/edu/ - Education

>>19053
Zero mentions of autism or ADHD 🙄
Zimbabwe

>>19053
This is just some guy's media rant

>>22309
Exactly, alleging that being a geek is just some thing we've been brainwashed into by the media is idiotic

>>22309
>>22310
Geeks aren't necessarily neurodivergent. In fact a lot of very neurotypical people are geeks, they're just geeks about things that are socially acceptable. How many sports bros get obsessed with the minutiae of their sports teams and play fantasy football and all that shit? They even buy jerseys so they can LARP as their favorite player. Being "geek" versus "normal" isn't about the mode of interaction with something, it's about the value society has attached to the thing people are interacting with.

>>22311
Being into comics isn't the most socially unacceptable thing either. But you are reading something, out of a page, even if it's mostly images, so a dedicated meathead might see that as "weird".

>>22311
Geeks are neurodivergent when people want to shit on geeks. Geeks suddenly aren't neurodivergent when people are confronted about the stereotypes and slurs they drop. You tell me the neckbeard stereotype isn't neurodivergent coded.

I've identified a need in my region for a product.
It would be assembled from parts imported from China presumably. Who would know what kind of parts specifically and could foresee obvious pitfalls? A mechanical or process engineer or something, or some kind of consultant?

>>18461
protip: if the question doesn't say to prove something, it's most likely because you can't do so and it wants you to argue against the conclusion

>>18461
Exercise 2.4.103
https://www.jirka.org/diffyqs/html/sec_mv.html#exercise-215

Am I dumb? mx''+kx=0, m=5000, x(0)=0.1, x'(0)=1, the general solution is known to be A*cos(ot)+B*sin(ot) where o=sqrt(k/m).

But if I try to solve this, I get A=0.1, and B=1/o. So k=m/B² but I only know m, both B and k are unknown? What am I missing?

bump >>20179

Why can't people just make up their minds??

>>13000
I liked "Male Fantasies" but the pathology paradigm is kind of an inherently flawed approach to studying authoritarianism which reproduces the logics backing the eugenicist ideologies one is trying to criticize.
Theweleit shows that the Freikorps soldiers had PTSD and other problems but that still doesn't explain why the soldiers went Nazi and did not form socialist vegan communes instead. Basically, all Theweleit showed was the soldiers were fucked in the head.

>>21147
consensus crack tho

>>21317
That image you keep posting doesn't make sense.

I'm not saying I disagree, I'm saying it's semantically weird.

1) The term 'CONSENSUS CRACKING' (emphasis in original, just like in the image) seems to originate only from The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies >>21142
which claims a certain method is used to develop a crack, a method which doesn't involve posting bait or trolling at all. In fact, it would be smartest to intentionally avoid seeming like either, because the point is to attack your weak planted argument with evidence which appears convincing and widely supported (i.e. the consensus) to the uninformed reader. The rigged argument results in a pre-determined break of consensus being reached in the thread, because one side was intentionally introduced with a weak premise and the other side is artificially inflated with fake accounts. If the cracker were trolling or baiting for reactions, they wouldn't convince the uninformed reader nor be able to fake an anti-consensus, plus it would encourage other forum members to be adverse and then discredit the cracking attempt with real counter-arguments rather than only a rigged one, ruining the consensus crack.
Trolls posting bait is not a consensus cracking attempt, as they do not attempt to plant a conversation which reaches a rigged anti-consensus. If anything, they strive for the opposite - universal opposition to their posts. They reinforce the consensus by making an inflammatory opposition to it for the consensus to unite around, while consensus cracking attempts to manufacture a positive opposition to the consensus.

2) The images disregards that and implicitly reinterprets a 'consensus crack' as a shift in the Overton window of acceptable ideas, so let's be fair and work with that.

But even then, ignoring a shitty unwanted post has the same effect as the regular users themselves forum sliding that unwanted post! It doesn't create any impression that the post's ideas are accepted (let alone consensus!!) if it is completely ignored. Nor does it create that impression if, rather than taking the bait, users refuse to dignify it with a response and simply post laughing anime girls.

Rather, to take bait and pretend it has a right to Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

*
>>21314
I've seen it before, it's a good watch and I recommend! Thanks for sharing.
The Fediverse, from what I've gathered, has normalized medium/high barriers of entry in large numbers of popular communities (as opposed to high-barrier communities being on the fringes, as opposed to capitalist-oriented platforms making barriers extremely low to aid getting as many users as possible), and being federated encourages people to find their own spaces. Contrast again with typical imageboards, with one of the lowest barriers of entry (no registration) and often leaning towards liberal rules if it's not a specialised community. The Mastodon approach, with federated safe spaces, collaborative moderation, and rapid staff responses, makes trolling more time consuming and less rewarding, I'd assume.

>>21140
- Philips, Witney. This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture
- Anglin, Andrew. A Normie's Guide to the Alt-Right https://web.archive.org/web/20231210135756/https://dailystormer.in/a-normies-guide-to-the-alt-right

I'm more interested in the psychology of trolling TBH. I put it down to relational trauma and trust issues mostly.

>>21317
if someone posts something that gets ignored, can that even be seen as a consensus? lol

>>10725
Isn't that what that "In the name of the people" Chinese show is about?

>>10726
In a country with a Marxist government. When it comes to the West these people are only used as an excuse to handwave capitalism's systemic issues away ("crony capitalism") without real malice, unlike what we see towards people in the ghetto selling drugs.

Organized crime is actually a lot more of a tribal concept. The name families aren't just for show, it comes from the origins of the Italian mob, The Italian mafia basically grew out of a culture where feudalism ended but the need for it in their culture did not. The people in the outlying regions were used to going to an authority figure to pass judgments for their disputes and protect them from bandits or whatever, and the new government was weak and inefficient. Some places would only have the authorities visit as often as once a month to pick up prisoners to take them away for trial. So you ended up with a bunch of guys that, for one reason or another, ended up being the de facto 'Lord' of their area: the one everyone came to with their problems. Because the people knew how that system worked, and democracy was at best a theory to them. So you had this power and authority structure that grew up in the shadow of the legal, official government.
So at its heart, whether or not it was ever true in practice, the idea of the mafioso was built around them being a respected individual at the head of the community. That's where the idea of mafia guys being 'classy' came from, when filtered through American culture by Italian immigrants and other past and present organized crime groups are also built around the concept. They aren't just groups of guys banding together but actual relatives. The mob boss isn't just a nebulous force, he could be your father's second cousin, someone your grandmother babysat.

>>10559
I liked Valencia's "Gore Capitalism". IMO professional criminals are part of the PMC. Organized crime is the same kind of gore work as done by cops, soldiers and security guards. So really professional criminals are a kind of class traitor.

Organized crime actually works a lot like a cult. What class is Alex Jones? Organized crime is more like religion, conspiracy, multilevel marketing and pickup artist stuff.

>>18406
if they were trying to shoot his jaw off, instead of him failing to kill himself, why did they bother arresting and executing him? instead of to load the gun with another bullet and shoot him again? He was mostly unconscious for an entire day after the failed suicide. There was plenty of opportunity to kill him as intended, right? Unless you concede that a show trial was their aim all along and Robespierre was trying to deprive them of this by killing himself.

>>18391
hebertists were ultras

>>21699
they know you were right which is why they never replied

>>21699
We will never know. However, there is one interesting clue that can also go either way, which is his signature was incomplete on the order to summon the national guard. Suggesting he was interrupted during the process. It's less likely they literally shot him, and more likely a struggled occurred resulting in a misfire.

>>22287
I forgot some details. There is a stain on the document that historians continue to debate being blood or smudged ink. Some think it is blood due to position, supporting the idea Robespierre was shot as he signed it. The signature is interesting as well, as its one of two documents that Robespierre's signature is different. The other being the order of arrest for Danton. In that case it is very small, and I've read pure speculation this might have been an expression of discomfort on his part with being responsible for Danton's death.

His last speeches also were directly referential to that he would not kill himself and the Cult of the Supreme being's coronation reads like a eulogy. Robespierre seeing himself as already dead would fit with his guiding philosophy regarding revolution.

There is supporting evidence for attempted suicide as well. Besides the fact the little pygmy couldn't use a gun, Robespierre did not want to sign the order. It is documented when asked to call in the National Guard to save the Jacobins, he hesitated because putting his name on the document would be a betrayal of his own revolution. Specifically when asked who should sign, Robespierre replied: "The People."

But then it's also worth taking into account the state of the headquarters. Couthon was thrown down the stairs in the Jacobin Headquarters. Only Saint-Just avoided being physically injured during their arrest. Pic related is worth a read for a play by play unless you know French.

Socialism in Arab countries was always a branding thing. A lot of Arab socialists were borderline fascists especially Nasserists and Ba'athists. At one time, the Shah of Iran portrayed himself as a socialist implementing a revolution in his country. There was always a fringe within right wing Arabist movements that had an interest in Marxism and that's how you get groups like the PFLP which split off right wing Arabist groups to pursue a Marxist line but kept ethnonationalist Arabist ideals and pro-Nasser or pro-Syria/Iraq stance and anti-monarchist bent. Some of the Omani groups were the same and effectively became proxies of regional powers.

>>22225
post a book rec on this tho, I'm not OP but I've had exactly the same interest ever since reading Red Star Over Iraq by Johann Franzen.

>>22225
That's cool except South Yemen was actually socialist not just nominally and it clashed with Arab nationalists as well.

>>8665
Good video on Chonmage as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPoLmHDcoRc
>The Surprising Reasons for Samurai's Strange Hairstyle
>Let's ask Shogo | Your Japanese friend in Kyoto

So how inaccurate is this?
>The Forgotten Story of How British Redcoats Took on Japanese Samurai
>Redcoat History

>>21875
If I remember right, in Musui's Story his dad had him put in a cage for 2 years in their like living room as punishment for being an asshole

>>1931
Any anime in this art style ?

>>22184
I think there is but I don't remember the name of it. I'll ask in >>>/anime/4229

China's Zhuque-3 VTVL-1 methane rocket did a lift and land test successfully recently.
https://topwar.ru/234642-v-kitae-ispytali-prototip-pervoj-stupeni-rakety-nositelja-zhuque-3-vtvl-1-na-metane-s-vozvratom-v-tochku-starta.html

Related slightly to the nuclear thread as well >>20394

This is late news but a month back the US MSM was drumming up hysteria about Russian ICBM capabilities and supposed preparations in the use of space-nuking.
https://southfront.press/beware-of-big-bad-russian-space-nukes/

Russia is developing space nukes… as a response to the US refitting the space shuttle platform as an orbital nuclear launch system for glide vehicles in violation of the outer space treaty, which was a response to Russia developing hypersonics* and the US being unable to compete, which itself was a response to the US unilaterally pulling out of the ABM treaty so they could deploy dual use nuclear capable anti-missiles in Eastern Europe pointed at Russia claiming non-existent Iranian threats as justification to escalate to the current war in Ukraine. The USA is also working on space lasers for early warning and tracking against hypersonics and possibly direct energy anti-missile systems which is why in response china developed and successfully tested their satellite killer missile. The interesting part is that the USSR predicted this as being the end goal of NASA's Space Shuttle program, despite denial from them.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-thinks-x-37b-space-plane-could-drop-nuclear-weapons-208369

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a36521988/russia-says-x-37b-spaceplane-is-secret-space-bomber/

Part of the reason for this hysteria is justified, in the sense that Russia's ballistic missiles of every type are superior to NATO equivalents, with only the aging Trident II SLBM being any actual threat and the LGM-35A Sentinel program being delayed heavily because of costs and mismanagement.
https://topwar.ru/232823-lgm-35a-sentinel-novaya-raketa-starye-problemy.html

HyperPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

Japan created an interesting 'jumping' Rover
https://topwar.ru/237242-v-japonskoj-lunnoj-missii-vpervye-uspeshno-zadejstvovany-prygajuschie-kompaktnye-avtonomnye-roboty.html

The Angara A5 rocket was successfully tested recently. It is the replacement for the Proton-M series of rockets with several serious advantages relative to the older Soviet rockets.

The DPRK jammed a GPS satellite over the Yellow Sea, during operations involving surveillance balloons

https://topwar.ru/243352-kndr-podavljala-signaly-gps-v-zheltom-more-v-hode-naleta-vozdushnyh-sharov-v-juzhnuju-koreju.html

>>22073
>Yeah. Ever since I became enamored with Marxism I tried to translate dialectical materialism to science. I think complex system theory and some ideas in physics such as critical transition are a scientific expression of dialectical materialism, coincidentally so. Though they still harbor brainworms due to the philosophical grounding of capitalist society (e.g. mechanical materialism, idealisations)
Ok then, good to know I'm going in the right direction. I get that having scientific knowledge is necessary to understand dialectics too. I've heard many times from marxist authors and soviet textbooks that dialectics has been vindicated by science. They mention dialectics in many scientific fields and in concepts like entropy, elementary particles, natural selection and so on. Karl Marx considered Darwin to be pretty important, he told Engels about Origin of the Species
>This is the book which, in the field of natural history, provides the basis for our views.
Have you ever read Dialectics of Nature? After studying a lot of science back in his day, Engels was convinced that nature is indeed dialectical and wrote this book with Marx's backing in an attempt to prove it:
>"To me there could be no question of building the laws of dialectics into nature, but of discovering them in it and evolving them from it."
>"Dialectics, so-called objective dialectics, prevails throughout nature, and so-called subjective dialectics, dialectical thought, is only the reflection of the motion through opposites which asserts itself everywhere in nature, and which by the continual conflict of the opposites and their final passage into one another, or into higher forms, determines the life of nature"

>That was a very interesting watch. Are you German? If not then it must be quite difficult for you to understand the content, having to learn all of that in a different language.
No. I should have mentioned that the video has English subtitles. Still, many of these words that the German philosophers used like substance, thing in itself, immanent, spirit, and the infamous Sublimate/Aufheben have been VERY confusing to me. I should make sure I understand them all before trying to step into German idealism.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>22106
>Have you ever read Dialectics of Nature?
Yes, and I was quite disappointed by it because it wasn't what I was looking for. For most of the book, Engels meanders about scientific questions that are archaic today and when he spoke about what dialectical materialism means in scientific terms he did so relatively briefly.

>have been VERY confusing to me.
Bet. The terms are more intuitively understandable when you speak German.

>Really? So you don't prefer to read in German? I thought Marx and Hegel would be way easier in the original language.
I didn't explain that well. I do read them in German nowadays and also think it's easier to understand them when you read them in the original language. What I meant was that I used to read everything in English because most of the content I engage in is in English. Free English PDFs are much easier to find than German ones so I started reading German philosophers in English first.

>>22025
Traditionally, dialectics was a subdivision on of logic and was about the study of how arguments are derived. Hegel's dialectics (which is what Marxists are usually building on) refers to a particular kind of dialectical method used by Hegel. If you want a simple introduction read Hegel's Encyclopedia. Its a basic short summary of his whole philosophical system. Get a physical copy. grab a drink, put on some music, and just read and make notes as you move along. Its the only way to do it.

>>22107
>For most of the book, Engels meanders about scientific questions that are archaic today and when he spoke about what dialectical materialism means in scientific terms he did so relatively briefly.
Oh well. Do you know Alan Woods' works? It's the most recent work I know of that attempts to tackle science from a marxist point of view. He wrote a book called Reason in Revolt and a history of philosophy
>>22108
Thank you, I actually forgot that Hegel wrote a condensed version. I've been slowly reading it these days. I've been forced to consult a couple extra books, like a Hegel dictionary/glossary thing because some expressions are really hard to get (and don't get me started on Kant, he's even more confusing than Hegel). I've been checking out the book The Philosophy of Hegel (1955) by W.T. Stace, which was recommended to me during the 8chan days of /leftypol/, but I'm trying to not rely on it much.

Well I think something is finally starting to click. At least I'm slowly starting to get Being and Nothing, which is way more than I ever knew before. You know it's too bad that Marx couldn't write that treatise on Dialectics he had planned. Would've saved decades of arguments and debates.

>>22146
>Do you know Alan Woods' works?
Yes, I read Revolt in Reason and liked it very much. It's closer to what I expected when I read Dialectics of Nature.