Basically, what I'm saying is that for as long as China is on the rise, China will follow Deng Xiaoping's famous dictum: "Hide your strength and bide your time". Once China hits the peak, then war is on the horizon.
I see your point but this is a matter of pride for the Chinese. I think they'll eventually do whatever it takes to annex Taiwan. Certainly, their preferred approach is through peaceful means; however, that's next to impossible. A coup will not be easy. China is not seen in a positive light by most Taiwanese especially after what they are doing in Hong Kong.
In my opinion, they'll wait until they're the world's leading military (besides economic, which they are already) power then simply move on Taiwan. By then, the west will be powerless to intervene. That may take 50 years but that is the Sun Tzu way.
Precisely. Biden says: "We will intervene militarily of China invades". White house spokesperson says: "No change to our Taiwan policy". At best, that means that the US's policy was always to intervene if china invaded. It does not put the jack back in the box in any way, does it?
Well, well, well. Considering that 40% of all people get diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime, this is certainly very welcome news. I wonder which cancer this virus kills though as virtually no cancer is like the other. Basically, joe's brain caner is very different from pete's.
Kinda skeptical atm, but I truly hope I'm absolutely wrong. Nevertheless, this is a step in the rightest direction! Kudos to the chaps involved.
Just a wee question: what if one's mistake cannot be rectified? What does one do then? Live with it as best one can, I suppose. A constant reminder of one's failure staring you down for the rest of your days. Not the best of prospects. Would the size of one's mistake matter than?
Well, different environments and isolation is what gave rise to the different human 'races', however, lets assume it was God. Had he intended them not to mix, then I guess he'd have made them chromosomally incompatible so as not to reproduce (as is the case with different species, for example).
That said, I'm not necessarily a fan of the thing - although there's certainly nothing wrong with it. I guess it's just a matter of preference.
News flash... news has it that there's a critical shortage of medical grade baby formula in the US. Tons of it have been shipped from Germany to the US. Who will Sholtz blame when there's rationing of baby formula in the EU?
Yep. Solution 2 is the transpose of Solution 3 (and vice versa), and Solution 1 is the transpose of Solution 4 (and vice versa). I've noticed that too.
I've also noticed that the 9 and the 2 on the left-right diagonal were rather easy to deduce because another property of these magic square dictates that: 15+R3C3=17 and 8+R2C2=17
In my opinion, it is not a matter of sanctity. It's more about the absurdity of enacting laws that facilitate the murder of the most vulnerable members of society.
Well, maybe but I kinda wonder where humanity would be by now if we could keep on accumulating knowledge and experience for say, 200 years instead of our rather short life times. Of course, reproductive age should probably be limited to what it is now for the sake of the genetic health of the species. Haha.
Yeah, this one has the 2x2 square constraint as well. It's probably that what makes the problem have a unique solution. Anyhow, it was an interesting exercise.
By how is it valid if every two by two square has to add up to 34 just like all rows, columns, diagonals and the corner elements? 8+3+5+2=18 not 34, no?
I was referring to instrumentation when I said that our perception of reality is not based on our five senses rather than what is typically referred to as "extra sensory perception" (I.e. metaphysical stuff)
As you know, for me, if something is not strictly reproducible and measurable/observable, then it's not real.
1. Our perception is not based on the 'five senses' as you postulate. It nowadays goes well beyond that. 2. If there is no observer, how do we know that there is a tree in the first place? 3. How do you define sound? Is it what you hear or is it the vibration of air molecules? Air molecules can vibrate irrespective of whether there is an observe or not. 4. If something does not affect the perceived reality in any way (as is anything which is completely unobservable), should we even be bothered with it? Lets say we should. Since it is completely unobservable (i.e., does not affect our perceived reality in any way), then we still cannot be bothered with it because we have no information whatsoever about it.
In short, this metaphysical argument is futile - and extremely irrelevant. (:
That is the case for fargo's solution; however, I do not think that that satisfies the constraints of the posed problem. There is only one solution to this problem, and that is the one I posted, I believe.
teddyKaz Blog Comments (330)
Joe Biden Lifts the Lid on US Policy on Taiwan
Basically, what I'm saying is that for as long as China is on the rise, China will follow Deng Xiaoping's famous dictum: "Hide your strength and bide your time". Once China hits the peak, then war is on the horizon.