Who cares if dangerous metabolites are "still produced" when the danger has been limited? It's like claiming that blood transfusions don't help with shock because the patient still lost the same amount of blood.

> Using ethanol is a last-ditch stand to try and take some minor control of an otherwise out of control situation.

This is some weird-ass over-elaborate synonym for antidote.

> There's nothing subtle about it—it's a blunderbuss approach that often doesn't work well because replacing one poison with a less toxic one is a pretty hit-and-miss process.

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean. This all reads like AI slop.

> Antidotes counteract poisons, that's not what happens when you give ethanol in methanol poisonings.

You literally give it to them to counteract the poison. You're using a idiosyncratic version of the word "counteract," which doesn't relate to the health or survival of the person poisoned, but has a lot to do with the absolute levels of "dangerous metabolites produced."

It was never legal for massive corporations to record other people's work on CDs and sell them; that's the opposite of copyright. The comparison is absurd.

He could now take certain steps, such as eliminating press freedom, but election fraud on the scale that would have been necessary to skew this election would have led to sanctions.

What do we call this mindset? Right wing authoritarianism? Anti-immigrant sentiment? Poland next door to Hungary is also very anti-immigrant and proud of it (everyone from Duda onwards).

These were previously peasants still under feudal lords. Before somebody came to teach them under the communists, nobody cared if they were educated, or whether they lived or died.

This neo-John Bircherism masquerading as argument will always ignore the millions victims of tyrannical royals, or capitalist oligarchs in order to assign every death under communism as a death caused by communism. It's not even intellectually dishonest, it's not intellectual at all.

If Stalin didn't kill enough people for you that you still feel the need to inflate the numbers, it's an indication of how many murders you're willing to excuse for your preferred system: "We only killed 50 million!"

For a salient example, see the "60,000" protestors killed in Iran. What's a few exploded schoolgirls in comparison to that?

What feudal lords? From the article's description it seems like they were basically on their own before the Soviet Union came in.

> Before somebody came to teach them under the communists, nobody cared if they were educated, or whether they lived or died.

And you think the communists taught the peasants to read for the benefit of the peasants? It is to laugh.

> This neo-John Bircherism masquerading as argument will always ignore the millions victims of tyrannical royals, or capitalist oligarchs

I'm not ignoring them at all. Where did I say that it was perfectly okay for tyrannical royals or capitalist oligarchs to kill people?

Indeed, if you look at how societies under tyrannical royals or capitalist oligarchs are run, they basically have the same problem I described: one person, or a small elite, at the top thinks they know enough to run an entire society. But they don't. And their attempts to do it cause massive human suffering and death.

That was the claimed goal, yes. It didn't actually work out that way. Which is an example of the problem I described.

The Alai region was not "feudal" in the European sense but it was a tribal system where power was centralized in a layer of elite lords. While pastures were communal and not "owned" by individuals, livestock was private and literate, wealthy aristocratic elites owned massive herds using their prestige to command the loyalty of poorer tribal members

The Soviet government was actively working to replace the Arabic literacy of these elites with Latin and Cyrillic script to break the their influence

This does not matter without antitrust, which is why customer service became bad in the first place. 30 years ago, the low quality of customer service we complain about now simply didn't exist, at any size or professional level of business, and never had.

If a company back then had the customer service of the average company now, or even the average government agency now, people would have suspected that it was a covert front for criminals or spies.

If a company doesn't have to compete, it can cut everything until it only has the ghost of a product and a billing department. You don't boycott monopolies, monopolies boycott you. If three companies put you on a list to not have internet, phone service, a bank account or a credit card, etc., you just can't have them. You've become a European human rights judge.

AI finding vulnerabilities and cleaning them up is going to be a budget problem for closed-source software, who have gotten used to ignoring vulnerabilities until somebody screams at them.

Closed source software isn't kept in a magical safe in a cavern deep beneath the earth, guarded by dragons. Half the people in your company touch it every day, and probably plenty of contractors.

This is also a self-inflicted wound. There's no reason that Europe should be in the situation that it is in other than it is run by elites that are, like everyone else, invested in the success of US companies, and have no particular loyalty to Europe. When they retire, they move to the US and get board seats, advisory positions, lobbyist jobs, and cushy university spots.

Europeans need to start engaging in rational thinking and to stop letting their politics revolve around zombie US institutions (like NATO) and electing functionaries from tiny little countries who have made an industry of covertly advocating for US interests in Europe. They also need to seriously rethink their relationships with Russia and China, and realize that when it comes to Russia, they were the bad guys so destroying their economies and futures over manufactured grudges and fantasies of invasion is an indulgence that their children can't afford.

Independence from the US means getting rid of their elites that work for the US, and getting rid of victimhood narratives about Russia (who at least occupied part of Europe) and China (who have never done a thing to them.) They should make BRICS EBRICS. If Europe doesn't wise up, they're just going to start killing each other. Thank God that France has nukes and can't be invaded again.

its russia that maintains the victimhood narrative. Europe cant fix it for them, other than beating down their army