Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hackandthink's commentslogin

>the law of the excluded middle, which says something can't be true and false at the same time

This is the not excluded middle, it is the "Law of noncontradiction"

Excluded middle means: either p is true or the negation of p is true

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction


I don't care about gas prices either. But next winter is going to be expensive. I don't have the option of switching from natural gas to a heat pump.

But of course, electrification as soon as possible.


I guess, a high oil price is a good thing for the oil industry, especially when producing oil domestically becomes more expensive.

But I also don't believe in some conspiracy by the American oil industry to eliminate other suppliers in order to fleece Europe.

(the article is not by Henry Farrell itself, it seems to be below his niveau)

https://shalemag.com/peak-oil-production-in-the-us/


High oil prices are good for most of the oil industry, but the oil industry is only like 3% of the US economy.

On the other hand, elevated oil prices are bad for a very large chunk of the other 97% of the US economy, who rely on buying oil and oil derived products in order to operate their industry.


I had to undress back then.

But anyway:

"The Clash - The Call Up (Official Video)"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ScaGjwkg2Y


That all makes a lot of sense. Mr. Devereux is being more realistic this time than he was at the start of the war in Ukraine.

My takeaway from the war in Ukraine is: it’s going to get worse and last longer than anyone ever imagined.


I remember his protracted war posts, and ... indeed there's still a war going there, and fortunately it did not even get into the anticipated guerilla phase.

Can you elaborate a bit on what was unrealistic? (Maybe you have different posts or claims by him in mind?)


I checked the blog, You have a point. Brett Devereux was more cautious.

"If you are trying to follow the War in Ukraine, I strongly suggest watching the War on the Rocks podcasts for the times they bring in Michael Kofman."

I’ve been caught up in “guilt by association” here. Michael Kofman always struck me as a cheap propagandist. (but I should shut up now)


Paying WoR subscriber here. Kofman likes to talk a lot and can't interview others because of it. He is also clearly pro-Ukraine.

But I never saw him as a cheap propagandist. Not even an expensive one.

Despite his obvious allegiance, he regularly criticised UAs actions and never went for any of the hurrah-hurr-durr delusions you had anywhere else. During the siege of Bachmut he repeatedly and clearly said that UA has nothing to gain from holding out. I remember him openly critical of the sacking of the defence minister, candidly describing the problems in UAs recruitment, never hyped up drones, avoided predictions and after that first fiasco with Trump and Vance last year he did not hold back criticism towards Zelensky and not once can I remember him painting the Russians as morons. On the contrary, in one episode he dismisses any sort of essentialism and related chauvinism, this was when refuting the idea that broad parallels can be seen between Napoleonic and today's Russia.


Habermas was a decent guy. He stood for a liberal and social democratic Germany. I respect that he didn’t fully go along with the shift towards crusading liberalism and militarism in Germany.

He was always part of the establishment. His writing was rambling and boring, and I always thought he was naive. RIP



He was a follower of Adorno whose ideas have not had a good legacy.


fourty

(1945 - 1949 it was split in 4 occupation zones)


If you ignore Berlin (which, I think, kept its four occupation zones) it were first four, three from January 1, 1947, and two from from August 1, 1948 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizone)


thanks


"The study examined different scenarios, from a "best case", in which the war ended in 2023 without significant further escalation, to a "worst case", ending in 2025 after further escalation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Ukraine


It is Burali-Forti 1897, predating Russel's paradox.


"the new AirTag is 50 percent louder than the previous generation, enabling users to hear their AirTag from up to 2x farther than before"

Can that really be true?


If you’re 2x farther away, the intensity of the sound with be 1/4, because of the inverse square law, so logically your speaker would need to be 300% louder.


And, technically, if you are 2x farther away, you are 3x as far away, so the intensity would be 1/9.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: