HN user
I don't see the irony, I'm just more knowledgable about Chinese literature so I gave an example of how biased the list is using its lack of Chinese literature. I am fully aware that many other literary traditions are also not represented on that list, I think its fair to say the vast majority of books on that list belongs to what is normally referred to as western literature.
Your suggestion for naming would be more accurate and I would be fine with it. However, besides the naming, this list shows how shallow western reviewers are as greatest book lists on the chinese internet always include multiple western books.
For example, the top 350 books doesn't include a single Chinese book! This is enough to shows you how biased and worthless this list is. It's essentially suggesting there is no literary tradition outside the west.
Who are terrorists? Foreigners the US government doesn't like? Who are domestic terrorists? Citizens the ruling faction doesn't like? Founding fathers must have been a bunch of terrorists.
He needs to start a Radio Free America to save his legacy.
Who is "We"? Why do you assume HN users aren't Trump supporters? Many people see this from a totally different perspective. In most countries, these recent events would be called a coup, performed by the blue faction of the establishment.
Yup, everypage is super slow.
Just think about how easy it is to make deep fakes with this.
Wow! Another propaganda piece which repeat same falsehoods about COVID origins from China without providing meaningful substance. It's from the NYTimes too, a reputable fake news source which also slanders Trump. Could it be they are also in on the conspiracy to engineer this global reset by stealing the election from Trump using a lab engineered virus?
While we're discussing racist coronavirus conspiracies which can't explain the positive COVID results of Italian and French patients in November 2019, why don't we go all the way instead and discuss the conspiracies used by Trump supporters? The virus was clearly manufactured by the deep state to steal the election from Trump, to take away person freedoms and to implement a global reset. I find that theory to be much more believable and interesting than this Pottinger paid hit piece on China.
Wow, I guess CIA only needs pay for two pieces to convince you of the Truth™.
This is a valid possibility, interesting to see such double standards applied to different tech companies based on the residence of their HQ.
http://britneyspears.ac/physics/basics/basics.htm My prof showed a slideshow in class that included the band diagram photo, which definitely piqued my interest. I think its just an old school informative website on semiconductor physics with a Britney Spears theme, which back in the day must have been a great idea.
How do you know Taiwan doesn't have malicious state actors behind these backdoors? Is it because they aren't in a China ruled by the evil CCP?
No company can make the 5nm litho systems today, and catching up with the decades of R&D they've invested is not feasible. They are the greatest achievement of science and technology on the planet. [0]
Those are some huge claims, which could have previously been said for many currently outdated technologies.
I only found this https://twitter.com/iamforrest_/status/1342580703440084994
https://twitter.com/intheMatrixxx/status/1342919849509597185... Explain this video without resorting to false flag please.
Can't believe this simple method hasn't been tried before.
This is like a standard university press statement for a standard high quality experimental article. It seems like the researchers have more experimental evidence of topological phases in Magic angle graphene and found some results which cannot be explained by existing theory. This paper has little impact for practical applications, but could lead to more discoveries in the interesting field of topological insulators, i.e., churn more papers.
Yes just like all the "anonymous sources" commonly cited in the news.
That's just fancy technical terms to justify the propaganda. If these kinds of "hard proof" which definitively link hacks to nation state actors exist, why are they never publically revealed?
It's gotten so bad that I actively avoid clicking any HN links with possible connections to China since I know a large portion of the comments will contain nonrelevant arguments along the lines of "China bad". On the bad astroturfing days I can't tell HN and Reddit apart.
How come this community of self-proclaimed hackers and independent thinkers are so quick to believe whatever "cyber-attack" related news that gets published?
Have you considered the possibility these "attacks" occured and were detected months before but were only announced recently? Could it be that some people have a motive to spin some stories during these politically sensitive times?
In the end they still haven’t exactly caught up to the quality we had in the US.
Arrogance, this is one of the factors that killed US manufacturing.
Let's see how many Americans truly believe in the four boxes of liberty.
Do you really want big tech and alphabet soup agencies to have the social media history (secrets, likes/dislikes, usage profile) of our future leaders?
There isn't really much of an analogy here, and on a general note, trying to approach a new problem by seeking an analogy to something we already know isn't really the best way to gain insight: simply put, not everything we are about to see is going to be like something we have already seen, or even close to it.
My analogy isn't meant for people fluent in both Chinese and English that understand the nuances between variants of languages. The analogy is much more informative for people deciding to learn Chinese than your any of your 發/髮 → 发 examples and analysis. Clearly there are distinctions between traditional Chinese and simplified Chinese, your earlier posts contain many valid examples and analysis which are suitable towards a Chinese etymology audience rather than the general English speaking audience who are curious about Chinese. FWIW I'd teach my kids traditional Chinese, but overexaggerating the difference between the two variants is not helpful for Chinese learners.
Your examples are excellent in pointing out the many to many mapping during the simplification process. Many people assume chinese characters are somehow "static" and that the modern traditional characters are not aggregately mapped from older characters. Your last point is also very important as the top questions I've come across language learning forums is traditional vs simplified. This seemingly trivial issue to people fluent in Chinese often get exaggerated and politicized to the detriment of Chinese learners. The best analogy I can think of between traditional vs simplified is akin to American English vs British English, except English learners don't make a big fuss about which version they should learn first.
Please provide some sources for your claim. I don't follow your logic on how 宝 means treasure in Japanese because "The King's balls are his treasure", and not because the character and its meaning was adopted from Chinese.