Tesla is mentionned 87 times. And even they explicitly state that they have strategic collaboration. They supposedly biggest projects are developped together (Macrohard, Terafab - all fugazzi, but still).
Related party transactions are close to a $1 Billion in 2025.
On the West of every single country in Europe, to start with.
Don't take this the wrong way, but have you looked at a world map? I ask since a significant chunk of people from the US cannot find Mexico on a map ...
Aside from its very evident geographic location, Brazil was the site of the first lasting European colony in the Americas established by Portugal.
People in Brazil speak Portuguese[1], a Romance language derived from Latin and closely related to Spanish, French and Italian.
The genetic lineages most commonly found within the Brazilian population include Portuguese, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, German, and to a much lesser degree but still significant, Lebanese and Turkish [2].
The top countries whose citizens visit Brazil as tourists are overwhelmingly from the Americas and Europe: Argentina, the USA, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, France, Portugal, Germany, Italy and the UK.
Likewise, when Brazilians travel abroad, their main destinations are Argentina, the USA, Chile, Portugal, France, Italy, Uruguay, the Caribbean, Spain and the UK.
Share of exports to Asia: ~41%
Share of exports to the Americas and Europe combined: ~47%
Share of imports from Asia: ~43%
Share of imports from the Americas and Europe combined: ~50%
How could one reach the conclussion that Brazil is an "Eastern" country? Oh yeah, they joined a trade organization with China and Russia ... sure, they must be Eastern now.
I agree that Brazil is Western, because it obviously is; it's a former European colony that speaks a European language and has European religious and cultural values. But geography has nothing to do with the concept of "Westernness", beyond historical etymology. Australia and New Zealand are as much part of "the West" as Canada is.
> I ask since a significant chunk of people from the US cannot find Mexico on a map ...
I love these comments. Don't worry: A "significant chunk of people" from Europe also cannot find Mexico on a map. Really, these comments say nothing. They are like "man on the street with a microphone" gotchas. Anybody under 30 years old has a mobile phone with Internet: They open their maps app, and search for Mexico. Done: Borders the southwestern United States.
Chill. GP never said he was against or in favor of the current US administration. This is quite a deranged strawman argument that borders on a personal attack.
This behavior does not lead to clever or constructive conversation. There are much better ways to get your point across.
It feels weird to have to write this but it seems warranted: A religious preference is something that extends beyond the limited time and space of a US political party.
Except a cursory glance at their comment history shows otherwise. You could have put in some basic effort.
Also don't insult our intelligence. It's pretty clear what side of the partisan line someone who says both - "I'm a free speech absolutist" citing Musk while in the same breath complaining someone is being mean to Jesus - is on.
Maybe you are simply projecting some guilt about your electoral choices. I can't come up with a better reason for your comment beyond empty moral posturing.
I'm happy to clarify but also please don't take it personal if this is my last comment wrt. to this; again, this does not really lead us to productive conversation and we can all do much better than that.
All definitions come from Google's AI summary, of course we can argue about those but I think they are pretty accurate.
deranged argument: a "deranged argument" refers to intensely illogical, paranoid, orpathological reasoning that often disrupts rational public discourse, characterized by extreme, often toxic, comparisons. It seems to me like that label is warranted, GP just wrote "I don't like that the game mocks Jesus" and got a somehow extreme response that I would definitely characterize as an "extreme, toxic comparison".
strawman: a dishonest debating tactic where someone misrepresents, exaggerates, or fabricates an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. In this case, GP wrote "I don't like that the game mocks Jesus", whereas the discussion was turned by some people into "I like the Trump administration".
Criticizing someone because of their political and religious preferences (and nothing else) is as personal as you can get. Most laws against harassment around the world specifically point out this behavior.
YMMV, if you consider this to not be relevant, it's actually ... ok. We all have different points of view and even "logical" things might seem illogical to others and I mean this honestly and without snark. We don't have to agree, the best I (we) can do is to thoroughly explain our points of view.
There's really no need to steelman here. If you click the poster's comment history, this is on the very first page: "I personally like Trump as a president". So the post was nothing more than the same old pattern of selectively-applied ideals. At this point, thinking there must be some nuance or 4d chess behind this kind of criticism is just foolish.
It’s literally a tactic in divorce reddits. Go to all the lawyers in the city and get a meeting. Now they can’t work with your partner because they’ve given you advice.
Whatever you do please DO NOT look up these links on the Internet Archive.
Not just that but I would also suggest to stop using the Internet Archive in general, as it is obviously not a reliable source of truth like Wikipedia or many news outlets with specialized people that spend a non-trivial amount of their time carefully checking all of this information.
A lot of people believe that Fridman is not affiliated with MIT even though the university says it is. <https://lex.mit.edu/> It's a recurring thing in the Talk page for the Wikipedia article.
Nah, that's just reddit. At this point it's safer to take anything that's popular on reddit as either outright wrong or so heavily out of context that it's not relevant.
Oh, sure, I learned a long time ago that Reddit is a very reliable anti-indicator. But given that HN isn't nearly as bad (but there are moments), it's still strange that people would just repeat something about someone else that they could disprove for themselves in 30 seconds.
This entire thread should be annihilated, but since you mentioned being pedantic...
You're correct that a pure encryption algorithm doesn't use hashing. But real-world encryption systems will include an HMAC to detect whether messages were altered in transit. HMACs do use hash functions.
There are a lot of explanations elsewhere in this thread. If you've read all of them and still don't understand, I don't know how to help you further.
Mainly I take issue with the person I replied to implying "I don't understand the solution, therefore there must be some functional issue with the solution."
>open the valve to release the required volume of oxygen
Mega LMAO. I can assure you this is not what's going on, at all. Also, if you release oxygen in gas form into the liquid you're going to run into a zillion other problems.
One of the golden premises of measuring things is to avoid altering what you're measuring, lol.
