“ It’s your insistence that Jewish people, and the existence of Israel, have always fundamentally been invaders that I was objecting to as it is so intensely at odds with factual history.”
No…it is at odds with your position and is not what I said.
It is factual history that fighting age European Jews came armed and forcibly displaced the natives after being offered sanctuary for their most needy. It is not factual that I claimed it was ever thus. That is clearly not what I said, I said for 10+- years they were getting along as refugees, then started coming in HUGE numbers illegally and taking over.

Those are facts.

I also mentioned a native Jewish population that were not refugees or invaders. Some of them supported the invading Zionists, some didn’t. I’ve never heard of one who opposed them.

“ You gave a brief nod on not being a scholar of Palestinian history, but then proceed to just count all Jewish refugees as good as Zionist aggressors from day 1(or close enough), and the local Arab population as nothing but pure, kind caring victims of these invaders.”

Not even close to true, I said many stood behind the Zionists when they started coming en masse, and didn’t say but seemingly few to none of the native Jews opposed them. I also was clear that at the beginning the refugees acted like refugees, not invaders….I mistakenly gave them more time being grateful than you say they were, according to you Palestinians position is they began the invasion in the 20’s….and theirs is the opinion I care about. I never claimed ALL Arabs were welcoming, but the “nation” as a whole (despite being not self ruling at the time) welcomed a huge number of refugees considering their own population. Way more than elsewhere.

Edit: Britain, who facilitated this invasion, only took in 80000 European Jews in the decade before and during the war, and they were only given transit visas to stay temporarily until they found other accommodations. All of England took in fewer Jewish refugees in all pre war history than Palestine did….England took in 80000, most on temporary visas, Palestine took in 60000 permanently in 1935 alone, and 130000 in 33-36.
Pre-immigration Palestine had about 700000 people. In 1944 European Jews ignored the 1500 visa limit per year and came by the hundred of thousands per year after already completely overwhelming the native population.
Palestine was forcibly invaded by a foreign population exponentially bigger than the native population while Britain kept them too weak to oppose it physically.
That’s an invasion…not on day 1. 🤦‍♂️

“ without being able to writeoff Israel as invaders from day 1, nuance enters the calculus and suddenly the conflict is flooded with shades of grey ”

Again, I said day 3, not day 1, and went on to say that meant 10 years later. Get off your high horse and READ buddy.

I guess I’ll stop here. If you aren’t going to read what I wrote and insist on arguing red herrings you made up yourself, you can do that alone.

Nothing you’ve said changes or excuses the fact that masses of armed violent invaders came to take the land from the natives by force and were successful. The exact date this happened is not only y highly subjective, it’s completely besides the point.
Nothing you’ve said changes or excuses the inhuman treatment they’ve subjected the innocent native civilian population to for 70 years…but you’ve tried.
Nothing you’ve said changes or excuses the intentional targeting of trapped civilians by the military….serious war crimes Israel commits daily.
Nothing you’ve said even hints that you consider Palestinians worthy of consideration themselves, possibly not even human status, definitely not peaceful existence.

Bye

“ my solution would be every able bodied Jewish man and woman join the French (or Polish, Russian, British) army and fucking fight…”

I agree that’s the noble thing to do, but I can’t condemn the ones that choose to seek safety in numbers with Jewish Palestinians as exclusively invasion minded aggressors. My 6 million tag was maybe a bit sharp, but you also know that the Nazi’s took Paris and as much as it sucked to be French or European under Nazi occupation, you also know adding Jewish to that carried a lot of extra consequence and danger to your family.

My POV is agnostic of everything save Isreali people today having a right exist as a nation. Which at this point from my POV leaves 1947 as somewhat academic.

It’s your insistence that Jewish people, and the existence of Israel, have always fundamentally been invaders that I was objecting to as it is so intensely at odds with factual history.

You gave a brief nod on not being a scholar of Palestinian history, but then proceed to just count all Jewish refugees as good as Zionist aggressors from day 1(or close enough), and the local Arab population as nothing but pure, kind caring victims of these invaders.

I will state again, that is ahistorical propaganda and NOT what actually happened. And for my POV, its enough generations back as to be Academic, but for your POV it is fundamental because without being able to writeoff Israel as invaders from day 1, nuance enters the calculus and suddenly the conflict is flooded with shades of grey because lots of parties all contribute to the bloodshed, and many with reasonable motivations from both sides yet too.

Please find me any reputable sources to refute the reality of 1920-1940s Palestine:
-Mass Jewish immigration fleeing European oppression raised tensions between Jewish and Arab Palestinians.(as one must expect)
-Arab palestinians were already chaffing and resisting British colonial rule(as one must expect)
-These tensions led conflict, initially more ‘civil’ with the Arab majority trying to refuse all business, sales and trade with all Jews.
-Escalation followed throughout that time, but in drips and drops and NOT a ‘surprise the Zionist army has arrived’! style of aggression

The violent escalation was a fight here, a beating there. Little individual fights, escalating into deaths. Retaliations slowly grew, with each side exchanging small escalations.

-the culmination of this was eventually all out civil war, and the Jewish side immediately accepting a UN mandated 2 state solution

-this culmination coinciding with the end of WW2 and revelations of the true extent of the holocaust can’t be ignored, it certainly shaped the Jewish mindset in the conflict.

-Their mindset was pretty clearly not inaccurate either, as the immediate response of all neighbouring Arab nations was a declaration of war on the new ‘state’, with bold claims of how quickly the Jews would be swept into the sea. The confidence was so high, a call was sent it for ALL Arab palestinians to abandon and flee the entire region of Palestine to better enable the complete cleansing of the land.

The above is all pretty much inarguably factual, and I’d bargain you could get an Arabic and Israeli scholar together to more or less agree on those facts which is saying alot.

——
Propaganda from both sides would like to declare that the Arabs harboured deep Nazi sympathies, and thus Israel was pure and true in all it did. Or from the other side, more or less your narrative of Zionist bad guys launching invasion from day 1(ish).

Both though are just sprinklings of half truths, with anti-British resentment naturally breeding some leanings towards the axis, and even genuine Nazi cleanse the Jews believers. And absolutely Zionists featured prominently within the Jewish population. Neither of those partial truths though make the propaganda of either side true, but instead just an incomplete and intentionally biased picture.


Again, please find me sources demonstrating I’m terribly wrong on all that, but the only ones I can find are clearly biased and the accurate accounts paint the picture above, the propaganda very, very clearly copies the real story more or less with just deletions of inconvenient bits

that's an impressive level of effort to be that intensely ignorant.

Good point. Similarly, most people have been sexually gratified by a pubescent child.

This is why I have an intense distrust of things like zero-tolerance policies... the spirit of the law is so much more important than the letter, and yet there are huge industries build up around manipulating the latter (lawyers, accountants, etc.)

Because playing in a river or on a beach in intense heat is great... painting a fence or working on your car in same heat is shit:)

My guess is terrestrial animals use fluorescence more often than bioluminescence as a simpler, less energy intensive, easier to evolve way to glow. Deep sea animals aren’t exposed to very much uv light to make them fluoresce (many shallow water sea creatures do fluoresce, like most coral) so need to produce their own light. Not so with most terrestrial animals.
That could partially explain the difference in frequency.

I immediately wondered that; a low yield dirty bomb, at say, the UN on the Upper East Side would be a different EMP profile, I presume, from a higher yielded ship born bomb inside, say, a container which had cleared customs in Pakistan, and that would be different from a high altitude air burst, right? So, and the physics seems calculable if annoyingly in my past--you should be able to calculate a range of EMP from various yields?

The "Quora" answers are: a ground-based (ship based?) lower yield weapon has EMP effects of note to the 3 mile range.

An airburst would be a different issue. "Starfish Prime”. In this high altitude nuclear test, carried out in 1962, a 1.44 Mt warhead was detonated at a height of 400 km. Electrical damage, including burning out hundreds of street lamps was caused in Hawaii - about 1500 km from the point of detonation.

By contrast there was no direct blast damage at all at that range.

The maximal electric fields induced in the Starfish Prime EMP in Hawaii were estimated at 6 kV/m. At high latitudes the value could easily be ten times higher.

For electrical equipment to be damaged by an EMP from a nuclear detonation, the detonation point must be above the visual horizon.

A large yield weapon detonated 400 km above Kansas would have an EMP that extended across the entire continental US, but the ground intensity pattern of that EMP would be peaked towards the South of ground zero, it would not be symmetrical."

"CGI can alter the color and intensity of light, changing the appearance of an actor’s face or body in a shot."

this means building a digi double of an actor's face or body, match moving/rotomating it, relighting it with scene lights, then a shit ton of work in comp. NOT a colour correct or a shitty filter. it's a huge amount of work.

Oh boo-hoo. Don’t have a hissy fit.


https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-cgi#what-is-computergenerated-imagery

From above….
“ 4. Special effects: CGI can alter the color and intensity of light, changing the appearance of an actor’s face or body in a shot. It can also simulate environmental effects, like rain storms or cloudy skies. CGI can also age or de-age an actor in post-production.”

Are you the layman you speak of?

Man, that's some intense core strength.

That's where my wife & I went to as a part of our honeymoon back in 2010. I remember the actions were pretty intense. Almost a dozen cars/motorcycles criscrossing the stage at any one time. Simple action setpiece like The Italian Job, but a good show.

What do they mean “ Recently, scientists in Japan were surprised to find a species of oval squid raised in captivity could change its coat, depending on whether its tank was clean or covered in algae.”…are they students, because I saw this described and demonstrated in 88 in my marine biology class in Hawaii….then we dissected it….then we cooked and ate it as a class. Interesting teacher.

Absolutely not the first time they’ve been “caught” doing this…maybe the first time with high definition cameras, in one specific laboratory condition, with that specific species, raised in captivity, but this is every day behavior for many cephalopods, including squid, and absolutely not a new discovery.

Let’s see them decipher the intense flashings, strobing, color waves, slow fades, etc that they use to communicate and hunt. That might be a first….but I doubt it. Others have studied their insane chromatophores and their amazingly mailable mantles and how they use them for decades if not longer.

This is a neat bit of biology, but to pretend they just discovered this is outrageously dishonest. Get real, people knew squid camouflaged themselves amazingly well long before that guy named Jesus was fathered by a forced pedophilic inception. Almost like saying scientists just discovered newts like it moist, or that water is wet.

Fun take on Brel.
Brel is a lot more intense.
Not sure if this sung by a woman is not cultural appropriation?

Ant,

It would require a fairly intensive refactor to get it to work. The hardest part would be figuring out how to shoehorn GOTO into a modern BASIC interpreter since that command was taken out back and shot in the head -- and for good reason -- but with the memory and processor restrictions of computers at the time, GOTO was necessary because GOSUB required 4 bytes of stored information and a bit more processing power. There's also a number of functions that are exclusive to TRS-DOS BASIC and the Model III in particular.

At one point, I thought about moving the code from BASIC to Z-80 Assembler, but by then the first PC Jr. clones were out (I had a TRS Model 1000 and it was GREAT!) and it no longer made sense to continue doing anything on the Model III.

The worst loss is the database data, which was all the room and pathing descriptions, as well as part of the warm storage for the games. That's the part that breaks my heart to have lost.

That said, the sound over an acoustic coupler of an analog modem making a 300 bps connection is still makes me smile.