”Another Lavender user questioned whether humans’ role in the selection process was meaningful. “I would invest 20 seconds for each target at this stage, and do dozens of them every day. I had zero added-value as a human, apart from being a stamp of approval. It saved a lot of time.”
This article is more than 1 month old
‘The machine did it coldly’: Israel used AI to identify 37,000 Hamas targets; Guardian, 2 Apr 2024
Its nice that you respect this person but can we retire the word polyglot? Saying it on behalf of someone else is slightly less worse than someone referring to themselves as one.
I would like to propose just saying “well rounded”, or “multifaceted”.
Its almost as bad as people that care about Mensa.
The blog author speaks around 15 languages competently and he reads in about 15 more. Here's a 2 hr long interview with him where he touches on this topic: https://azeletmegminden.hu/040-sajo-tamas-podcast/ (in hungarian)
Maybe if you are suggesting to retire a whole word out of the language you could at least provide a (valid) reason to do so? It's not really obvious and a bit surprising, honestly.
„John von Neumann was "violent anti-communist and much more militaristic than the norm", according to his own words from one of the Senate committee hearings. He was an advocate of the "preventive war" strategy (against USSR), and was quoted in 1950:
"If you say why not bomb [the Soviets] tomorrow, I say, why not today. If you say today at five o'clock, I say why not one o'clock?" ”
https://www.quora.com/What-were-John-von-Neumanns-political-...
We forget that Khrushchev had literally said "We will bury you", banging his shoe on the table on international TV. He wasn't fucking around. Von Neumann knew many, many people tortured, killed, or sent to the gulag by the Soviets.
So the proposed solution to stop them being tortured, killed and sent to the gulag was to nuke the and hundreds of millions others so they'd be dead before that could happen?
> Question 1: Sara wants to buy a desk before she starts her Open University course. She has chosen a suitable place for it but needs to measure the space before going to buy it.
> Which of these units is the most suitable for measuring the width of the desk? (a) millimetres, (b) metres, (c) centimetres, (d) kilometres.
Seems pretty arbitrary to me. Okay (d) is arguably out. (b) is maybe out? (c) vs (d) seems a toss up to me. Who cares if it's 1234mm or 123.4cm? How is this even a good question? Not a good sign
Note: the answer they want is (a). I don't think I have a tape measure I could get accurate millimeters on especially given measuring a space where I need to bend the tape at 90 degrees like next to a wall.
I might hazard that you, by virtue of being here and by virtue of having dug so far into the question, are exactly not the kind of person this question is targeted at.
Imagine being someone who cannot produce an answer to this question. Who cannot discuss it.
The vast majority of people for whom this entry-level course is aimed at do not think like you. The purpose of the question is not to elicit a correct answer, although I note the effect intended actually worked perfectly on you and the question has been a success in your case. Maybe you are exactly the kind of person this question is aimed at!
The reason for the question, IMO, is not to get the given answer.
The reason is to learn why there is an answer, at which point you can give an opinion as to whether cm/mm are better. You've missed the primary step, and almost certainly are - as others point out - over qualified for this question (which is a precursor to discussions of decimal precision).
Often when helping the kids with homework I find myself answering "well this is the answer they want ... but the real answer is ...".
tl;dr the question is there to make you think, not because there's only one answer.
The opening paragraph from NYT: „CSAKVAR, Hungary — Under Communism, farmers labored in the fields that stretch for miles around this town west of Budapest, reaping wheat and corn for a government that had stolen their land.”
1. The Csákvár State Farm was originally the estate of Esterházy family (the biggest landowners in Hungary).
2. There was an agricultural cooperative in Csákvár, owned by the farmers. It was a rather successful venture. The state had not owned the land of the cooperatives in Hungary. They worked for themselves.
Is this a supposedly factual piece of quality journalism, or a cheap propaganda?
It is wrong in the sense that the peasants had never owned it, but right in the sense that collective ownership under communism was a sham. They should have had a chance to own it after communism, but Orban's fascists have stolen it.
They were liberals at the time and spoke for tolerance etc. (Not joking, Orbán used to be a liberal, he even was the vice president of the Liberal International up until 2000 or so). He became conservative in the mid 90s.
Orbán also fiercely condemned the style of Putin's rule while he was in opposition. He accused of the then PM (socialist) of going to Putin as the party leaders went to Moscow during communism. This was up until 2008 for sure. They also waved Tibet flags when Chinese diplomats visited etc. They turned around 180 degrees on many issues since they are in govt.
Budapest has been more left leaning for a long time. The 2010 elections were special because people everywhere were very fed up with the previous socialist government for various reasons: Corruption, some effects of the global crisis were blamed on them (but they definitely contributed their own share of mismanagement), and of course the "Őszöd speech" leak wherein the PM admitted at a party meeting that they've been lying for years about the economy and they haven't got anything of significance done over the years prior.
The point is, before this landslide victory of Orbán in 2010, Budapest used to be a socialist and left liberal bastion, along with a few other cities such as Szeged. Budapest's mayor was the same left winger (Demszky) for the 20 years between 1990 and 2010.
The divide between cities and the countryside is huge though. Orbán is still overwhelmingly popular among villagers and the poor.
Let's see some Hungarian ones:
kutya, kutyát,kutyának, kutyán, kutyába, kutyában, kutyához, kutyának a (dog's), kutyára, kutyánál, kutyailag, kutyább, legkutyább, legeslegkutyább, kutyai, kutyáé
kutyám, kutyámat, kutyámnak, etc. (my dog)
kutyáim, kutyáimat, kutyáimnak, etc. (my dogs)
kutyájuk, kutyájukat, kutyájuknak, etc. (her/his dog)
kutyáik, kutyáikat, kutyáiknak (her/his dogs)
kutyák, kutyákat, kutyámnak etc. (plural)
etc, etc.
My beloved teacher (she was professor of ancient history, India) said that the Hungarian language is almost as difficult as the Sanskrit.
I know more people that tried learning Hungarian and failed than those who tried and succeeded, with a ratio of 10:1 if not more. The best part is that I heard from more than one Hungarian that it's not worth learning their language because it's too complex and there's only ~10 mil people that speak it. It's just not worth the effort :)
