HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

noworld

no profile record

投稿

A Way to Challenge the Groupthink of Scholarly Journals

wsj.com
3 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·先月·1 コメント

NASA Marches Toward Artemis III Mission in 2027, Names Crew Members

nasa.gov
2 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·先月·0 コメント

Scientists Precisely Edit Human Embryo DNA. Are 'Engineered Babies' Next?

news18.com
3 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·先月·0 コメント

Ukraine captures enemy Russian position using only robots

nypost.com
7 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·3 か月前·0 コメント

The Emperor Protects: A Warhammer 40k Musical

youtube.com
3 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·3 か月前·0 コメント

Colosseum gets a fresh look recreates the footprints of long-gone columns

apnews.com
4 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·4 か月前·0 コメント

We're Not Ready for Superintelligence

youtube.com
3 ポイント·投稿者 noworld·9 か月前·0 コメント

コメント

noworld
·2 か月前·議論
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-special-forces-won-409k-bet...

Another indicator we could track.
noworld
·2 か月前·議論
One time I wrote a game in English.
noworld
·2 か月前·議論
Ban the trading and upping the base pay would probably improve accessibility.
noworld
·2 か月前·議論
https://status.claude.com/
noworld
·4 か月前·議論
‘Unlike most city building games, I'm Sorry Did You Say Street Magic specifically prohibits creating a map due to the historical connections between map-making and colonialism.”

Everyone delete your maps app.
noworld
·4 か月前·議論
Like something out of Fallout
noworld
·4 か月前·議論
Man, if there were only something more reasonable... something in-between letting them spy at will and concentration camps. Hmmm, maybe we will think of something eventually.
noworld
·5 か月前·議論
[flagged]
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
"extraordinary claims/extraordinary evidence" isn't scientific rigor, it's adding qualifiers to make the evaluation of the claim and evidence more subjective.
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
Ah, since the claim contradicts materialism, you get to make up a scenario, present no evidence, then put the burden on the other side. Got it.

There's literally extraordinary evidence in the PDF, you just don't like it.
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
I don't think there's a "guarantee" that it wasn't backdated, but there isn't any evidence of that either.
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
Can you give me some evidence that this document was backdated? I'm not saying the government isn't shady AF, but I just wonder what's behind the immediate jump to "this has to be BS" rather than keeping an open mind.
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
The first PDF is the record of a remote viewing session from 2 days before the USS Stark incident, and it is eerily similar to the incident. The feelings and "atmosphere" (can't think of a better word for it) sound like what you might expect on a ship being attacked by a random missile.

For example:

1. The drawing on p. 7 looks like the superstructure of a warship.

2. The next few pages might describe what it feels like to wonder if your ship is actually under missile attack.

3. On page 10 it records "aircraft--large, multiengined; distant; orbiting; distraction controlled, directed. 'Under orders.'" This USNI article has a little more detail on the AWACS plane detecting the incoming attack: https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2017/j...

There are other similarities, but the CIA report predates the attack, which is especially strange.
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
I always thought this was interesting.

May 15, 1987: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00789R0017000...

May 17, 1987: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_incident
noworld
·6 か月前·議論
I never noticed that the floor of the BoP appears to be mounted on a shock-absorbing suspension
noworld
·9 か月前·議論
[flagged]