https://newlinesmag.com/ has been a favorite of mine lately if you wanna give that a try, it's got global coverage and there's always something interesting to read
doing some reason.. uhh intuitioning i imagine brazil and portugal might have some sort of a visa-free deal going on in which case llama 4 might actually be right here?
anecdotal, but my experience a year ago when i travelled international was: 2/2 delays by OEBB that made me miss connections (and absolutely rude and inconsiderate customer service reps in Vienna HBF on top of that), 1/1 on time trains by DB ICE
sadly no, it is an unsolved problem of scholarly publishing imo. on the one hand you have the reputable journals following the traditional publishing process that take pride in their high rejection rates -- these require a large percentage of desk rejections to avoid flooding their reviewers with sub-par papers. thus they'll inevitably have some quality papers fall through the cracks + some flashy sub-par papers making the cut.
on the other hand you have the pay-to-publish journals that have a financial incentive to push as many papers through peer review -- these thrive on sub-par papers that are technically just barely 'good enough', but the upside is that the real good ones will also make it through. however, they inevitably face reviewer fatigue, and the most valuable ones will quit reviewing if they often send them low-quality papers. so basically once in a while they'll publish top notch research without being aware of it.
i'm not aware of any middle-ground solutions out there and it certainly feels like a tough problem to solve.
a desk rejection is when the editor in chief (or managing editor, or whoever is the one first receiving the submitted paper) decides to reject the submission without sending it out for peer review
basically a judgment call by the person in charge of a journal that the paper is not interesting or impactful enough to warrant going through with the rest of the review/publishing process
GP is getting downvoted because it's a shit take. ethnic tensions in Kosovo date back to before the break up of Yugoslavia -- like early 1980s at the latest. Serbia may feel that now is an opportune moment to stir shit up again, and Russia may be supportive, but to suggest that Kremlin is pulling all the strings here is plain wrong.
other commenters in this thread display much more nuanced and informed perspectives.
This piece of investigative journalism has been posted on HN some 9 months ago. I'm reposting it now because a) it's a really thoroughly researched article, and b) it's presented in an interesting and engaging way (edit: on desktop at least; I haven't checked how it looks on mobile).
So, dear HN: trust me when I say it's worth spending some of your time on this one even if you're not interested in the subject matter itself
shown themselves to you maybe, but have in mind that post 1945 plenty of couped/invaded countries around the world could come up with a convincing case painting US as a bad actor too
this is where you should search for nuance and complexity, whereas dropping a-bombs on civilians is a clear cut case of an immoral act no matter how many lives it supposedly saves
it's 2/2 real world cases so 'all cases' seems like a legit conclusion to me, but if you can come with an ethical hypothetical a-bomb dropping scenario i'm all ears
i haven't heard / read his speeches but isn't that just regular political speech? 'we'll make x great again' where they invoke some mythical glorious past x and make grand promises to appease the masses?
i'll check the book out, but if there's less speculative stuff like leaked cables, war plans, fact based reporting etc out there i'd be more receptive to the idea that the Russians were genuinely about to blitzkrieg Europe if all went well in Ukraine
where does this notion of 'protecting the whole Europe from fascist hordes' come from? has there been any indication that Russia genuinely intended to steamroll Europe if they had taken Ukraine as planned?
according to Derna's deputy mayor quoted in [1] "the dams have not been maintained since 2002", so it seems unlikely that NATO intervention is to blame (though that was my kneejerk assumption too). the situation in Libya post NATO intervention certainly contributed to the negligence, but it has been going on for years at that point.
and that's just this storm. a lot of other countries in Europe got hit by severe floods earlier. it's definitely been a weird summer and not business as usual
yes and if i'm reading it correctly, the article says banning women from schools is a remnant of tribal law, which is why they favour sharia law -- the lesser evil apparently given the circumstances -- as crazy as it may sound to out secular ears