The article says:

Eyewitnesses tell Asharq that beside the disguised troops, other special forces snuck into the Nuseirat camp inside an aid truck. The IDF has denied using humanitarian transports for the operation.

From the link you posted, it seems this would still be a war crime if it’s true, unless I’m misinterpreting the text:

Ruses of war are permitted. Warships and auxiliary vessels, however, are prohibited from launching an attack whilst flying a false flag and at all times from actively simulating the status of protected vessels such as hospitals ships, small coastal rescue craft or medical transports.

I assume the aid truck they were using would qualify as an “auxiliary vessel”, and they were using it to impersonate “medical transport”.

Off course, that’s fair. This was a while ago, but I believe my point was more generally about whether to rename an existing popular application. I think it’s commendable that you make that effort to protect the kids you work with.

Plenty of words have multiple meanings, but I rarely think of them when I’m using a word to mean a specific thing. I know the meanings of gimp, but I never think of them when using GIMP; perhaps because it’s capitalized and I always assumed it stood for something (and it does).

But anyway, and more importantly than that, what you describe is a problem that you might run into with any word.

A small subset of the world population can view it as an insult, but for the vast majority it means nothing. Sort of like the word “negro” in Spanish, which some English people take offense to when they hear it. I even searched “gimp” in 3 different search engines, and the first 2 to 5 results were always the GIMP. Most people have no other concept for the word.

Let me put it this way: you say you’d favor Kira, but how do you know that there aren’t some kids in Egypt, or Russia, or someone else in the world, that take offense to the word “Kira”?

The podcasts and other media consumption will probably be what most benefit you in the long term, and something like Anki and Duolingo I think are good complements for that.

Any alternatives to Duolingo that I think would be worth replacing it, would have to be something that is more focused on the specific language that you are learning, i.e. Nicos Weg for German (and I don’t personally know any for Italian, sorry). Most other general language learning websites/apps would probably be running into the same issues and limitations as Duo, and which one to use depends most on personal preference; however, there is one I’ve heard of called Italki (there may be more) which basically acts as a language exchange app, where you connect talk to people who natively speak the language you are learning, and they can give you input. I’ve never tried it, but I’ve heard good things.

Other than that, you have certified online/in person courses, but obviously those are not as convenient as Duo, and they cost money (probably significantly more than even a Duo subscription).

EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention, but one thing which I personally enjoy is looking up and trying to read children’s books; and I mean like “90% picture & 10% text” books which are made for parents to read to their very young kids. And as you get more comfortable, try finding and reading increasingly harder books/stories online.

This is frustrating, but it has always been an issue; and usually the more you advance in a language tree the more it happens, because fewer people have found the problem and reported it. It’s a human problem that comes with not considering every possibility when creating an exercise. I’d imagine that using AI (in addition to humans) would actually help reduce cases like this, since they could be detected before users run into them.

That’s a bit over the top, in my opinion. I’ve tried plenty of courses, and Duolingo is pretty good to get a hang of the basics of a language.

I’d say, in my experience, the hardest part of learning a language is getting started, and I feel Duolingo is perfect just for that. To get deeper knowledge and become more comfortable, one should probably switch once they start feeling more comfortable with the alphabet (if there is a specific one), and with the basic vocabulary and grammar.

EDIT: Forgot to add but another advantage of Duolingo, is that it’s also great to get a taste and basic feel for different languages; and that can be especially useful for someone who is looking to learn a new language but can’t quite decide on one.

Any tolerance for those ideologies

Again, you are misrepresenting what is being said. There is no tolerance being given to those ideologies, neither by me nor by the other user. You are arguing in bad faith and misrepresenting what is being said; the very thing you accused the other person of. There is really no point in continuing to talk if you’re going to do that, so I’ll just leave a link to another comment I wrote that expands on this, and I’ll be going.

I think you have misunderstood what the other user was saying, and/or are not thinking through what you are saying.

You said “All areas should be nazi-free areas”, but unless you are advocating for putting them up against a wall, that is not possible to do. That is what the other user meant by “‘Tow it outside the environment’ is not an option”. By the way, I think that expression is a reference to this; it’s not very relevant to this topic, but might help illustrate the point they were making.

Another alternative, like the other user mentioned, would be “lifelong reeducation camps”; but not only does that have questionable morality behind it, it’s also not a view that merges very will with the idea of abolishing the police and especially prison systems, which so many on the left, especially the more libertarian left (which btw a lot of Beehaw seems to lean towards, including me, and I think the other user as well), subscribe to.

Like the saying goes: “don’t attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity/ignorance”, or something like that; there are real life examples of former Nazis/white supremacists changing their views just from interacting with other people outside that group. When you think of a Nazi, you’re probably thinking about the smart and actually evil ones that tend to be at the top, but a large part (I think the vast majority) are just the product of fear and ignorance (think average German during WW2); and when you try to erase/separate those people from society, one way or another, you’re often just feeding into that ignorance and fear.

Over the past several days I’ve seen you draw out many good faith disagreements about racism or nazism into what seem like intentionally blurry “just asking questions” type derailments whereby you try to shift the topic of the discussion to other, emotional or tangential details and or try to misrepresent the issue at hand to make the racism or nazism seem not that bad.

This does not appear to me at all what is happening, at least in this thread, and I would even go as far as to call it gaslighting.

The other user literally said if 10 people are at a table and 1 is a Nazi, then all 10 are Nazis. They have also labelled any opposing view as “sympathizing towards Nazis” in another comment. That is pretty damn fucking far from good faith. And yet, somehow, because this other user pointed out the problem with this type of thinking, you are now accusing them of not being good faith? Are you serious? People are refusing to have any kind of nuanced view of the situation, accusing everyone in that situation of being a Nazi and people who disagree of being sympathizers, but somehow the other person is the one not acting in good faith, or using emotional arguments?

I really don’t want to be rude, but your comment reads like textbook projection. They also never said anything to defend Nazis or the far right, not once (*), so that makes you the one who is misrepresenting what they are saying and doing. I encourage you to keep everything you said in mind, but re-read the thread through a more objective lens.

I really didn’t want to get involved in this conversation, but some of these comments really frustrated me, and yours was just the straw that broke the camel’s back; I had to let some of the frustration out. If you just want to ignore me, that’s fine.

(*) At least as far as this discussion is concerned; I do not have an all seeing eye.

All those are fine suggestions, but a “free with ads” option isn’t that bad either; the real problem isn’t the ads themselves. The real problem is how intrusive the ads are, how many of them there are, as well as much information they (and YouTube) collect on you. Plus, in this case, the company in question isn’t exactly a small company who is financially struggling. It’s the classic capitalist problem of “infinite growth”, where your profits have to be constantly increasing.

But there’s nothing inherently wrong about the idea of having ads, just like there’s nothing inherently wrong about youtubers having sponsors.

He created JavaScript?!?!

I can excuse controversial right-wing views and homophobia, but I draw the line at creating JavaScript!

Completely understandable. Not that I agree necessarily, but I understand.

My main issue is, would that really change much? At the end of the day, companies show up and survive by meeting people’s needs/wants, and politicians climb to the top and stay there by having people on their side and not doing things those people would disapprove of. This means that if all those powerful people just went poof one day and disappeared, they would be replaced by new companies and new politicians doing all the same things as before, as long as people want and do the same things.

This means the only way things can really change, is if the culture itself changes and people begin to want and do different things. One way or another, whether people believe it or not, people are in power. The question is in whether they organize and use it, or just sit back and give up control and let themselves be taken by the flow.

Off course, there’s a counter-argument to be made about how much influence those powerful people also have on everyone else’s way of thinking, but then that just makes it a closed loop, and someone needs to break it.

You really haven’t contributed anything to the conversation so far other than repeating several times how disappointed you are, and how disgusted you are at people here. Do you want to perhaps expand on that?

For my view, here is a comment I essentially made addressing comments like yours.

To everyone who is against this, and call the people supporting it “disgusting”:

Here is a post on Beehaw about climate activists who spray-painted a yacht. Posted about 10 days ago but only has 68 upvotes, and 15 comments at this time; meanwhile this post sits at 182 votes and 151 comments just 1 day after. Off course, you could argue it’s because c/environment isn’t as big as c/news; although that could be said to be a demonstration of the problem itself. But the real questions are: why did it not spread further, and why did you almost certainly not hear about it?

Because no one gives a shit about that. It raises no eyebrows. Because it’s meaningless and doesn’t really inconvenience anyone. She probably just had her yacht cleaned, and it never bothered her for more than the 5 seconds she was made aware of the spray paint. It’s not going to stop any other rich people from buying yachts, and it’s not going to raise the awareness of the average person and cause them to reduce their consumption either. In the end, it accomplished absolutely nothing.

Climate activists have been trying peaceful protests for 50 years, do you need a reminder of how bad things are getting?

And before the arguments about how this affects “working class” people, but all of it is really the billionaire’s and companies fault and that governments need to act: What do companies stand to gain from ruining the planet? Money, which the people give to them while offering each other excuses to consume. What could a government do to stop it? Well, they could introduce carbon taxes, stop subsidizing meat, and invest in more bike lanes and public transport; which would all result in higher gas prices, higher prices for anything made of plastic (among other goods), more expensive energy, much more expensive meat, a lot more bike lanes with smaller roads, and more public transport. Are these all things you’re okay with? If yes, then there’s no reason to not get “ahead” (although we’re far behind) of the problem and start organizing; and if no… well, then you might have stumbled into the problem.

Finally, here is a picture from two posts on c/news that I think illustrates the problem quite well.

Do they need to repress anything, or do people just not care? The yacht news was shared on here, I was literally in that thread. After 2 days, it had less than 60 upvotes and about 10 comments.

In one day, this post is already near 200 upvotes and has 148 comments.

But I guess let’s just keep pretending we’re all angles and that the 1% and leading class are acting in complete isolation. Let’s just keep pretending they are the only problem.

People only care when something might affect them directly, and people messing with theirs cars seems a lot closer to a possible reality to them then being affected by climate change. Which is why everyone claims to want for there to be action to stop climate change, but they are incredibly stubborn about having to change anything about their way of life.

I can easily go without using my phone for extended periods of time, and always have been. I’ve never really been “phone addicted”, and never used my phone during class - despite having one for the entirety of my school years.

That still never stopped me from not paying any attention in class. Drawing on a book/desk, talking to the person next to me, looking out the window, or just spending time with my imagination were things I did too often, and I never needed a phone for any of it.

I seriously doubt banning phones would make much of a difference, other than pissing plenty of kids off. You’re essentially being forced to go to a place, every day, where you will be stripped of your personal belongings and are not allowed to be in contact with the outside world.

I’m talking about first and third party websites tracking you. I don’t use Chrome or Opera, but I’d rather only have to trust a browser of my choice, than having to place my trust in thousands of different websites.

The point is, if you care about tracking and privacy, you shouldn’t be using Vivaldi in the first place.

According to this Vivaldi protects you from tracking about the same as Chrome and Opera, and both of those provide less tracking protection than even Edge.

When this topic comes up people usually bring up search engines that still use either Google or Bing’s index, so if you want to look at something completely independent of those:

• Qwant

• Brave Search

• Mojeek

Sort of, it depends on implementation. There are some techniques (which I don’t really know) that will allow a 32 bit OS to address more than 4GB, but natively it can’t for the same reason that the process will still be limited to 4GB.

Perhaps you already know this but: 32 bits can only represent 2^32 numbers (4.294.967.296), which is how many bytes 4GB is equivalent to, and so anything after that cannot be reached. This also means 64 bits can address up to something like 17 billion GB, or about 16 EB.