Considering it has its roots in the "Lebensreform" in the late 19th century, it's not that surprising that it's part of the culture. Still, American influence hasn't been good to it and it's also the reason why it's more prominent in Eastern Germany.
Information war is a thing. Though, you can find information from people on the ground on Youtube, social media and small websites (mainstream media you can completely forget, there are enough leaks to show that the likes of BBC and Reuters engage in propaganda to turn people against Russia (and I don't even mean local/international outlets but in Eastern European nations specifically and even in Russia itself)). Ah, of course, you should be able to distinguish footage from a video game from real life footage (referring to the large amount of people who apparently can't do that).
On the topic of video game footages being used seemingly by unknown actors with various intent, if a gamer like me can be tricked, how gullible is the average user?
I LEGIT thought the whole Ghost of Kiev video was REAL the first time I watched it. It was only when the whole scene did not make sense——why would the Russian jet slow down and slowly ascent with a pursuing Ukranian jet and why would it use AA missile instead of opting for guns at such close range moving slowly?
It was only after this exercise in logic did I take a second look at the video and saw the person holding the camera was moving way too stable without the artifacts you normally get from software stabilization.
Many, many people saw that video and retweeted it thinking it was legitimate. I almost did too until I saw it a second time and realized Twitter's compression algorithms degraded the quality in an authentic manner that hides anti-aliasing and uncanny valley.
Games are increasing becoming photorealistic where I can't tell from preview thumbs (ex. Ride 4) and we are probably witnessing the cusp of a new type of war. Our morales can be influenced by the hour now thanks to social media and advancements in light ray tracing.
Like in 2011 I was certain that photorealism was far off because of the computation difficulties with real-time ray tracing, I had not anticipated the leaps in GPU, AI, Deepfake technologies as well as software advancements like Nanite and Lumen in UE5
From what I've heard it's a Buk-M1 with a failing guidance system that was used to intercept a Russian missile attack on military infrastructure. Why it failed is guesswork but missing maintenance/deterioration is rather likely.
I mean, do you deny that the Ukrainian army has been shelling civilians in the separatist regions? A fellow countryman moved there since no one of the press bothered to report over the years and she confirmed it. And even apart from that, it's not like reports from the OSCE and UN aren't available.
Furthermore, considering that the Ukrainian government enacted language and racial laws (can be easily looked up) and employs right-wing extremist military groups like the Azov Battalion as National Guard...it should give you something to think about. But well, most just blindly consume US(-controlled) media without doing some basic fact-checking even, let alone engage in critical thinking.
There is a serious issue with neo-nazi's in Ukraine who the U.S. supports because they are anti-russia. (I feel like I am living during the beginning of the Iraq war all over again.)
Depends on which country you are from. There wasn't exactly reporting from it (at best only at the beginning) here which is why she moved there. Additionally, now the general tenor is that "Putin" invaded Ukraine basically without any reason even though there were several said by him. He even warned the Ukraine of consequences should they continue with the aggression when Russia formally acknowledged the separatist regions. In response, the Ukraine even increased the aggression (shelling etc).
You mean like paying social benefits (pensions etc)? Possibly. After all, Ukraine was supposed to do that according to Minsk II but they violated the agreement in more than enough points. Personally, I see the NATO sending weapons and establishing bases...ah, they don't call them "bases" but "mission" instead to train military and the like as destabilizing factors.
(Then there is also the interesting issue of American biolabs in Ukraine (and other countries bordering Russia). There were reports of what the US does there but we will see whether the Russians can still find anything or whether it's too late.)
Anyway, it's pretty much already over and the West won. Putin/Russia got painted as the baddies + more sanctions (e.g. Nord Stream II suspended, so now the US can sell their shitty, overpriced fracking stuff to the EU). The Ukraine got screwed over/played by the West but they had already achieved a lot of goals (getting access to all the rich soil + controlling it for example as well as dividing brothers and sisters by supporting nationalists to the point where we now have those language/racial laws). But hey, apparently a lot of Western people support such a government. "Slava Ukraini/Heil Ukraine", as they say.
I love that HN has all sorts. To read a pro-dictator, pro-invasion, pro-authoritarianism argument is still a surprise, but at least it's something new to read.
No need to smear Europe with their high fructose corn syrup. There are plenty of empty calories on the table in Europe, but they are typically made in a kitchen and not in a factory.
I think it's just broken in some cases for whatever reason. Like 9 months ago I mentioned trying out Tik Tok for some weeks and despite lots of "not interested", likes etc, I got swamped by 99% garbage, including videos I specifically said I don't want to see.
Growing up in the countryside, basically no kid was driven to elementary school, except maybe some first graders early on. You either walk, come by bicycle or take a bus.
I wouldn't call 8:00 "very early". Elementary school started 7:25 for me, "Gymnasium" 7:20. Didn't really have a problem with it, same with my classmates. If you keep a decent sleeping schedule, don't play games on some device right before bed or laze about all day, it's a non-issue under normal circumstances.
Is that actually a thing though? When I got my own TV, I usually went to bed at ~22:15 because that is when the first evening movie ended. And that was before and after puberty. Eventually, at age 17, I found something I really wanted to watch which aired from 22:00 to 0:00, so that's how long I stayed awake. It had nothing to do with my body. Similarly, talking with classmates, I noticed that girls went to bed earlier (like around 21:00) and that was most likely because there wasn't anything interesting for them to do at later hours, while we boys either watched TV or played games. Almost all the boys quit around 22:00 which would make it a very healthy 8 hour sleep until they got up again.
And that is aside from being physically active during the day which makes sleeping in rather simple. Of course, if you sit on your bum all the day, sleeping in does become more difficult as there is little physical exhaustion.
"Nur Bares ist Wahres"...and it's true. With cash you have full control of the money while with some CC or phone you rely on third parties. Not to mention the privacy and data issues. It's always "funny" when people whine about that or how their CC got compromised, despite it being their choice.
>"Nur Bares ist Wahres"...and it's true. With cash you have full control of the money
Well nobody said cash payments should be banned, but it sucks when cash is the only way to pay in some places, meaning I always have to carry a bulky wallet filled with banknotes and coins just in case the bar, restaurant, shop, cafe, deli, parking meter or whatever, does not accept digital payments.
I also used cash for buying greens since that's not yet legalized, but for everything else that's been legal for over 100 years already, please accept digital payments.
you're getting downvotes which is puzzling because a sibling thread laments the all too common overreach of law enforcement citing the "zwiebelfreunde/CCC" raid. It's perfectly consistent to be suspicious about paying by cash and also wanting to avoid leaking information to advertisers or taking care about security. Rejecting FinTech or traditional banking in a high tax country even as a law abiding citizens is not being a Luddite. It's good data hygiene for when they eventually come knocking and demand you explain yourself.
>you're getting downvotes which is puzzling because a sibling thread laments the all too common overreach of law enforcement citing the "zwiebelfreunde/CCC" raid
Because just because people want CC/contactless payments to be accepted everywhere, doesn't mean they want cash to be banned, if you wish to stay anonymous.
So why should you deprive everyone of contactless payments if you wish to stay anonymous, when you can acomodate both.
Once traceable transactions become widespread there's a push to limit cash payments - see reporting requirements for paying more than 10000€ in cash, the amount des not get inflation-adjusted, see other countries with higher percentages of cashless transactions.
So the people who want to pay cashless enable a power-grab by law enforcement. Not intentionally, but through their own convenience. So while their preferences taken on their own are not harmful if you combine them with known dynamics they are in conflict with the preferences of those who want to pay cash.
And I think simple convenience (not having to carry a slightly heavier wallet) does not quite weigh (heh) the same as privacy.
So until we get the ratchet of increasing surveillance solved it is entirely reasonable to push back on cashless transactions.
>see reporting requirements for paying more than 10000€ in cash
Why is that a problem? The bank is doing the reporting, not you and it's not like the government is stopping you from transferring over 10000€, electronically or in cash. You are free to do that. I transferred over 50k without any issues. And you can still use cash to buy weed if anonymity is what you wish, or use cash to pay some handyman to fix stuff around your house or piano lessons for your kids, without paying taxes.
The issue is with large cash sums, as believe it or not, money laundering and tax fraud is a real thing, and large cash transactions make this a breeze.
So, knowing how much tax money the taxpayers are loosing every year thanks to cash driven tax fraud, I'm all in favor of more scrutiny on large cash transactions and moving to more transparent wire transitions.
Because they're boiling the frog. It doesn't stop at reporting. And it doesn't stop at 10k€. And it often does not get inflation-adjusted, so the real limit keeps getting lower too even without regulatory changes.
> So, knowing how much tax money the taxpayers are loosing every year thanks to cash driven tax fraud
I assume the bulk of tax fraud happen by corporations cooking their books, using legal loopholes and writing their own legislation, not by average citizens paying a car in cash.
If it were about tax fraud they would have set the limit once, decades ago, and kept increasing it with inflation, not the opposite. Organized crime isn't something novel after all. So this reeks like a post-rationalization for more surveillance.
Also, tax reporting is the duty of the merchant for most transactions, private citizens shouldn't have their privacy voided just because others evade taxes. Instead make it mandatory to provide bills (with audit logs) and prosecute customers after tax fraud has been uncovered if they knowingly benefited from the tax fraud (e.g. by waiving the billing). Create bounties for people reporting billing evasion. I believe something like that has been implemented in greece. Search for privacy-compatible solutions instead of proclaiming that taxes and privacy cannot coexist.
This feels to me a bit like saying "wheelbarrows trump cars" because you're way less likely to get into a life threatening incident while operating one.
You're highlighting one small convenience of cash and ignoring its many real disadvantages.
It is more secure against remote hacking and imposition of a serious negative interest.
In a purely cashless society, the central bank could force a -10 per cent interest on all savings, thus forcing people to spend even if they don't want to.
This is harder to do in economies where people can take their money out of the bank as cash. There, the lower limit for interest seems to be around -1 per cent.
That’s a fundamental misunderstanding of sensible economics.
Cash is a facilitating fluid which should be channeled into diverse investments which are not based on monetary value such as property and resources, not stashed in large piles. Holding any cash in any quantity is a risk. Doesn’t matter if it’s magic numbers in a computer or bits of paper in a mattress.
As usual, some people want to undergo this risk in order to balance out other risks. For example, your bank account can be frozen under a variety of scenarios, even unjustly so. In such situation, it is better to have emergency cash at hand.
Diverse investments are good, but some liquidity is good as well. If you e.g. need to escape a starting civil war, things that can be carried on a person and have near universal acceptance are more valuable than a roll of blue chip stocks or a nice house that you cannot take with you. I have met people who escaped the siege of Sarajevo; cash and gold went a long way helping them out.
Countries like Italy cannot inflate their way out of debt anymore. ECB, at least officially, is trying to keep inflation low. But negative interest rates would help the heavily indebted countries to ease their debt service burden.
(If such constellation of parameters is sustainable, IDK, but that debt isn't going anywhere.)
There being no transaction history is good (less data/more privacy). Not sure how it's easy to lose. At least I have never lost my cash. And if you lose your wallet for some reason, you also lose your CCs. There is "often" fraud with CCs, with cash that rarely happens, unless it's counterfeit money. Also not sure what you would do with the money that you would damage it. Usually, it's in your wallet or somewhere stored.
Promises that the money will be worth it the next day, sure. But at least I have my cash in my hand (and some stored where I live), so access to it can't just be denied.
Depends on where you lose it. If it's in/at some place where you can buy something, people usually bring it there and you can get it back as soon as you notice. If it's the whole wallet, it's even easier (would be true for CCs then as well). But yeah, if you don't get it back, then it's gone. But to be honest, if I lose like 100-150€ once in 80 years because of that, then I can take it. I never have more than that in my wallet, unless I intend to buy something. (And that's also another benefit. Cash prevents against impulse buying and you spend your money better (you visually see how it's shrinking etc)).
antifragile doesn't mean no shocks no sacrifices. it's regular shocks and sacrifices to reduce chances of black swan events. Zimbawe is a (predictable) white swan event not a black swan.
In some regions it's (4:15) "Viertel nach vier" while it's also "Viertel fünf" because 4:45 is "Dreiviertel fünf", while in those some regions it's then "Viertel vor fünf".
(Personally, I only use Viertel, halb and Dreiviertel, otherwise it's just "siebzehn Uhr zehn" or something.)
I used an English "translation" instead of the German words for the audience here to understand better. What you mention is true and part of my list already e.g.
Not a native speaker here. How come it's supposed to be a derogatory term? I mean, you would say "granny" because "grandmother" is too long. So saying "tranny" instead of "transsexual" makes sense, it even has more syllables.
There's no consistent grammatical rule. Certain words and phrases are obvious warning signs about the speaker, but you have to be somewhat immersed in the culture to notice. Usually the literal meaning of the word / phrase really is an innocent neutral descriptor.
No one ever starts a sentence with "The Jews control" and ends it with "the home owners association on our block and have done a phenomenal job managing it."
No one ever says "The Japs" followed by "have really contributed to our culture in the form of anime".
No one ever says "that n***" followed by "is an inspiration to us all and we are proud to have him in our community."
No one ever uses the word "tranny" followed by something well thought out and respectful of transexual people.
None of these words/phrases have an offensive dictionary meaning, but they are all rightfully associated with offensive speech.
Both are diminutives. The thing with diminutives is that they can show both affection and disrespect.
It's usually the first if referring to familiar people and the second if referring to strangers. Even exactly the same word can cut both ways. "Dear" is affectionate towards family members, calling a coworker "dear" is condescending.
Also, as other posters have said, rule-based logic can only get you so far. It's all in the context.
