

It isn’t to help them catch up, it’s to keep them limping along without collapsing entirely, while at the same time keeping them dependent so they don’t think of trying to escape. It has the same function as the IMF/World Bank.
/u/outwrangle before everything went to shit in 2020, /u/emma_lazarus for a while after that, now I’m all queermunist!
It isn’t to help them catch up, it’s to keep them limping along without collapsing entirely, while at the same time keeping them dependent so they don’t think of trying to escape. It has the same function as the IMF/World Bank.
In terms of larger countries, it has been beneficial for France and Germany, less so for Italy
It’s just a way for the wealthy metropoles to turn poorer members of the EU into neocolonies. Yeah, it’s great for rich Europeans! Not so much for everyone else. Without the ability to deficit spend (because they lack currency sovereignity) they are forced to do austerity and privatization. It’s just financial imperialism.
It’s a bad system and it will collapse.
Ask Greece or the other Mediterranean nations if they are better off without their own currency (hint: they absolutely aren’t)
Death to US is a basic statement of understanding that the US empire is the primary contradiction.
The EU as a whole is an interesting project, but the Eurozone currency bloc was a mistake. All it did was surrender everyone else’s currency sovereignty to Germany and France.
And death to the US.
Don’t give up sovereignity, even to allies! Alliances change, but even ignoring that, it’s akin to letting allies run your infrastructure or make your policies or own your water. It’s giving part of yourself away.
Data sovereignty is going to be key to maintaining any sovereignity going forward, it’s so vital to the function of society and the economy that outsourcing it to another country is just giving part of yourself away.
How would it encourage the behavior? If they fire and forget, they aren’t looking at downvotes anyway.
Chelsea* Manning
But, yeah, most people just do not care if they are spied on because they don’t think it will be used for anything besides advertising. Trump is going to wake a lot of people up to the immense power we’ve handed over to our tech overlords.
You could dab it with a little paint or glue or something.
It helps when you reframe math as a puzzle, because then it becomes a game. It’s not interesting unless you make it interesting.
“New Math” kind of tries to do this, although then you run into the problem of parents being unable to help their kids with homework.
That makes sense, but it’s still strange because it means in the case of a fire the entire building has to be treated the same anyway because there is something in the building that reacts with water even if its separate.
I guess it is helpful to indicate that there are multiple substances that have different reaction profiles, but it still seems strange to me.
The reason for listing them separately is because each individual chemical has its own ratings. You can’t simply take the highest of each and combine them into a single sign. For instance, in this case one chemical isn’t flammable but is explosive when heated. The other chemical is flammable but not explosive. So if you see a chemical on fire, you know it’s the second chemical and isn’t explosive. But if you see something that isn’t burning in a room full of fire, you know it’s a potential powder keg waiting to explode.
Okay, so the two signs on the building have a weird combination.
The sign on the left indicates something that isn’t flammable, but reacts with water. The sign on the right indicates something that is flammable, but there’s no risk of reacting to water. If the building caught fire then a first responder on the scene has to read both signs at the same time. They can’t spray the building with water because the non-flammable substance would react with the water.
So why aren’t the signs combined? They have to be treated the same anyway.
Sure, but I don’t think the building should have two labels. I think it should have one label that reflects a warning for everything in the building.
Imagine you have a crate with two different chemicals. The chemicals are in different bottles so they aren’t mixed, and each bottle has its own label.
Should the crate have two unidentified labels like this, or one? There’s no indication what those labels refer to on the building.
But the building, as a whole, pesents the combined risk of both chemicals.
But it’s just slapped on the side of the building with no indication of which chemicals the labels are for, I don’t think that’s how it’s supposed to be done. It’d be like mixing two chemicals into a bottle and then putting two labels on it.
I think there should just be one label that combines the warning levels of both i.e. 3-2-2-W
As others have said, these are NFPA signs.
What I want to know is why there are two different ones. What the hell does that mean?
Deepseek, Huawei, Tencent - China isn’t just a factory for the West anymore. They’re not the go-to for advanced tech, but they’ve become a go-to for advanced tech.
I think it’s too late to slow down their growth.
This is classic underdevelopment, like how Europe and the US deliberately withheld vital equipment and machinery from Africa to prevent them from building their own industrial base.
It’s obviously way too late for this tactic to make any sense, though. China can’t be underdeveloped, they’re becoming a tech leader at this point.
Over 100,000 Israelis have reportedly stopped showing up for reserve duty.
It’s not just a few anymore. Israelis are waking up and you shouldn’t be erasing the heroic Israelis who refuse to serve in the IOF. They’re also ethnic Israeli Jews, after all.
And yet they never catch up. Why do you think that is?
The goal is to keep them weak and dependent, not help them stand as equals with France and Germany.