Why couldn’t they just serve the comments to each client with the ad-adjusted timestamps already? The only thing the client has to request then is the comment page it wants to load, and some unique ID for which the backend remembers which ad version it’s associated with.

I will say, for a mainstream US news outlet this article wasn’t as bad as I was expecting. Maybe just because there’s no way to spin this anymore, but then again some outlets will just parrot IDF statements as fact

Ooh good catch. That makes sense. Not sure I would call this beautiful, especially without any way to tell how much time has passed, but fair enough

That doesn’t make sense unless this was personal expenditure, which it doesn’t seem to be

But… from when? Surely expenditure hasn’t gone up linearly with time

…how did the line come about? How did they determine what the life expectancy would have been with less expenditure per capita?

Ok, I like this description a lot actually, it’s a very quick and effective way to explain the effects of no backtracking. A lot of the answers here are either too reductive or too technical to actually make this behavior understandable to a layman. “It just predicts the next word” is easy to forget when the thing makes it so easy to be anthropomorphized subconsciously.

Inheritance is random

My favorite way to resolve method ambiguities.

Somehow Corrections gave a late night show parasocial vibes and I am here for it

Conveniently they are about to declare those the same thing

Ah right, and here I thought the point of the protest was calling for peace. Silly me!

“Ha, you have nowhere else to go! We can do whatever we want”

Just wait until you hear what’s going on in Jerusalem, a city with sacred meaning to all abrahamic religions. The hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Maybe back then it was, but it sure isn’t nowadays… what with some of their most prominent reporting since October 7 written by someone with ties to the IDF

I’ll throw in Griddle, where you have to find high-scoring words on a grid

The city I’m from has more bridges than Venice and Amsterdam combined.

This is what REAL analysis looks like, done by REAL undergrads

Because I’m just interpreting the statement as it was written while you are reading an additional argument into it that the comment plainly does not make. I suggest you brush up on argumentation theory if that is too difficult for you to understand

The statement I was addressing was where they were called “exactly the same.”

You are the one misinterpreting a statement here, by insinuating that the OP’s assertion of “exactly the same” was referring to Russia and US as a whole. It wasn’t, and so the point you’re arguing against is one that OP never made.

You’re arguing as if they had said Russia and the US are morally the same; what they actually said was that they are guilty of the same aforementioned crimes.

The [US] is actively and purposefully destabilising multiple countries and are basically terrorists at this point

Tell me how that sentence is wrong.