On a lighthearted unscientific note: After getting absolutely bombarded with traffic today (5-10x normal, YAY!), we noticed:
- No increased latency in responding to requests
- Flat memory usage at 130MB per worker (we run Nomad)
- Spiky CPU traffic (which is expected when starting and stopping Wasm modules hundreds of times a second), but never really over about 60% of the CPU on a small VM size on AWS
- No Wasm downtime (though we did have a non-Wasm load balancer hiccup at about peak load, cause unknown)
also google probably should delete all new entries from Ukraine or review them manually. if deleting all of them is difficult for users maybe maybe op want to create falses? idk
1. If you had read the wikipedia article carefully , you would see that the Timbuktu manuscripts are written, not only in Arabic, but also in West African languages like Songhay and Tamasheq.
As for story buildings, have you heard of the Lalibela Churches? [1] Granted they are hewn out of rock, but this is a quote form the linked article:
> The churches were not constructed in a traditional way but rather were hewn from the living rock of monolithic blocks. These blocks were further chiselled out, forming doors, windows, columns, various floors, roofs etc. This gigantic work was further completed with an extensive system of drainage ditches, trenches and ceremonial passages, some with openings to hermit caves and catacombs.
Unless you don't consider Ethiopia to be a sub-saharan country (which to me is even an absurd distinction)
I agree that making a distinction like "Sub-Saharan" is often unhelpful (like it would be to divide European history entirely by the Alps, say). I think some of this may be quibbling over terms, but my impression is that the Timbuktu manuscripts are all written with Arabic orthography, but in several languages (much like we're happily using the Roman alphabet here!) There are clearly multiple other indigenous scripts native to Africa[1]. Axum and Lalibela are remarkable architecturally, and Timbuktu itself certainly has multi-storied buildings[2].
> sub-saharan country (which to me is even an absurd distinction)
Why? Sahara was for bigger natural barrier than Mediterranean Sea, so for populations/civilizations it makes more sense than continental distinction (Africa/Asia/Europe). It is true that Ethiopia is kind of exception here due to Nile and Red Sea.
Songhay is from the 15th century and was developed after contact with other civilizations.
Tamasheq is not sub-Saharan as it was developed in North Africa.
I commented about Ge’ez and how it’s fairly modern (1k years old). So I agree that it’s sub-Saharan, but just not that old and unlikely to be used in the area that is presently Zimbabwe.
There may be other written languages in sub-Saharan Africa that we don’t know about that were used in ancient times where we would be impressed with these engineering structures.
Your first link describes the Malian documents that were written in Arabic and a language developed in the 15th century.
I think GP meant that written languages weren’t developed at times similar to other ancient civilizations (ie, Sumerian was 4K years ago).
Your second link describes an Ethiopian written language that came about in the 10th-14th century.
So I think the point is that written languages developed (or at least there’s not evidence of) much later in civilizations like where Great Zimbabwe was created.
This is different than other parts of the world. And if the Great Zimbabwe had been made in Siam or Persia or Japan or England, the cultures there had written languages at that time.
So I think the conflict is in the interpretation of time periods. I think GP’s point is valid as when I think of ancient civilizations having languages (or even the civilization that built this cool structure) I don’t think they had written languages.
Although there are many great civilizations that didn’t have written languages (eg, Inca had their knot system) and built lasting structures. So I don’t think the presence of written language is some sort of agenda.
Article says "Jirzankal cemetery" -- on the banks of the Tashkurgan river in what's now Xinjiang province. I don't think that would be a Scythian area, that's more Pontic steppe, west and north from there. This is on the other side of the mountains.
But could be Tocharian, which were Indo-European speakers, an extinct lost branch of the language family that split off very early and lived in this region. (Read up on the Tarim mummies).
"Early settlers worked this ground to grow crops and domesticate animals; eventually, around 6,000 years ago, agriculture led to urbanization. These early cities — Eridu, Uruk, Ur and others — relied heavily on the natural resources of the marshes and were strung along waterways and latticed with canals to give access to the plains, the Gulf and to one another. " this people weren't arabs as far as I know arabs came 1500 years ago. I know language is not ethnicity but the Sumerian and Akkadian cultures are dead for long time. the story is s still sad but its the same story every where
I think this is a loaded and defensive question that tries to broaden the scope of the allegation to something obviously wrong. Obviously everything the EU does isn’t automatically right because it’s the EU. But maybe if multiple reputable human rights organizations are condemning allegations of a country as baseless and part of ongoing human rights violations then maybe that specific thing is a correct statement of fact.
or maybe its conflict of interests. I'm not talking of the general situation but about this action by Israel government and the response. And this all human right groups are funded by the EU if its private or public it doesn't matter from the Israeli government perspective. Or maybe this groups doesn't know everything? why their members opinion is more accepted than the Israeli politicians who did that? some of them are even have pro-Palestinian independence stance
The fact based claim is that the Israel government haven’t provided evidence to their claims and therefore the claims are unsubstantiated. Any discussion of conspiracy can be put to rest with some proof.
but since when governments need to provide evidence and to whom? the world government? Can I go to random governments around the world and ask them to show evidence about their security issues to my organization?
Any state abiding by the rule of law, human rights, and democracy needs to provide evidence proving such allegations beyond a reasonable doubt and enabling the victims to challenge such administrative decisions in court. If Israel wants to drop the pretense of democracy, so be it. But human rights and the rule of law are universal obligations under international law.
Yes, and you should. And for those governments who can’t or won’t provide evidence, you should disregard their assertions as baseless and suspect.
I mean, why wouldn’t you demand proof? Governments have a long and nasty history of conflating their political interests with security interests, just trusting their assertions seems extremely foolhardy.
Tough. The logical consequence of “we can’t show you the proof” is “okay, I don’t believe that you have any”. After all, you would not believe my assertions about fantastical achievements without evidence, and the consequences of that hypothetical are much lower than the state saying it should be able to kill people in the name of “counter terrorism”.
More succinctly; “it would compromise means and methods” is a phenomenal way to cover up shaky or non-existent evidence.
All the evidence of Russian collusion and hacking is almost always presented without any evidence whatsoever. Yet no one in the mainstream media thinks to question it.
I'm sorry if finding out that national security of a foreign state trumps your demands for evidence in a terrorism investigation is so traumatizing you classify it as abuse.
countries do hit jobs rarely and when they do its clear this person was involved 100% of the time. That's the only case people get killed in the name of “counter terrorism”. the discussion was about banning an organization not a person.
They claim that, yes. Then again the DOD also claimed that their final drone strike was on a valid combatant, later on they had to admit that it was just a worker being greeted by his children. Whoops (/s).
Obviously banning an organization is much lower stakes than killing or jailing someone, and we should adjust accordingly. Still, if Israel (or any other country really) is going to run around and say that an organization or person is connected to terrorism, they should pony up enough evidence commensurate with the actions they propose so that we can discuss the matter. The pressure for any state to conflate political and security threats is high, and public scrutiny is part of what provides a counter balance.
This is particularly important if a country is demanding that the international community writ large take action against a given person or organization. Should not the citizens of the countries being asked to participate have the opportunity to see some evidence and discuss the matter?
No, I’m demanding they support their allegations before killing people. Giving the state unfettered access to kill and jail god knows who based on unsupported allegations of terrorism is very dangerous territory, and any right thinking person should be wary of handing out that kind of power.
Saying this is about making me “feel better” is pushing the limits of good faith discussion, don’t do that.
It's not your state, and this did go to court, you just weren't privy to the evidence because you're not a party involved in the investigation or the case, and have no security clearance in this foreign state to know the details.
> why their members opinion is more accepted than the Israeli politicians who did that?
Why does the opinion of multiple third parties carry more merit about the adversarial facts of a conflict than one of the participants to said conflict? Really?
Exploting bugs to gain unauthorized access is a crime regardless of who does it. If the crime happened on EU grounds they have to asnwer to EU. That particular company should have trading sactions imposed on it just like the country it belongs to. We do the same for Russian hackers so it's only fair to apply that to everyone else.
EU is the modern equivalent of Soviet Union and it behaves like that. They do a ton of stuff wrong and they take decisions without any regard for the local culture and people. This has nothing to do with illegal access to other peoples devices.
are we all stuck in competition with each other about who is more productive and smart? the economy is the embodiment of that fact and will just extract us as much as its can forever? is it possible to build and own our life instead of being forced to labor until near the end of life? why technology improved so much but the work is never done? can individual have control of his life or we stuck in doing what the economy dedicates? is there a place on earth is not owned by anyone?
> the economy is the embodiment of that fact and will just extract us as much as its can forever?
No it isn't. The economy isn't zero sum.
>is it possible to build and own our life instead of being forced to labor until near the end of life?
By "forced to labor", are you talking about having to work for someone else, or having to labor at all? It's clear that the former is possible (ie. start your own business), and the latter is a pipe dream as long as we're not in a post-scarcity economy
economy is reflected by the the decisions of individuals and groups and what they priorities.
Im not talking about post-scarcity economy Im talking about trying to get there, right now it feels we only moving away from it, and the labor we do is not constructive to us or valued very little.
Its not the competition that is bad. Is the things we have to fight with each other to get. humans conquered all of the earth twice, now we fight on how to divide the prize and get to the top of society. thats the struggle of being alive as a human, if you are Chinese or American or anything.
