Reuven

@PhupheliMu13579 @cenkuygur @Dogecat1044208 2023 is only three years ago, is that really where you are starting from? Israel literally left Gaza itself in 2005. If their plan is to conquer it that seems counterproductive.

@CoopReuven @cenkuygur @Dogecat1044208 When did they give any land back since 2023 u lying piece of manure😅osreal now occupies about 50% of gaza and a large part of southern syria and about 10% of lebanon yes they are land thieves

Congrats to Israel, they killed another peace deal. We were at 95% done. After Puppet Trump talked to Netanyahu, he came out with new completely unrealistic demands: 1. Israel doesn't have to abide by the peace deal and can keep attacking Lebanon. So, only a ceasefire for one side. 2. We have to take out all the enriched uranium on day one, not in the second stage. 3. All Middle Eastern countries have to betray the Palestinians and sign Abraham Accords to normalize relations with Israel without ending the occupation. These are purposely impossible, so that the war continues. And Israel is bombing Lebanon heavily now to try to reignite the war. They are not our allies, Israel is a terrorist government which has captured our government and media. They're using it to drive permanent war that Americans are forced to pay for.

@TonyWitAhBurner @cenkuygur @Dogecat1044208 So why have they given back land in the past? If this is their plan they aren't hiding it very well. So what did they accomplish when they returned most of the land they conquered in previous wars?

@CoopReuven @cenkuygur @Dogecat1044208 do you know of the greater israel plan??? they will keep conquering land until that is complete lol

@cenkuygur @Dogecat1044208 Do you really believe Israel is fighting this war to conquer more land? They have consistently given land back they could have kept.

@Dogecat1044208 You mean the Israeli soldiers invading Lebanon? Look at how entitled Israelis are. They think they have a right to come into another country, take their land and if anyone defends themselves, they're killing poor Israeli soldiers! No, those are terrorists invading their country.

@Mega_Spud Why would you make potent sulfur not movable by a piston? Just because Java can't move block entities is not a good reason to add that limitation to Bedrock.

And just like that it's time for another Minecraft Beta/Preview! More fixes and tweaks incoming - read the changelog at feedback.minecraft.net/hc/en-us/artic…

@MicahBohnenste4 @CDonnick1 @steaakfriend Steelers fans have a valid excuse to pick 9-8 every year.

@CDonnick1 @steaakfriend REAL. I can promise you no Steelers fans will be predicting 13-4 though 💀

I love all fans using the schedule release date as a way to make their prediction for this season because they all go the exact same way. Sweep the bad division teams, split vs. the good. 9-8 to 11-6 prediction if you missed the playoffs last year. 13-4 if you made it.

@cashmoneydrunk @new_era72 I'm sorry but this throw is a silly reason to change your mind about him. I also warmed up to him more as the season went on but this has to be one of the luckiest plays of all time.

@new_era72 I was a Caleb hater till this throw icl

We were getting straight gems in Round 2 of the playoffs and I looked at the NBA and sighed

@Steve5081979 @OunkaOnX *Provides literally zero proof* "What more proof is needed?"

@OunkaOnX What more proof is needed that Trump is being blackmailed by Israel and the Neocons? I’d say none.

Tucker Carlson says he told Trump to his face: "Netanyahu hates you. Rupert Murdoch despises you. Ben Shapiro, Mark Levin - they all hate you. The people pushing you into this war want to destroy you. On behalf of Israel." And Trump's response? "Yeah, I know."

@starblade125 I actually don't think that means they were better though. They just had the Bucs number. Against common opponents the Bucs were much better they just couldn't figure the Rams out.

The 2020 Bucs won the Super Bowl, and they retained all 22 of their offensive and defensive starters. The 2021 Rams beat them twice.

@rbnmckenna86 @RafaRuizdeLira Republicans in general don't think of their political opponents as tyrants so that isn't included in "achieving their political goals".

@RafaRuizdeLira I guess that’s a vote for yes I’m being too much of a philosopher. I’m still puzzled though; isn’t the right to bear arms in the US partly about having the means of resistance to tyranny?

Whenever this comes up I’m always puzzled by the poll question. Who on earth thinks it is never justified to use violence to achieve political goals? Am I just being too much of a philosopher here?

@jon_vs_moloch @stolperson That's why, honestly, in real life I probably would actually take one box. I stick with two being the logical choice but $1000 just isn't that much money so I'm willing to lose out on it on the chance that I'm wrong and could get $1M.

@CoopReuven @stolperson It could really be “slightly better than chance” lol, there’s a 1000x payout difference.

How do you vote in the Button problem? How do you vote in Newcomb's problem?

@jon_vs_moloch @stolperson I heard it as "almost always right" implying it had gotten it wrong before. It doesn't really make a difference except that a 95% accuracy seems somewhat realistic while 100% just looks like it can see the future.

@CoopReuven @stolperson The level of accuracy generally given is "has never been wrong so far".

@jon_vs_moloch @stolperson At some level of accuracy I might be convinced to take one box because I'd assume the computer was either supernatural or it was cheating. It will never make sense logically, because again, I'm already in the room, if I walk out with $1M then if I had taken both I'd have more.

@CoopReuven @stolperson Would it change things if you learned that all past participants who decided *once already in the room* to pick one box *also* left with a cool milly?

@stolperson @jon_vs_moloch But the way the problem is actually worded I don't find out about any of the rules until I'm already in the room. What I do now can't change anything. I just take the most money available.

@stolperson @jon_vs_moloch This is actually where I think peope split on the problem. They think about it like, "we are going to put you in this room." If I was told about it ahead of time, obviously I'd decide to take one box because I'd assume it could predict that correctly.

@LuminaMeow14 @stolperson @jon_vs_moloch That's certainly possible but then it's already too late.

@CoopReuven @stolperson @jon_vs_moloch And by being a person who thinks this way you have screwed yourself out of a million dollars. Congrats

@stolperson @jon_vs_moloch It's pretty simple. I don't think I can change the past. Whatever was predicted about me is completely irrelevant by the time I get into the room because the boxes are already set. I just take as much as I can get.

@jon_vs_moloch I think pretty much all 2 box solutions requires either not buying the hypothetical completely or desillusion of grandeur.

@Dr_HououinMD @Freakoutery @IterIntellectus This analogy is no better because jumping to a life raft is difficult. Everyone can just press the red button easily, there's no reason anyone should be left behind. If the ship is sinking just have everyone get on life boats, don't all stay there and risk your lives to fix it.

Compelling at first, but false analogy because it arbitrarily places red as the course of no action, when in fact red is the choice made which results in death. You are temporarily on an unstable ship, if you alone jump off to a safe life raft then nothing happens and everyone else can get off safely when it lands, but if over 50% of people jump then it topples and everyone left on the ship dies. Why would anyone jump when you can just stay on the ship and no one dies, honourably accepting risks involved but recognizing that inevitably some people will be left on the ship no matter what (largely women and kids for example)

why would anyone even press blue?!?

@MichaelENewton1 @mathandcobb How exactly do you make an exclamation point with these matches?

@mathandcobb 758! (factoral)

3^58

@NhavsMaimonides @jcsalomon It's obvious that a significant portion of halacha that applied in the times of the temple doesn't apply nowadays. But that's not the point. What percentage of those halachos actually effected a person in their day to day life?

Here’s a suggestion: go ahead and summarize the laws found in the following tractates, and then tell me what percentage of them are applicable today, and occupy your daily life: Shekalim Yoma Chagigah Nedarim Nazir Sotah Zevachim Menachot Bechorot Arachin Temurah Keritot Meilah Tamid Midot Kinim Kelim Ohalot Negaim Parah Tahorot Machshirin Zavim Tevul Yom Yadayim Uktzin

I find it necessary to address a burgeoning antisemitic trope suggesting that Judaism is a "newer" religion than Christianity, a claim often met with Jewish responsa that are, regrettably, as misguided as the trope itself. Judaism is a religion defined by Law, and Law, by its very nature, cessitates constant evolution to remain relevant to a shifting reality. The transition from Temple-based worship to rabbinic practice reflects a faith built on orthopraxy (action) rather than static orthodoxy (dogma). This is the functional heart of the Oral Law. 21st century Judaism isn’t 20th century Judaism, and 20th century Judaism isn’t 19th century Judaism, and so on. However, in regards to theology and core belief, one will never encounter a “council of Nicaea” or “council of Constantinople” in Judaism, as its core belief, that there is one God who demands service through Law, is unchanging from its foundation as a religion. Yet, the Halakha must remain dynamic, as it always has. Its vitality is predicated on its ability to adapt, and to cease evolving would be to signal the end of Judaism as a living faith. The only comparable element within Christianity is the everlasting evolving of its antisemitic tropes which, not unlike Halakha, always adapts to the constant changes in reality.