I am wondering about the downvotes. You mean it is offensive to assume that something is different? Thank you for that feedback. I would have never guessed.

Indeed. The important part are the experiments to determine the correlations. Without those every opinion about OP’s hypothesis in this post is as useless as my guess.

Now determine the correlation between the various methods and adhd. My guess is that people with adhd are more likely to use the more exotic methods.

The situation could be more nuanced. Putin lost in Syria and Europe is split from Russia and massively spending on weapons. That’s already a huge win, maybe big enough to accept a bleeding face.

Adding up to 10, like the other comment explains, is the common way. Using 14 as intermediate step suggests a different way of thinking. OP could be on to something if that’s normal to you.

7 + 6 = 10 + 3 = 13

and seeing everyone make the same stupid mistakes over and over

Propaganda has improved. People don’t have communities. It’s worse. People have to be more clever than before to compensate.

Thank you.

After Tiananmen they can’t believe in #1. The party showed that they were in control.

#2 is possible but requires that the elite mistakes money for power. I cannot imagine that old money makes such a rooky mistake.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production

China is producing so much steel that the USA cannot believe that they can contain the Chinese navy in a prolonged war.

I cannot pin it down but things don’t fully add up.

Downvoters, for #1? Jelzin was corrupt. Was there something similar in China?

South Africa had a nuclear program and gave it up. Left alone.

How do nukes help South Africa? They don’t have rockets. What do they threaten to bomb that is a deterrent?

Where are those informations diskussed? If the information was out in March then Lemmy as a whole is not good at filtering the relevant news.

Now, how do I focus without the stress of option 2? Without focus there is no option 1.

About one hour in, he is talking about a three front war against China, Russia and Iran that was predicted in the 1990ies.

Why has the USA allowed China to become powerful? That war could have been fought earlier with a much bigger technological lead.

Political change is driven by 3% of the population. 1/3 voted for democrats. So 1% of the population would be incarcerated. Peak prison population was 0.7%. Doubling that capacity is possible, especially if prison camps can be used.

What’s the winning strategy? If violence is escalated until everybody is incarcerated not much will change.

hadn’t been held back by lazy MS et al.

MS is not lazy but working hard to maintain their lead.

edit: Just noticed that my phrasing is bad and could be seen as praise. OP is right, MS is holding everybody back.

I meant to say that they abuse their market domination to maintain their lead.

Look at MS Teams. It was free until Slack was done as a competitor.

MS did things but that’s inevitable. The crucial part are the things that they prevented.

It’s increadible that OP is even downvoted.

However, the only strategically significant rival we have that utilizes those shopping lanes are Russia, whom the administration wants to buddy up too.

If that doesn’t play out, Putin will be dropped like Saddam.

Better than being a hopeless doomer about everything.

How can any change happen if there is only a limited willingness to perveive reality and analyze it?

They’re clearly referring to when it became easily accessible to the masses.

When have you been to the moon?

Only if the summary is included in the training data.

After all, it’d be much easier to press on a button that’d kill 10 000 people living 10 000 km away from you than to stab one person to death.

That could be the result of our training. After all, people die for our way of life and we have to cope.