What does "cursory search" mean to you? Whatever it is, you should considering adding Google or some other basic search engine. Regardless, Wikipedia backs up the truth of the comment you are replying to.
It is easy to be weak, and watch war criminals like Netanyahu with support from rich American je-uwry like the Adelsons from afar get away with evil. We are dealing with a tribe that starves children, which the Nazis themselves did not dare to do. We are dealing with a tribe that bans journalists from Ghaza (western journalists) so they can rape women and children. But then again, an intelligent conversation here while children are starved is not possible buddy. I saw your other comments. What intelligent conversation do you speak of? They are all lacking in intelligence, charisma, and wit. You are as much a stranger to intelligence as those oil barrons of Israel are to kindness and humanity. Maybe instead of leaving dumb comments, try to go after those war crimes in Israel. Get sanctions against Israelis and American Je-ws that are supporting this apartheid, and the theft of property. It is always disappointing when a Je-w like you wants to benefit from the west, but decouples from our values the moment their darling Israel is a bully.
As a jew, it is obvious he asked because GP somehow brought the topic of being jewish up in his edit for some weird authority reason? Hence the reply I would assume.
1. The Palestinians are not being "punished". That would actually be illegal and is not what Israel is doing. Israel is trying to destroy the party that attacked them, which is a legitimate war aim.
2. Being the civilian population of a dictatorship waging a brutal war of annihilation against its neighbors sucks, but is not the fault of the party being attacked and defending itself from said brutal attack.
3. Particularly if that dictatorship very explicitly uses the civilian population as human shields (an actual war crime) and does everything to maximize civilian casualties. Again, this is horrible, but not on the party that was attacked by said dictatorship, but rather on the dictatorship
4. Unlike, say, Nazi Germany, the last election produced a very solid majority for the party that is now running the dictatorship. And polls as well as public display, as much as those can be trusted, show a significant if not overwhelming majority in support of the war of annihilation waged against Israel.
So you're telling me that Israel have not been stopping aid from getting into Gaza for three weeks now?
That is definitely a war crime.
And basically Hamas are fighting a guerrilla war and engaging in acts of terror similar to what the Zionists engaged in pre 48. If that was ok, then surely what Hamas are doing is fine?
I'm really confused about your notion that the Israeli state is being attacked. It's more accurate to say that both sides are being attacked, and only one side is engaging in plans to displace one side.
The last election was in 2007, half the Gaza population wasn't even born then.
By your logic the carbrt bombing of Dresden and nuking Japan were fine, is that a fair summation of your position?
If the enemy takes control of humanitarian aid shipments, which Hamas has done consistently from the start, the requirement to supply aid no longer applies.
So Israel has been over-fulfilling its requirements. And when it stops over-fulfilling people start accusing it of war crimes.
You know what's a war crime?
- Using your own civilian population as human shields
- Commandeering humanitarian aid
- Unprovoked attacks targeting civilians
- Using hospitals and schools to launch attacks (including rocket attacks)
Nothing about war is "OK", and neither is your attempt at framing. War is horrible.
Pro-Tip: don't start wars.
Free bonus pro-tip: don't start wars and then cry victim when you start losing.
However, neither Dresden nor the nuclear attacks were "genocide". Look it up.
And last I checked, the consensus is that they were not war crimes, although a vocal minority claims otherwise.
in 1948, when partition of the last remaining sliver of the mandate regions was announced, with the vast bulk already having gone to the Arabs, the Jews weren't happy, but immediately accepted. Because their goal was to have a Jewish state.
All the Arabs had to do to gain a Palestinian state (in addition to Syria and Jordan, the other mandate regions) was to also accept.
Peace.
Instead, the Arabs immediately attacked from all sides in a war of annihilation against the newly formed Jewish state. And despite the overwhelming odds the Arabs lost that genocidal war of aggression. And rebranded their own war of annihilation as the "nakba" supposedly perpetrated against them. "Woe is me".
Because the Arab goal never was "a Palestinian state". The Arab goal was always "no Jewish state". And of course for the rest of the Arabs the Palestinians are just the useful idiots who do their bidding and suffer the consequences.
But this is slowly coming to an end. Egypt recognized Israel a long time ago. So did Jordan. A bunch of the emirates also did recently (the Abraham accords). The new Syrian government has indicated that they will also recognize Israel. Saudi Arabia was also close to recognition and economic cooporation when their regional rival Iran used their proxies Hamas and Hizbollah to throw a violent spanner into the gears of peaceful diplomacy.
Because a Saudi/Israeli alliance is as much a nightmare-scenario for the Mullahs as it is a dream for the region.
This was a last ditch attempt that ultimately failed: Saudi Arabia has indicated that their plans are only delayed, Iran's proxies Hamas and Hizbollah have been all but destroyed, their ally Syria (land-route to their proxies) has fallen and wants to recognize Israel and their non-proxy attacks on Israel backfired so massively that it was embarrassing to watch from the outside.
After the direct Iranian attacks, Israel demonstrated that they have complete and total air superiority over Iran, took out their main air-defense just as a demonstration and then left. So Iran is in no position to do anything.
Without their backers, Hamas will not be able to resume their usual terror regime.
It won't happen overnight, but there is hope that the nightmare situation in the Middle East is slowly drawing to a close.
And all it will take is the death of children from starvation.
Given that you believe that blockading an entire country is a legitimate act of war I'm not sure there's much basis for a productive conversation.
I would note that terror/liberation movements like Hamas have basically never been defeated with these tactics so I really think that Israel are digging their own grave here.
You do realize that Hamas and Palestine are not the same thing right, even if they are obviously related? Funding aid for Palestine is not the same as funding Hamas, even if it is impossible to avoid some money being used in ways it’s not supposed to.
Well, in fact it is. First the "official" agencies in charge of most of this aid are practically indistinguishable from Hamas. Second, most if not all the funds get diverted. Third, Hamas appears to enjoy widespread support within the Palestinian population, as shown by the last free elections, which Hamas won handily, as well as opinion polls and public displays.
And I am not talking about basic humanitarian aid such as food and medicines. I am talking about the high-level assistance, construction aid. Famously, water pipes paid for by the EU were torn out and used to make rockets and/or rocket launchers.
Are the Russian people being persecuted such that many of them are being bombed in their homes after being given a token amount of time to evacuate, or many are starving to death?
No they're not. Because the Russians are the actual perpetrators.
Just like Hamas is.
Israel is defending itself against that aggression.
And yeah, being the civilian population of a brutal dictatorship that wages war against neighbor(s) without regard to the well-being of its own population sucks. It's horrible.
Should Ukraine stop defending itself because some Russians may get hurt?
Should the allies not have conquered Germany and Japan in WW2, because of the toll on the German civilian population?
While I wholeheartedly agree that no child should ever go hungry and school lunches should be free (from a EU country, this isn’t even a thing here), if you call people subhuman, we can't be friends, nor acquaintances.
Subhuman is a rather severe (and incredibly reductionist) judgement. Sure, being anti-free lunch for children is morally objectionable… but they’ve failed to probe that line of reasoning. They’ve encountered a bug, but instead of debugging it, they’ve closed their IDE and walked away.
Sometimes an honest conversation—with carefully placed, introspective questions—can be revealing to all parties. When we use our tongues to learn about others and build them up rather than tear them down, we’re actively making the world a better place. When we resist the tendency to judge others, we’re actively bettering ourselves.
This, and there’s something all-too human about ignoring or even basking in the suffering of others, including children. Pretending it’s somehow less than human to be on that side of things feels a bit head-in-sand.
A certain amount of ignoring human suffering is positively required to exist in the modern world, otherwise it would be an impossible-to-defend-against exploit to walk up to happy people in the first world and say “ten thousand children die every day from lack of access to clean water”, because then you would permanently alter or ruin their life.
FWIW this is true on Earth today.
It is required to turn a blind eye to slavery and oppression and hunger and thirst and preventable death and disease otherwise it would be impossible to have any semblance of a happy life in the good parts of the world, because the scale of preventable human suffering is both epic and, thus far, neverending.
> ... and school lunches should be free (from a EU country, this isn’t even a thing here)
I'm from another EU country (the Netherlands). Primary schools do not provide any lunch or other food whatsoever, secondary schools might have a canteen selling some snacks or low quality fast food. But everyone is basically expected to bring their own or go out/home for lunch.
Yes, we had the same system when I went to school in a (relatively low-income) expat (Indian) school in the Middle East. But nowhere was a child expected to leave the break hungry - I saw firsthand a teacher ruthlessly scolded by the grade supervisor (who was a GOAT all-round) because she found a student still eating after she had arrived at the class, and sent him to stand outside as punishment.
Another time, a teacher paid for a student's meal because he lost the change he was given by his parents to buy food from the canteen.
And another time, the school canteen just giving away free food at the end of the day to whoever wanted it, because there was no point in them keeping it around.
It's honestly unbelievable that a first world country would let its children go without lunch because even third world countries do not let that happen. I have seen schools in rural Africa that don't let their children starve - in fact, giving a midday meal (and some to take home afterwards) is a way to ensure school attendance.
No one is starving in the netherlands. There's a difference between offering a canteen but charging for it with some able and some not able to pay, and a general expectation that all bring food from home. Many Dutch, German, etc companies will also not have canteens but rather people bring a sandwich or last night's leftovers from home. The standard warm meal is the evening meal.
Also read the book "Superschool" about what was one of the worst schools in one of the poorest areas of the Netherlands, where there were loads of kids going to school hungry, dirty, and without basics like a coat.
Sorry, your throwaway remark just rubbed me up the wrong way. The Netherlands is not the socialist utopia that some people make it out to be, we just have bike lanes, sorta-legal weed and superior bread / cheese.
I wasn't talking about the Netherlands per se, but wanted to pinpoint that alternatives exist in places other than the US, which ensure that no kid starves. In fact, my comment was an add-on to yours, as we followed the same system as you guys do in NL.
He's absolutely right. As someone whose society suffered very heavy losses from the Nazis, this is the first thing that came to my mind when I read the root comment. It's like posting swastikas online and then dismissing concerned replies because "it's a Buddhist sign, what are you on about?"
I am glad to read this. (I am the originally - bit snarky - commenter about your use of the word, and do indeed live in Germany) .. my snap reaction my not have been worded the best it could have been :)
Except in this case the victims (the hungry children) are not the ones being labeled that. Also the word subhuman is in the dictionary (I checked Webster's) with zero reference to the war.
And "n*gro" is the Spanish, non-slur word for "black" but yet we can't use it because US people dislike it. Slavery and such. Cultural sensitivity goes both ways.
> And "n*gro" is the Spanish, non-slur word for "black" but yet we can't use it because US people dislike it. Slavery and such. Cultural sensitivity goes both ways.
Webster's dictionary:
plural Negroes
1 dated, often offensive : a person of Black African ancestry
2 dated, often offensive : a member of a group of people formerly considered to constitute a race (see race entry 1 sense 1a) of humans having African ancestry and classified according to physical traits (such as dark skin pigmentation)
Note the "offensive" warnings. Now let's see subhuman:
: less than human: such as
a: failing to attain the level (as of morality or intelligence) associated with normal human beings b: unsuitable to or unfit for human beings
subhuman living conditions c: of or relating to a taxonomic group lower than that of humans; the subhuman primates
In the case of subhuman, Webster's dictionary does not give any warning. And there is no reference to any wars.
Don't try to make people say things they are not saying.
In this case the intended meaning was clearly:
"failing to attain the level (as of morality) associated with normal human beings"
Like you, probably, I got a very systemizing brain and had trouble understanding this for decades. What the dictionaries say about the words does not matter - what is offensive to other people does not follow any system, but their feelings. And that means its arbitrary and you have probably no chance to know it ahead of time.
I agree. There is something less evolved about their sense of humility.
One day it's someone else who can't afford lunch, another day it may well be you or your kids. In a rational society, where we all unanimously acknowledge the fragility of our respective positions, I believe even the most simple rational human would agree that the basic needs to live must be met for all.
I feel those who take an opposing view are often blind to their own vulnerabilities and misunderstandings.
this is ridiculous. I'm a socialist and I believe that people should have far more of life's necessities provided to them by the state; I think supermarkets should be nationalised; I think water and electricity should be free up to a limit. on the other hand, this "people disagree with me about something sensitive so they're unevolved and/or subhuman" lark is childish as fuck and completely hypocritical
people think things for a reason, and it's rarely because they're sociopaths or they're unevolved or they're stupid, and assuming that it is lazy and uncritical
No, there, at least in the USA, a large amount of very dumb people. They also tend to be quite sadistic as well, thinking 'those people' deserve the sadism and torment.
This percolates through our whole society, one case of which is this scholastic food 'debt'.
And also, during some of Biden's years, there was a few years of free school lunches. And was also summarily cancelled. Even democrats have this pervasive 'those people don't deserve X'.
you're proving my point. people think these things because, as you say, they're instilled in the American national mentality. it makes sense to think that's wrong, it makes sense to think people should think for themselves and try to engage their empathy circuits for people not in their immediate family, but it's taking it a million steps too far to say they're subhuman or unevolved, and it's not helping anything anyway. perhaps it was too far to say that it's rarely because they're stupid though
A less evolved sense of humility (as I originally put it) does not equate to stupid. They are far from stupid - they are ruthless consumers of every scrap of advantage they can get, including the best education, food, clothes to name but a few things. They believe they deserve that advantage.
In fact, they see the person who can't afford lunch as stupid - after all, an intelligent person should at least be able to get lunch - it's so easy! What they don't realise is how much each person is impacted by their own starting position in life (which, I believe to be random), and how that in turn impacts where they are now.
Many "privileged" people lack empathy, because they believe the tables can never turn. They don't even want to entertain the thought. They believe their privilege is a birthright. In some cases, they are probably correct; they will enjoy privilege for their entire lives. But in exceptional circumstances, they will be caught out, and their opinion will undoubtedly change.
So, it's not stupidity, it is willful ignorance. History is full of such examples, some more chilling and devastating than others.
I feel like you're not actually replying to the things I said. I added that they may be stupid as an afterthought given that I value challenging societal norms highly as a signal of intelligence. the main points were elsewhere
How so? You said my comment was ridiculous because I was implying stupidity or a lack of evolution in the general sense, but my comment concerned the evolution of their humility, not their evolution in general. My last comment simply clarified that.
This comment would be 60 times more helpful if in addition to your strong opinion on the failures of learning with Duolingo it’d supply some of the good alternatives.
As someone learning Japanese I'm really appreciating tools built for JP specifically: Renshuu and Wanikani. Both use SRS (same as duolingo) but spend a considerable amount of time actually teaching the grammar and nuances, they both avoid starting from everyday phrases like "I would like sushi" to instead build a foundation first, and many other little things that make it a much nicer experience than Duolingo who's trying to use a very generic approach that maximises small term satisfaction in exchange for painful long term learning.
I was under the (possibly incorrect) impression that Renshuu was very beginner unfriendly and WaniKani skips the most basic stuff (hiragana et al) and is “just” to learn kanji which ofc is important. Was I wrong?
On WaniKani: that’s correct. In their FAQ (I think?) they link out to an article on Tofugu (aiui run by the same people) which gives you a couple good anki decks to learn hiragana and katakana. I started wanikani without knowing either, and found it manageable at the start by referring back to a hiragana chart. At some point I went through the decks, and after about two weeks I could read hiragana well enough to leave them behind.
Certainly not a complete resource for learning the language, but very effective for learning (to read) the kanji.
It focuses on teaching grammar and vocabulary through listening comprehension. The creator has put an immense amount of effort into it, to a point where I cannot believe its free. I highly recommend it.
I am a year into learning Japanese my self, and kind of wanted to learn vocab and kanji at the same time (and also see example sentences for the vocab which I can put into my anki deck). My method is when I start a new kanji I pick a few words that contain that kanji, bookmark them (and maybe add to my anki deck), and then when it is time for a reading review if I can remember how to pronounce those word I rate it as good.
Thanks for sharing, I'll check it out. I am currently using Wanikani +Tsurukame to learn Kanji, from your description your approach sounds similar with more customization?
I just had a look at it, love that it also teaches the stroke order, this is something I have no tool for at the moment.
If you are happy with WaniKani, you should probably just keep using WaniKani. It is a fine app (though a bit pricey). But I talked about the difference a bit in another thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43839879
The gist of it is that I like studying vocab and components (radicals) at the same time as the kanji. I kind of swap out the on/kun-yomi reading practice with bookmarked vocab, if I can remember the pronunciation of a couple of words with the kanji, I mark it as good. I also think writing the kanji helps remembering it (although I‘m not strict about it; personally if I screw up the stroke order, or add an extra tail, etc. I still rate it as good). I am also a fan of self rating rather than input evaluation.
My learning finally picked up speed again when I started using CCI (Compelling Comprehensive Input). How easy it is to find material differs a lot between languages. Way way back in time I learned English that way, though I didn't think of it as "learning" back then - I was so focused on what is now called "compelling input".
However, you'll need some kind of foundation, otherwise it'll be hard to find anything to start with. Though at the language school my wife attended the teachers had methods for that too, when there weren't any common language to "teach" in. Show and tell, basically. Point down and say "This is a table". Point away and say "That is a window". And so on. The Krashen initial method basically, though the one teacher I talked to had never heard about the guy.
When I started Japanese I didn't use textbooks or classes, I used an app called "Human Japanese", which teaches structure and a little grammar, but mostly through show and tell. No conjugation tables or other boring stuff. It quickly gives you enough to start acquiring other material. My own huge mistake was to switch to Duolingo.
I'm trying to look up what this CCI thing is, but I don't seem to get further than simply "use the language". Do you have a good resource that explains how to apply the method or, if applicable, an example of a CCI course?
That's basically all it is. Find compelling content that is basically comprehensible at your level and consume it. You'll need to translate it, but you don't need that to be rigorous or to perfectly understand it. As long as you comprehend it in the end, you'll start to learn the patterns of the language subconsciously.
It's essentially a move from memorization and learning language as if its math to how children naturally learn language through exposure.
Yeah, I really don’t get all the hate towards DuoLingo on this site. Granted, it isn’t going to make you fluent alone but it is very good at keeping you sharp and getting your feet wet.
Name one sole app/course which will teach you absolutely everything there is to know about a given subject. There are none. All learning needs multiple avenues in order to be effective.
Even if you take part in a course with tutors they will you to practice out of the course and in your own time. Personally I found DuoLingo to be extremely helpful in getting the basics of Hindi down.
Because duolingo is designed for addiction (that's how they make money), not actual learning (learning would mean you'd stop using the thing, no good for stakeholders).
There is no sole app that makes you go from 0 to C2, but there are infinitely superior tools that actually make you learn, and not the self-complacent pretend-like-learning pastime that duo is.
For a start, almost every other app succeeds at not treating you like a toddler and not resorting to emotional manipulation.
I have to disagree in that you would stop using the app if you learn a language. Learning is a lifelong task and becoming proficient in a language does not mean you will stay proficient in a language. It takes constant refreshing in order to keep sharp.
Is Duo the best thing on the planet? No, does it serve a purpose? Yes. The reality is that, if people see their skills improving as a result of using the app (gamification etc included) then it doing its job.
> There is no sole app that makes you go from 0 to C2, but there are infinitely superior tools that actually make you learn, and not the self-complacent pretend-like-learning pastime that duo is.
This I strongly disagree with. Nothing can _make_ you learn other than your own willingness to do so. If you have the desire to learn, you will. If you do not, you won't. It is that simple and that is applicable to any subject.
> Learning is a lifelong task and becoming proficient in a language does not mean you will stay proficient in a language
Agreed, but most people see it anyways as a journey from point A to point B, and then it's done. Also, most people just settles for good enough, not continuously improving.
> if people see their skills improving as a result of using the app then it doing its job.
Problem being that duo tricks you into believing you are learning when you indeed are not. I feel encouraged when I understand something for first time, not when the godam owl gives me a high five because I matched a word with a picture.
> Nothing can _make_ you learn other than your own willingness to do so
Well, I am really willing to be a world class piano concertist and astronaut. Doesn't mean I'll become one. Motivation + habits set the baseline, the mimimum needed, but they are not remotely enough. Success would be pretty darn easy then.
For people who have trouble keeping up hobbies, that's a feature. Even if duolingo isn't the ideal way to learn, it's a lot better than something I give up on or forget about after a week.
There are a lot of things an app can do for you. Spaced repetition is the easiest one. However there are a lot of other options if you get creative. Most of them are a lot more work though. (though chatbots should now be easy as well to implement)
I agree i can speak passable spanish with my wife's family. i learnt exclusively on duolingo.
I don't know if its the best way but it kept me motivated to come back and put in some work in a fun environment. which i belive is the biggest problem to solve for any sort of learning.
The suggestion is that it's likely that you did much of your learning from speaking to your wife's family, with duolingo giving you a kickstart and the confidence to do so.
Having conversation partner(s) to practice with generally trumps any other learning method for languages.
Pre-internet ways failed to teach language super often. Very frequent issue when learning from book was that you could not not understand anything people say, because you imagined the language to sound much differently then it does for months and months while learning. That was the most common result of language learning attempts - not much.
Language learning is one of the things that were genuinely made much more effective by the internet and streaming services. The input based learning methods were basically impossible pre-internet for most people. And these are very effective.
Many language learning books used to come with audio media. I'm old enough to own a few that came with cassette tapes.
Books are still worthwhile IMO, if only because they provide a bit of structure to one's learning. With free resources it's way too easy to become paralyzed by choice.
I am old enough to remember them. Comparably, you got maybe 4 hours of media - meaning sentences from the book being read and short boring dialogs. You cant compare it to what is currently available. It is like comparing a puddle of mud to Atlantic Ocean. And I mean it in a positive way - those audio tapes were almost nothing comparably.
Beyond projects like Dreaming Spanish, you have around infinite amount of French, Italian, Spanish or German Youtube about whatever topic you want to. There are even dedicated playlists for total beginners you can start to consume with zero knowledge. You have thousands of shows on Netflix in foreign language with various difficulty - some actually suitable for beginners. Some you have already seen in own language, so you can understand them more easily.
For major languages, there are dozens if not hundreds of podcasts with simplified news, "for beginner" discussions. Some of them are useable with literally miniscule amount of knowledge.
Schools vary a lot. Some schools are really good, but a lot of them are bad. Schools are typically held back by those who don't care and so disrupt the class. (this isn't always bad, for kids learning how to deal with other kids is itself an important lesson - home school kids tend to do well on tests with much less time spent in study, but they always show a lack of meeting diverse people in my experience)
