Look, they say that the sample is representative, but is it really?
Let me try this:
"According to the survey (the sample is representative) around 20% Russians support the war"
You won't trust me, but why do you trust the quoted resource without verification? The two countries are at war and while Russian propaganda is horrible, it doesn't mean that everything else is 100% true. Note that I'm not blaming the victim, the situation is close to black and white. I'm only asking whether you really believe that 75% people support the ongoing war and support starting war with multiple other countries?
There's one more aspect. Even if the sample is representative by sex/age/income/education level etc, some people may be scared to tell their opinion to a stranger over the phone. The government labeled those against the war as traitors and who knows what's the real intent of people asking such questions over the phone.
How do you think, if the war was so popular, would there be a need for stricter laws and calling people traitors?
I lived in USSR, and suppression of speech and opposition is exactly needed to have such high popularity. The transition into 199x shown that informed population doesn't allow to sustain such high popularity, and this is why Russian regime has been tightening the screws back over the last 22 years.
>some people may be scared to tell their opinion to a stranger over the phone
Yet, there is no need to enthusiastically point to a next country. Almost all pointing to the same one is extremely suggestive of it being a genuine result.
>I'm only asking whether you really believe that 75% people support the ongoing war and support starting war with multiple other countries?
Yes. Of course most of those people aren't going to fight themselves. And it will take some time and more sanctions before they start to question the situation. With all the sanctions the life in Russia is still much better than at the beginning of 199x, and until that the Russians feel just fine finding satisfaction in resisting that "American attack on them". And don't forget that "Ukraine was with American help making nuclear and biological weapons to attack Russia".
I was too young to remember how was it in USSR and left Russia roughly 10 years ago. It's hard for me to believe in 75%, even considering state propaganda. Maybe things changed, I don't know.
> Yet, there is no need to enthusiastically point to a next country. Almost all pointing to the same one is extremely suggestive of it being a genuine result.
We don't know how many people refused to answer.
Don't get me wrong, I think even 20% support is unacceptable, and my gut feeling tells me that it is higher than that. Just not 75%. However, sadly I agree that situation is bad and shock therapy may be necessary. We'll see if it helps.
70% of RF population supports war. That's data from liberals who'd like to see different results. You should know public oppinion of Ichkeria (1994) occupation, Georgia (2008) occupation, Afganistan (1979) occupation.
Sure they are brainwashed, but their soldiers kills innocent and population supports this "special operation". Just like in Nazis Germany.
Okay, looks like your number is already lower than 75%.
Don't get me wrong, I hate what is happening and sick of Kremlin propaganda. If you are willing to have a constructive discussion, we can chat, otherwise please skip the rest. I'm on your side and support Ukraine in every way I can. Also, I admit that I haven't been to Russia in long time and don't know what exactly is happening there right now - I hope that the support is not overwhelming. I could be wrong.
I suspect that it's difficult to conduct a proper survey because I heard something (from a friend) that I haven't heard since 1990s (from parents): "this is not a phone conversation". That made me think that some people may not be comfortable telling their opinion to a stranger over the phone.
Data from liberals (is it Navalny's team?) was collected in rush and they admitted that the methodology is far from perfect. Iirc in their report they indicated that day after day the numbers were lower, which could be the result of the misinformation at the beginning.
Re public opinion about other wars: you listed many things and we'll not be able to discuss everything in this thread. I'm only curious why you went as far back as Afghanistan? Last I checked, it was the Soviet Union that invaded Afghanistan - are you sure that the public opinion in Ukraine at the time was significantly different from other republics? I'm really curious if you have any data to back it up (genuine question, willing to learn). If you wanted to add another "this is **ed up" story, Moldova would be an easier example?
almost no changes. Yes, a lot of people decline but that's not the only evidence. People quite often share in YouTube comments that everyone around supports war.
I've mentioned Afghanistan because 3000 Ukrainians died in this war. I am Russian speaking from Kharkiv, I know what is Russian chauvinism and imperialism from the inside. I could also mention Soviet-Finland war (1939), Holodomor (1933), occupation of Ukrainian National Republic (UNR), same line by Kremlin imperialists.
I have no data on Ukrainians opinion of Afghanistan war, but times were different, we've got Internet now, so many ways to discover truth. That's why I've mentioned Ichkeria (1994), I had no understanding what was there until RF occupied Ukrainian Donbas. Clearly that was occupation and genocide by RF but what's your opinion? Do you enjoy RF troops song:
А мы береты на лоб надвинем
И автоматы удобней сдвинем
И с улыбкою веселой
Мы будем жечь чужие села
I have a mix of guilt, fear, shame and anger when look at photos from Kharkiv.
I realized that it's so easy for this discussion to go sideways and it was not my intention. Everything what is happening is like a nightmare, even after 2014.
This is the first time I see this song, it's disgusting. Also, I stopped following Katz after I learned that he was on Moscow dept of transportation payroll. Imo anyone taking money from state owned organizations is compromised.
a) it will help noone (piracy), however Microsoft as a vendor will no longer be trusted by many countries
b) this will be a middle finger to retail users, not large companies and government who are more likely to test updates before installing them
c) I find it interesting that many Silicon Valley companies took investments from DST (=Usmanov =Putin). Putin and his friends directly benefit from those companies, but I see noone asking Apple to brick laptops for engineers of those companies. Should we ask those at least donate to humanitarian efforts? I've submitted a question (poorly worded perhaps) and it was flagged almost instantly.
Before you begin the migration, are you sure that all requirements are known and well understood? What is the reason for migration, is it because you are not familiar with .Net or because it is not the right tool for the job? If you will be hiring new engineers, what is the talent pool for all three in your area?
Could they also prevent it from being made by competitors and then refuse to distribute it in those countries? If not denying it to those countries at least delaying it in bureaucracy?
Exactly what ffpip said. The TOR browser does much more than just run your traffic through TOR to counter website fingerpriting, and Google being an advertising company, I see a conflict of interest to provide you with the anonymity that the Firefox-based TOR browser currently provides.
As a user I don't mind Electron when the main running app (which I define as the app that is in focus > 50% of the time) is written in it. For me this application is VS Code and I'm happy with it. However, I'm concerned that larger and larger count of apps running in background move to Electron platform, mainly because that requires more and more memory (eventually surpassing memory available on my machine).
I’ll not comment on the first part. However, it’s sad to think that somebody can “earn” right to piss in everyone else’s face.
Fwiw, I don’t believe that this is what happening, noone is happy about counterproductive behavior, regardless which country it comes from (the US, Russia, China, Turkey, etc). However, in some cases there is not much you can do about it. Sigh, I wish all nations listed above could work together toward making this world a better place.
I have seen somewhat successful attempts (in international markets) that used a similar approach. There are still some hard questions: how do you make sure that your clients receive consistent levels of service, what is the plan if a driver breaks the law (if/when something _really_ bad happens, clients typically don't like position "it's not us, we are just the app - blame the driver")
The plan is that you don't get involved in any of that. All you do is provide a platform that allows customers and drivers to connect in an efficient way. If clients don't aren't willing to accept that then I guess they don't need rides.
I suspect that a large part of the current ridership of these services would be less than thrilled about grabbing a ride from a random stranger without the level of oversight provided by Uber/Lift in terms of payments, safety, and service levels.
My objection to your argument is that taxis and other car services existed long before Uber and Lyft, usually with some level of safety supposedly being provided by government licensing requirements for drivers.
The big problem with taxis is that they're inconvenient to use. You either have to take a chance at hailing one or call a switchboard, having no idea in advance of how long it will take to get picked up.
Uber/Lyft's platform largely solved the inconvenience problem, they could have offered it as a service to existing taxi companies/drivers without getting involved in all the regulatory issues.
>My objection to your argument is that taxis and other car services existed long before Uber and Lyft, usually with some level of safety supposedly being provided by government licensing requirements for drivers.
And people preferred Uber/Lyft’s oversight versus the taxi services that existed before.
I think they did it wrong by trying to maintain too much control over the drivers. Either that or people and/or their political representatives just aren't that interested in ride-sharing. But I doubt that, because as someone who is currently unable to drive, I know what a valuable lifeline these services can be. Fortunately I don't live in California.
EDIT: Also there's a problem with the way resources get allocated. I think that platforms of this type provide a valuable service, but not necessarily one that should be considered the basis for a billion dollar business. The majority of the revenue should be going to the drivers. But it's hard to get capital for something that has no chance of creating a few more billionaires.
"According to the survey (the sample is representative) around 20% Russians support the war"
You won't trust me, but why do you trust the quoted resource without verification? The two countries are at war and while Russian propaganda is horrible, it doesn't mean that everything else is 100% true. Note that I'm not blaming the victim, the situation is close to black and white. I'm only asking whether you really believe that 75% people support the ongoing war and support starting war with multiple other countries?
There's one more aspect. Even if the sample is representative by sex/age/income/education level etc, some people may be scared to tell their opinion to a stranger over the phone. The government labeled those against the war as traitors and who knows what's the real intent of people asking such questions over the phone.
How do you think, if the war was so popular, would there be a need for stricter laws and calling people traitors?