The first could have been a mistake. It happening three times is crazy because ground control should have been in the pilots ear the entire time trying to de-conflict.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Kuwaiti Air Force switches to ground controlled intercept only after this.
Space needs maritime salvage law.
If China could salvage it, then the US would have a reason to service it.
Science was never enough; its always been about geopolitics.
Hmm yeah I guess it could be that they see this sound byte (quoting one scientist's opinion, not a study's results) as having answered the question. It's not reported to be the best way though, just what "Achieving fluency in the real world requires" (any at all?)
The article speaks of so much research but, if this is indeed the 'answer', uses nothing of it in answering the question. Could have just put that sound byte up top and saved themselves and us the further trouble...
Also, what's feedback even supposed to mean? Like Anki? Like having a speaker correct your grammar from the get-go as you speak, or do you speak a bunch first and learn by stumbling and do they correct major mistakes at first only? There's a million ways to fill meaning into these words. Sustained exposure is obvious, but none of the other words are any guide
N64 vs PS1 no contest. But I don’t think they misspoke (even if the author didn’t really mention this explicitly in the article)
The Gameboy (plus color and pocket) outsold the PS1, and was more of a phenomenon. Also, the 90s saw the rise of Pokémon, which is the highest grossing media franchise of all time.
Maybe Reformation religions require belief, but the paganism was a set of rituals known to work (by virtue of having worked before), sort of a like a spiritual experimental science. Belief was not required.
Religions don't necessarily work because people believe in it, either. There are a number of religious sects that started with end of the world prophecies.
I think that religions work the opposite way: people believe in them because they work. Since the purpose of religion is generally to explain the nature of reality and how to flourish in it, it needs to work for you. If it doesn't, you either just go through the motions, or quit and find a different religion (or swear off religion, which is sort of the same thing).
Reminds me of Julius Caesar describing the druids. Part of his political career meant precisely performing important orthopraxy. He probably didn’t meet a druid, but amazingly described them playing the same role he did as Pontifex Maximus.
The orthopraxy requiring those precision rituals, take Rome and Greece, had little or maybe no mandatory beliefs. City-state-sized gods in Mesopotamia probably functioned the same way. Traditions still have precise orthopraxy today. But we talk about differences in belief whereas Caesar doesn’t even acknowledge any.
Charitable read, would suggest slight touch of tongue in a cheek.
A bit of spelling it out
Point-1. People just interpreted that paganism works.
E.g. Somebody made offering to gods, and year later won a war - proof.
Point-2 paganism had this transactional notion with gods giving and taking based on your offerings.
While christianity on the other hand does not promise anything good in this life (the only promise being: bear all the bad things in this life, you will be rewarded in the afterlife), so there can’t be proof.
reply