0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
No, it just shows that society is dynamic and evolutionary (except in the USA).
In order to model the future evolution of society completely, you will need a complete model of every individual plus a predictive model of the climate and all natural disasters. It is for example difficult to imagine how science would have evolved if Newton was not in quarantine. Or if someone had studied the antibiotic effect as thoroughly as Fleming (who just noticed the accidental contamination of a culture) in time to cure Henry VIII's syphilis: No Anglican church → vastly different history of Britain and America....
Common goal: to be richer then everyone else. Now avoid the disagreements.
I can't answer why, but I've never met anyone who aspired to be poorer than anyone else. Have you?
https://phys.org/news/2022-06-algorithm-crime-week-advance-reveals.htmlAdvances in machine learning and artificial intelligence have sparked interest from governments that would like to use these tools for predictive policing to deter crime. Early efforts at crime prediction have been controversial, however, because they do not account for systemic biases in police enforcement and its complex relationship with crime and society.
Quote from: alancalverd on 30/06/2022 17:36:25 Common goal: to be richer then everyone else. Now avoid the disagreements.What do you mean by rich? Why should everyone wants to be rich? To be richer then everyone else, you can make yourself richer, or make everyone else poorer. Is the later equivalent to the former? Why or why not?
Here's my answer. Being rich gives us the ability to make someone else do something that we don't want to do or can't do by ourselves.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 12/07/2022 16:08:30Here's my answer. Being rich gives us the ability to make someone else do something that we don't want to do or can't do by ourselves.I think you have just discovered the fundamental point of money. In principle, you get it by working for someone else, and use it to get a third party to do something for you. It is (or should be) the countercurrent of labour.
The Truth About Why America Dropped Atomic Bombs on JapanThe atomic bomb proved to be the most devastating weapon used in any war, past or present, but was the United States justified in dropping two nuclear warheads on Japan for their unconditional surrender? Check out today's insane new video and maybe your opinion will change on whether or not the US should have nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I think that one thing that gets overlooked in this debate a lot is the fact that at the time the after effects of radiation exposure was not fully understood. The US sent in 250k troops to occupy the bombed cities, with a great number of them suffering the rest or their lives or even dying prematurely. A vast amount of the citizens were killed not from the initial explosion, but from radiation afterwards. Now knowing the effects 80 years later, it changes how we view the decision vs how it would have been viewed and justified back then. I think with history we look at it from our standpoint too much, and don't consider the views, culture, and morals at the time enough.
The US sent in 250k troops to occupy the bombed cities, with a great number of them suffering the rest or their lives or even dying prematurely. A vast amount of the citizens were killed not from the initial explosion, but from radiation afterwards.
Numbers, please. This is a science chatroom.
It implies that the number of death by radiation is significantly bigger than number of death by initial explosion, which you can get from the video.
one civilian who survived both bombings (how unlucky can you get?) died in 2010 at the age of 93.
The longterm statistics are difficult to establish as the natural incidence of fatal cancer is around 25% but the number of excess cancers among those who were irradiated by the flash but not mechanically or thermally injured seems to be less than 5%.