Näin on. Ja yhä useammin twiitti itsessään on uutinen. Esim. Verkkouutiset "uutisoi" pitkälti jakamalla twiittejä ja kirjoittamalla niiden pohjalta "artikkelin". Ei se oikein journalismia ole, mutta tuonee klikkejä.
They just happen to be the two biggest movie releases of the year this far. I think they beat all the Marvel movies and the new Indiana Jones in box office, which signals that serialized movies are not the huge phenomenon they used to be just a few years ago. They are also received very favorable reviews. So they are just getting a lot of positive attention.
Yes, it is a very good movie. Like someone pointed out, it is a long one, but to me it didn't drag that much. In fact, the last 30-40 minutes are necessary to help the audience understand Oppenheimer's struggle post Trinity. And since it's a biopic that really is the meat of the film, not the building of the bomb itself.
I also enjoyed the way it managed to make the first atomic test suspenseful. I mean, everyone knows what happens, but somehow I still had my heart pounding at that point in the movie.
So yes, I think it a movie worth seeing.
Perustulo kaikille olisi fiksu veto, mutta ymmärrän että sen kanssa halutaan edetä vaiheittain ja kokeillen. Eriyttämisen riski on siinä, että eriarvoistaa. Jos erilliset tukisysteemit luodaan, on täysin mahdollista että sitä käytetään tulevaisuudessa perusteena sille, että maahanmuuttajia ja kantasuomalaisia koskevat eri säännöt ja oikeudet. Tämän kanssa pitäisi siis olla tarkkana, mikäli muutos tällaisenaan toteutuisi.
Sure. One thing is pretty certain though: thing won't be getting better under the current regime.
Vaikka pienen asialla olenkin ja paikallisen päättämisen lippua heilutankin, niin olen yhä enemmän sitä mieltä, että tämän maapallon ongelmia ei ainakaan kansallisvaltioiden perustuva kansainvälinen järjestelmä pysyy ratkomaan.
Vallan keskittämisessä on toki isoja riskejä, mutta myös se puoli, että isoja päätöksiä saadaan tehtyä ja vietyä maaliin. Toki paljon on kiinni myös siitä, millaisen mallin varaan päätöksenteon keskittämistä rakennetaan.
Ajatus EU:n liittovaltiota ei ole minulle täysin mahdoton, mutta suhtaudun siihen lähtökohtaisesti aika skeptisesti. Positiivisena kuitenkin pidän sitä, että tätäkin asiaa pidetään edes jollain tapaa varteenotettavana vaihtoehtona ja keskustelun arvoisena.
I think you seriously underestimate Russia. They have a helluva lot of manpower, natural resources and money. They are also able to import western sanctioned materials via China and Central Asian countries.
Russian society is being organized to resemble a war economy. There are new laws that make drafting more difficult to avoid and with more severe punishments. Also they have just raised the age for conscription. They are playing the long game and preparing for future eg. mobilizing the whole society under one delirious cause. Late 20s, early 30s it is totally possible that Russia has a better military capacity than it currently has. Sure, the life of average Russian will suck way more than it does now, but there's not really an option if you want to keep your job in a tank factory and avoid going to prison. You have no choice but to participate.
Putin has made his mind and the struggle in Ukraine only makes him more determined that He is fighting an existential battle with the west, especially since he believes that democracies and western liberal lifestyle are on a path of inevitable decline.
Sure, if he is stupid enough He might start a conflict with NATO, believing that the alliance will break when under pressure. He might think that He is prepared and the west is weak. And while there's 95% change that he is mistaken, it doesn't matter if he himself believes the crap the yesmen around him and He himself are feeding him. That's the real risk and to me, a defeat in Ukraine makes this scenario less likely to happen.
If beaten in Ukraine, there is a chance that the trajectory of the Russian Federation changes. Currently they are trying to fulfill a senseless imperial project which is doomed to eventually fail.
With defeat in Ukraine, there's a chance that the growing destabilization within Russia leads to abandonment of the imperial dream. It might also force a change in the leadership albeit not necessarily for the better. What it would do however, is to show that the Putinist system is not the only option and that the actions it has taken, are in fact harmful for Russia and Russians. In a way, it opens up a way to politicize the apolitical Russian public.
In the semi long/long term this would benefit the population as it would not only challenge the idea of Russia as an Empire, but also allow for a less authoritarian model of governance.
Well, this is one possible outcome, although not necessary. For example Finland was able to patch it's relations with Russia after 2 brutal wars with tens of thousands of casualties and a huge chunk of lost land. Of course the friendly relations were somewhat forced and a survival mechanism for a small country in Cold War era (Russia had a hold on Finland while Finland navigated in it's position to gain as much political freedoms it could) but it genuinely got rid of open hostilities between the countries.
Even after the cold war ended and up to today, majority of the population in Finland has not had a revanchist opinion towards Russians, albeit they were not fully trusted either. Finns learned to live as neighbors and in peace while preparing just in case.
So while it is probably likely that loosing land would cause a negative nationalistic turn in Ukraine and grievances towards Russia, it's not set in stone. Actually I am way more concerned that if Russia can claim a victory, they expand their delirious imperial/quasifascist project and escalate the conflict with the west further.
Palkkaa saa teknisesti nostettua joo, mutta tahtoa siihen ei ole. Se pitää tekijöitä poissa alalta ja vaikeuttaa tuota henkilöstöpulaa. Lisämitoitus toki ensisijainen toimi.
It's difficult to build lasting peace when the aggressor does not want it. Sure the Russians are open to peace in their terms, but imo that is just escalate things again in few years to come.
Don't get me wrong, EU is in big part a peace project. That however shouldn't happen at just any cost. Free, independent and territorially whole Ukraine is important for the future peace, Ukraine, Europe and even good for Russia.
Some time ago I read about a similar situation with copyright preventing use of pictures of 70+ year old paintings in a doctoral dissertation. The dissertation was all about analyzing those paintings so the situation was sort of ridiculous.
Even worse, the owner of the paintings (the artist's heirs) had given their permission for the use, but the the high quality photographs of the paintings were owned by institution that requested thousands of euros for their use. While 100% lawful and I understand cultural institutions also need money, the whole situation felt really wrong and against common sense and decency.
I understand requesting money from a commercial project, but for and academic dissertation that's not fair. Same goes for emoji's that are anyways used by millions of people every day. No one is going to profit directly from a dissertation anyways.It's just stupid and should be changed.