yogurt

That's only because they're designed with passivation to vent tanks and disconnect batteries to remove sources of explosion when they start to die. If that fails the tanks eventually pop from thermal cycling or the solar panels overcharge the battery until it blows up like a Russian satellite did earlier this year.

Leaves out the one catastrophic demand that the US actually cares about

(D) taking appropriate steps to return to United States citizens (and entities which are 50 percent or more beneficially owned by United States citizens) property taken by the Cuban Government from such citizens and entities on or after January 1, 1959, or to provide equitable compensation to such citizens and entities for such property;

"At the beginning of 1959 United States companies owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands - almost all the cattle ranches - 90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions - 80 percent of the utilities - and practically all the oil industry - and supplied two-thirds of Cuba's imports. ... The symbol of this shortsighted attitude is now on display in a Havana museum. It is a solid gold telephone presented to Batista by the American-owned Cuban telephone company." - JFK

The second one is more like what the original razed 17th century mosque looked like. Deng was the one who gave orders to open fire in Shadian, he's not good guy liberal here. Mao's strategy was to yell at people to be atheist. Deng's strategy was a religious red light district. Keep it alienated from secular society, make the mosques look like they were air-dropped from Saudi Arabia instead of having been there for 500 years, and give people the choice to be religious or Chinese but not both.

Starting before Xi China realized that wasn't working, especially in Xinjiang, so the new strategy was to integrate. That means less of Deng's "laugh at this weird foreign religion" architecture and more of "respect China's history of patriots who are Chinese first and Muslim second."

From a liberal perspective what's the difference between MLs having "critical support" for the Soviets or China and anarchists celebrating historical anarchists like Makhno and the CNT-FAI who burned churches and killed kulaks too? If anarchists are online supporting US foreign policy then liberals can assume you're just a liberal and any claimed anarchism is just larping, but if anybody throws a brick through a Starbucks window that's tankie authoritarianism stealing rights and freedoms from the Starbucks shareholders.

Tankie was coined by trotskyists to insult a slightly different kind of Leninist. Then anarchists picked it up and started calling trotskyists tankies. Now liberals call anarchists tankies. It's the circle of life, in a few years if you say tankie people will assume you're talking about Kamala Harris.

I think you're thinking of Xiaomi, Louis Rossman did a video assuming they were doing Apple-style serialization but all it was doing was blocking installation of self-driving if the headlights weren't standard. It wasn't DRMing brake pads or preventing buying headlights from a junkyard, there was a functional reason.

For me the jwt login cookie is being set to expire in 3023, I edited it to 2026 and it works

Even if you like the bot you should be downvoting it because that puts it in a predictable spot: at the bottom, without getting in the way of real comments.

having no outstanding, individual, or unusual features; unremarkable or impersonal. "the anonymous black car waiting to take him to the airport"

It's a gigantic library, #1 in the world by visitors by a lot, #4 by number of books, and they're doing that in NYC in buildings that look like this and a bunch of the books are 600 years old or have George Washington's handwriting on them, so it's real fucking expensive.

If you don't get the historical or political reason why something is the way it is then it seems "natural" by default. China never had a several millennia empire unless you think Europe is also a several millennia empire. The modern concept of Han is the same thing you're doing when you say "fucking Saxons". The Saxons didn't do anything, the imperial system and opposition to it is racialized. From the 1600s-1900s Han wasn't the dominant group in China, the Qing dynasty had a Manchu identity, and they executed people for expressing Han culture. Opposition to oppression and corruption and European imperial influence was racialized as Han nationalism.

CCP politics straddles an anti-colonial idea of Chinese identity where the diaspora of people shipped around European empires to build railroads or farm plantations are still Chinese, and then also a geographic identity that all those millennia of different systems whether Mongol or Manchu or Han or split up into 100 different states are all equally Chinese.

burned wood in the upper atmosphere also catalyzes ozone depletion That's why it was bad putting CFCs up there in the first place, almost everything catalyzes these reactions