going back to step 2 would reduce it. A "perfect" solution would give everyone homes at the best price physically possible and with full liquidity, which would sink renting yields to basically zero.
Objectively, yes. But it was polarizing at the time because some of the people present were investing heavily in real estate.
1 more year has passed, and I'm still tracking these numbers, albeit now posting with a different username. The upward tendency has not just continued, but even increased; now Linux is nearing 4 % market share globally and over 2 % on Steam.
I downloaded and used HDI values from the 2022 report, which contains data up to 1990, and values for 1975-1985 from the 2009. Then successively added any missing data from reports starting from 2008 to 1990, since some values (specifically from some socialist nations) are deleted in the latter reports. Note that data before 1990 uses a different methodology, which explains the jagged line. Finally, I used linear regression to complete any countries that only missed a single data point.
Then, I computed the average of all capitalist and socialist countries that existed at the end of each year, and plotted it. For capitalist countries, I also plotted the standard error (it's too large to represent for socialist countries).
The dashed line is the p-value computed via the Mann–Whitney U test, which is the probability (out of 1) that comparing random countries from both groups would not show any difference. That is, the closer to 0, the more likely it is that there is an actual difference between the groups.
My old keyboard served me well, but lately I'm having to replace a broken switch every month so I'm not sure it's worth it. It's also noisy as hell and I hate the backlighting with every piece of my heart. So here's the replacement.
I've ordered it from WASD Keyboards, hmu for the design file. Obviously Spanish layout, I chose MX Cherry Brown switches, light pastel colors to improve visibility under dim lighting, and a pattern from a Gray-Scott reaction-diffusion system to decorate special keys. I've added a few (superfluous) icons for editing operations and arrow keys for Vim, as well as part of an Aristotle quote I like, just because the spacebar felt so empty. I used the old Greek translation simply to avoid distracting myself (I can barely read even modern Greek, so this looks like an uneventful string of accented letters to me).
I guess we could make one using newer FHE-RAM techniques and some edge case handling.