It’s just time travellers from original timeline that tried to prevent it, and time travellers from the fucked up resulting timeline that returned to fix everything back to at least what it was

in which case, enjoy your privilege

…for now

It will do nothing, and I personally don’t think it should be done. But as a thought experiment it shows that saying other authoritarian countries’ citizens that they just ‘didn’t riot hard enough and this are all to blame’ was a bit wrong

But if it’s on Truth Social then it’s certified true

To be fair, I’m using Linux, MacOS with Darwin Nix for managing it, Windows, and I still am not sure what exactly is an operating system, what’s the role of kernel and all of the possible system software is. Well, I think kernel is for hardware abstraction, but other than that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Remember not to skip your prescriptions

Sometimes this is useful, though. Other times it’s infuriating 😅

Maybe better use second most popular: Spanish, it at least uses same letters (differently though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

I think it depends on if you want to emphasize something specifically or not. Second ‘that’ is the default it seems, but I first expected ‘was’ to be emphasized in this sentence

You don’t need to use and learn everything, just pick what you need.

I used to think the same, but now I think you should at least skim through everything. Reason being otherwise you may reinvent the wheel a lot, and there are many use-cases where you really don’t want to do that (but C++ makes it so easy, I was constantly tempted to just do what I want and not look for it being already available)

A lot of computational heavy tasks for science were done in Fortran at least ten years ago (and I think still are). I was told that’s mainly because Fortran has a good deal of libraries for just that, and it was widely taught in academia so this is a common ground between the older and newer generations.

I think it may be gradually superseded by Python, but I don’t know if it is

saying that the British should inherit it is a very weak argument

Yes, I am not making that argument, inheritors mush be at least somewhat related.

Although, in case you’re talking about, the indigenous people’s artifacts will likely end up in the country of their conquerors and oppressors, which is also a shame

It’s not an empire if you call it a federation /s

This is reasonable, but what if the culture that created the artifacts already went extinct like Maya? Besides, we’re not only talking about how it shouldn’t have been done in the past, but also about what to do today with that past.

It’s easy to say that everything bad of today is only because of wrongdoings of yesterday, but it is not useful and usually is only used as propaganda for something that has no justification except for the past being bad.

Edit: although, now that I think about it, coming from this viewpoint, that past is past and we should care about present, it’s clear that you’re right. If the culture bearer (or the inheritor, but this is grey zone for me) wants to destroy what is rightfully theirs, so be it. There is a bit of an issue with making those decisions by all eligible people, not a couple of extremists, though. Well, I think I found the contradiction that I had in me

As far, as I know, there are many cases of not returning on the ground of owners not having conditions to preserve.

But thanks for replying at least, I was hoping to see opposing opinions to try to understand what am I missing, not just ‘stealing bad’ downvotes

Oh, I didn’t know that, neat. Then there’s no space for nit-picking

Yes, but it still is about language, not game engine.

Albeit technically, the statement is correct, since it is more specific.

This is a conundrum I can’t wrap my head around. One (country, usually) can have something of cultural significance, and decide what to do with that. They can make it a museum, make it generally available, forbid access at all, and even destroy it completely (e.g. see Palmyra under ISIS).

If the object in question is not protected by UNESCO (and really, even if it is) no one has a say in that. The only remotely correct argument that can be made is that destroying historical artifacts makes it hard or impossible to study history, but one can argue that we don’t need to study history, it’s not like this is an imperative. Another argument may be that things do not belong to those who have it, but instead to their people as inheritors of people who lived long ago, but I don’t think that also helps.

And so, on one hand, I am for preserving artifacts and not destroying those, on the other hand, I don’t quite see what moral ground is there for it.

This looks like some kind of doom:

{“data”:{“error”:“Imgur is temporarily over capacity. Please try again later.”},“success”:false,“status”:403}