Also don’t forget about survivorship bias. We don’t know how many percent of their buildings are still standing. Probably only the really really good build ones. Also never forget, any idiot can build a bridge that stands. It takes an engineer to built one that barely stands. And that is often what we are doing today. Making our stuff “good enough” as otherwise it wouldn’t be economic feasible in the short or midterm. I am still curious how good it would be if we would instead aim for the long-term though…
More ancient buildings have fallen than are standing I’d imagine but I don’t agree that just anyone can built a bridge. I’m not an engineer so I feel really inadequate making an opinion though. I agree 100% it would be very interesting to see how building practices would change if the goal were to construct buildings for longevity. There are lots of considerations though: weather, earthquakes, natural disasters, etc.
Another user posted a practical engineering video that I hadn’t seen yet and I heard your exact phrase about anyone building a bridge that stands so mea culpa i didn’t know any better.
I thought they figured this out already, and it was a combination of the lime chunks allowing the concrete to heal, and also mixing it hot somehow made a difference.
I’ve heard lots of reasons. One was that the Romans used volcanic ash, which has some kind of special structure that maked it durable. I’ve also heard that it had to do with using salt water. Obviously not using rebar is important to longevity. The article talks about the lime chunks in the Roman section. I’m kind of a sucker for any article about Roman history though.
I read a good chunk of that and I’m not going to lie the chemistry part went right over my head. My new favorite phrase is “post-pozzolanic reactivity.”
No! Witch hunt! It's all deepstate Trump hate! A very reliable chan poster told me, and my pastor agrees!! Trump can do whatever he wants or its anti-Trump bias! This is all just revenge for giving us 6G (worse than 5, do your own research)!
You can’t exploit it. I know some people won’t like to hear this, but Chinese expats are a security risk if they have any family still in China. It’s well known at this point that the Chinese gov threatens family members to pressure and blackmail residents abroad to perform espionage.
100%. How many instances were there where they just straight up stole resources/IP? CCP backed Industrial sabotage and IP theft is very much a concern.
My old company started a collaboration with a Chinese government subsidiary to get market access. When they announced it at a company meeting they almost literally said, “yes, we know they are trying to steal our IP”
Not here for this xenophobia. The people leaving are the people who don’t particularly like the government.
It’s a little ridiculous we have to keep saying that it’s not OK to say “all X people can not be trusted.” Even if the X is Chinese people, I know China is today’s boogeyman. When X was Japanese people we got internment camps.
You’re not really refuting the point though. It’s not that ‘Chinese people are untrustworthy’. It’s ‘Immigrants from China are vulnerable to blackmail and extortion by the CCP’.
The point as written in their comment is that we can’t use smart Chinese immigrants at all. Quote “Chinese expats are a security risk.” No nuance.
Anyone can be vulnerable to blackmail. People with gambling debts, people with credit card debt, business entanglements, money problems of any kind, cheaters, people who request to stay in a Russian suite once visited by Obama just to have prostitutes pee on the bed. Could be anyone.
In positions where blackmail is a concern, we have vetting procedures. So we can do better than just blanket saying Chinese people can’t be trusted.
I do get your point, but everyone is right here. The difference between “Chinese expats” and “people with family in China” is really splitting hairs. And it IS going to lead to xenophobia, especially in tech.
They don’t have to particularly like the government in order to engage in espionage. Like the commenter above said, they just have to have family still in China. Just within the last few months, there were two separate cases of USN sailors, both from China but naturalized citizens, who turned over classified information to the Chinese government following family pressure from the Mainland.
We should never engage in the sort of blind discrimination that resulted in internment camps. The associated risk of having family/ties in China just needs to be properly evaluated when placing people with family in/ties to China in positions of trust. The vast majority of Chinese people will never engage in espionage. And they should also never be unduly punished for the actions of the very few among them who do.
Careful if you don’t think Chinese people are mindless CCP drones with no independent thought you’ll be down voted. Really disappointed with Lemmy’s community so far it’s just as bad as reddit.
People are definitely more reactionary here (imo). The ‘downvote train’ can be just as powerful as reddit if other commenters don’t like what you say.
You’re being hyperbolic though if you’re referring to my comment in particular, I never said Chinese people are mindless CCP drones. I said that Chinese expats with family still in China are a security risk. I hoped that anyone reading that sentence would extrapolate from it that I meant in relation to military / national security roles, and there was not a need to directly specify that I didn’t mean every Chinese person is a security risk. Reading it back though I can see how it wasn’t very clear.
Yes I meant to be hyperbolic because that’s the general sentiment I see in the post and community. Not trying to call you out in particular. Though I would like to see some more sources for “Chinese gov threatens family members to pressure and blackmail residents abroad to perform espionage” because the main source I see from searching for it is from the FBI director himself.
Not to mention the recent string of hacking groups that have clearly had internal information.
They accessed an air-gapped system at Microsoft because they knew who to target.
They stole an expired cert out of a stacktrace that was moved from the air-gapped system to a compromised developer machine. They then were able to use this expired cert as part of an exploit chain.
I think this article focuses more on personal reasons. For example:
When Ms. Zhang decided to emigrate in July 2022, she made a list: Canada, New Zealand, Germany and Nordic countries. The United States didn’t make it because she knew it would be extremely difficult for her to get a work visa.
Ms. Zhang, 27, a computer programmer, felt the hustle culture of Silicon Valley was too similar to China’s grueling work environment. After putting in long hours at a top tech company in Shenzhen for five years, she was done with that. She also sought a country where women were treated more equally. This year, she moved to Norway. After paying taxes for three years and passing the language exam, she will get permanent residency.
Hey good for her, Norway is awesome if she can live with the winters, the different culture and a relatively small Chinese population. Sounds like it worked out for her in the end.
I know Lemmy is just Reddit 2.0 and aMeRiCa bAd and everything, but believe it or not we still attract and churn out some of the world’s brightest and are leading the pack in tech development and entertainment (which are often not coincidentally intertwined).
Honestly as unpopular as it is for me to say…, those need to be stopped too… no one should be getting married as teens when they can’t vote or sign a contract legally…
Romeo and Juliet laws are fine for consent purposes, but yeah… They can wait for marriage until they’re both adults.
Too many weird ways that people can technically get away with selling children.
Shouldn’t be that unpopular, really. Under those laws, a 16 year old can marry an 18 year old no problem. But, if things aren’t so great a year later (and let’s be honest, we all know people who’ve had those marriages), the now 17 year old needs permission from their adult spouse (parents don’t count anymore, since marriage also emancipates them) to retain an attorney or file for divorce.
Giving the maximum benefit of doubt here and assuming that Romeo and Juliette laws are an honest attempt not to saddle young lovers with a lifetime offender registration, the marriage component of them should be scrapped.
No one would have been in trouble if they were married. In Oklahoma, there are no age restrictions for marriage. An adult can marry a toddler if they want. Child marriage is a long-standing conservative tradition, unfortunately.
I grew up in the south surrounded by conservatives. They absolutely don’t see the problem with it. Conservatives see all straight same-race weddings as “traditional marriage” which is “sanctified by god”, which transcends age and man’s law.
Most consent laws used to be written so that marriage would be an exception. Whether Oklahomas have or not is a toss up, but given that they didn’t add a lower limit on marriage age, I’d guess they haven’t updated many of those laws in a while.
Yes they do and to a cheryy on top. It does not grant the child the right to sign othet contracts. So they have to get permission to hire a divorce lawyer. American law, American order at it’s finest
Even with the lawyer they need permission for the divorce. Running away is often their only choice to avoid being constantly raped by an old man. In the USA. In 2023. unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-…
Just an FYI, minors CAN enter into contracts. It is true infancy imparts a lack of capacity. However, minors can still enter contracts. They are voidable at the election of the minor party until a reasonable time after reaching the age of maturity unless the contract is for necessities, then it is not voidable.
I disagree with the no age restrictions statement. That makes it sound like there are no restrictions. According to Wikipedia , in Oklahoma, you have to be 18 to get married, 16 with a parent’s permission, and any age under 16 requires a court order.
One of my wife’s friends needed parental consent because she got married at 17 (to a guy a few years older). The whole thing worked out OKish - they’ve been together nearly 20 years, had a couple of kids, but I think they both recognise they got together too young, and wouldn’t otherwise be together today - though they have no plans to separate.
I can. By making it technically possible, you can divert attention.
One example would be for crazy edge situations. Like letting children with terminal illnesses fulfill their last wishes, or letting hormone ridden teens make their case to a judge, keeping them from more extreme actions.
But more practically, I think this is a great idea… 99.9% of anyone asking for this either needs court ordered mental evaluation and/or a referral to CPS to do a deep dig into the situation. By making it technically possible, that means anyone seriously pursuing this has to explain themselves to a judge.
Unfortunately our judicial system has a lot more to do with money than justice (so most people who would actually go through with this probably have the money to protect themselves from consequences), but this law would be a sensible part of a more perfect system… Granted this should almost never be granted by the court (terminally ill child is the only situation that makes sense to me), but there’s value in it
My opinion would change greatly if this is a real path to child marriage rather than a mostly theoretical possibility
mostly when the girl is raped by her future husband and the family did want to live with the shame/sin of sex before marriage. So they just marry off the girl and pretend the sex happened after the wedding
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.