@MontréalCité-État Ils sont loin de nier les urgences modernes telles que celles de faire face aux puissances montantes, qui ne feront aucun cadeaux aux occidentaux et arriveront à les dominer grâce aux nouvelles technologies ; s'il n'y a pas des gens comme Musk pour mener la course à l'espace et investir dans la robotique et d'autres technologies de pointe, la possibilité d'un retard irrattrapable est une chose à craindre ;
il est illogique d'appeler des Musks des tarés ; leur politique industrielle ne peut pas être celle de tarés. Même si Trump est cru lorsqu'il dit qu'il ne veut pas voir la Chine et de la Russie donner le ton dans l'espace il a entièrement raison d'être partisan d'une politique qui assure aux Américains une solide emprise sur l'espace. Il n'y a pas le même souci apparemment dans l'opposition.
@MontréalCité-État L'idée d'un complot contre l'humanité est ridicule. L'humanité a de plus en plus son libre arbitre, et quand les colonisateurs lui rendent sa liberté elle fait la guerre avec ses voisins, des guerres raciales, et va même jusqu'à perpétrer le plus grand génocide depuis celui dont les nazis ont été responsables (massacre d'un million de personnes au Ruanda) ;
la diminution importante, pour ne pas dire l'élimination de l'activité de la CIA en Chine n'est certainement pas le signe d'une nation dont les élites rêveraient d'organiser un complot mondial. Ça n'a aucun sens.
@MontréalCité-État Plus ou moins toutes les civilisations qui ont laissé derrière elles une trace mémorable l'ont fait en partie au dépens d'autres civilisations moins chanceuses, et se sont trouvées dans une position d'exploitant de ces civilisations d'une façon ou d'une autre ; la civilisation Américaine n'et pas une exception, et son contexte politique n'est pas celui d'une civilisation particulièrement orgueilleuse qui aurait besoin d'une leçon ;
c'est celui de toute autre civilisation qui un jour a pu voir son hégémonie s'effriter et passer progressivement à d'autres, mais on n'a pas encore vu le véritablement commencement de cela.
@MontréalCité-État Le futur est partout ; si le monde défavorisé a commencé à se mettre à l'heure de la révolution industrielle, qui n'est pas un évènement mais toujours pour le moment un processus constant, ça n'empêche pas les initiateurs de cette tendance qui semble incontournable de rester compétitifs ;
il n'y a pas de raison évidente pour que tout d'un coup les rôles soient interchangés et encore moins pour souhaiter une telle chose ; il est plus raisonnable de croire en un effacement des rôles traditionnels, ce que les groupements en grand blocs de nations semblent favoriser.
Tous les projets de Musk tombent et sa contribution est limitée et peu intéressante. Sa plus grande contribution est de jouer à la roulette russe avec la démocratie américaine et de faire la promotion d'un autocrate et d'un mode de vie où les femmes retournent à la maison pour repeupler l'Amérique.
On n'a jamais eu besoin de ce fils de pute-là @LPH.
@MontréalCité-État Mais aussi, au lieu de jouer au jeu du milliardaire qui a la plus grosse fusée (pour aller peupler Mars? vraiment?), il pourrait utiliser ses ressources pour résoudre le réchauffement planétaire. Beaucoup plus utile.
@MontréalCité-État Neil DeGrace Tyson ne questionne que le fait de laisser à des entreprises privées des projets que n'ont osé entreprendre jusqu'à présent que des organisations nationales avec l'argent du contribuable ; il passe d'ailleurs sous silence le fait que les capitaux risqués sont ceux de particuliers et non ceux des contribuables.
Finalement, il reconnait les avancées en ingénierie spatiale (création de gros porteurs (100 tonnes pour 43 tonnes , réutilisation des modules, moteurs à poussée variable, etc.). Ça a pris 10 ans après la création de la NASA pour un premier atterrissage d'un homme sur la lune et 153 milliards de dollars US en valeur 2019 corrigée de l'inflation, et jusqu'à 400 000 personnes.
Il y a 22 ans que Space X existe, mais c'est une entreprise privée et les milliards dépensés ne sont pas ceux du contribuable ; on ne peut que louer ce qu'ils ont accompli et leur façon de le faire. De plus dire « Qu'est-ce qui a été fait par Space X que n'a pas fait la NASA ? » n'est que de la rhétorique ;
la NASA est en fait un partenaire de Space X (Jumping a bit ahead, we can say that NASA is counting on both SLS and Starship. The corresponding contracts have already been signed. orbitaltoday.com/2023/11/02/…).
Erreur : « DeGrasse » et non « DeGrace »
Erreur : « (100 tonnes pour 43 tonnes portées par SLS (Artémis)), » et non « (100 tonnes pour 43 tonnes , »
@LPH Here's the irony re the orange man. He is facistic (not to mention criminal, narcissistic and a liar) but he is so poorly read and uneducated he doesn't even know what that means. That's a real danger.
Pauvrement lu? Il ne sait probablement pas lire. Il tient même les bibles à l'envers dans les photo ops. Quoique, ça c'est probablement parce que c'est un sataniste.
Frank, excuse me but we say in English: A person is poorly read as opposed to well read. You are assuming that when I said poorly read and uneducated, the poorly goes with uneducated; it doesn't. He is poorly read means Il a lu très peu.
@Lambie I tend to agree with you, he is not the intellectual type, contrarily to Musk, and he is rather ill-manered; he often uses crude language, and which is more, he often treats people in a very untactful fashion, not to say heinous ("shit hole country", "shit Vice-President"), but we are in an era where the common man is king, and such behaviour is far from rare nowadays, although that is not really an excuse. / Yes really shady dealings and murky businesses!
Apart from maybe a Duterte in the Phillipines, the orange man's discourse is beyond the pale in terms of public discourse. The fact he is so fucking ignorant makes him even more dangerous. And not all common men are like him at all.
@Lambie Il a lu très peu ne rend pas he is poorly read. Most of the time "well read" will translate to cultivé*/*instruit and poorly read as inculten'a aucune instruction.
J'ai déjà rencontré ill-read, seemed really strange to me... I'd never say it.
Not only is he “poorly educated” but he did say he "he loved the “poorly educated” because voters with lower levels of schooling delivered an overwhelming share of votes to him". Says it all.
The fact that he loves the poorly educated says nothing at all about his education; it could be compassion, or an affinity for the simpler mind of the uneducated, or something else, and just as probable, a politician's lie. The way he says that, anyway, is not "I love them because they vote for me", let's not distort reality!
@None Yes, of course. well read means cultivé/instruit. BUT poorly read can be said as Il a lu très peu. C'est une personne qui n'a pas lu beaucoup dans sa vie.
@Frank He does love his country or, being the rich man he is, he would not bother with politics; he makes much more as a businessman, and by the way he refused his salary as president. How many rich men have been a president of the States? They must be rare. His concern with preserving the ethnicities that originally constitued his country are a proof to that; he is not interest-driven as far as that goes, you can't say that.
@None He isn't poorly educated because he went to a good school but it didn't take. Poorly educated refers to people who had no access to higher education. He did but he didn't read much of anything. If you go to a good college (like Wharton) and don't take advantage of it, that does not make you poorly educated. It makes you a shitty student.
He is too erratic to be interest-driven. His speech is not cogent after 2 sentences. Preserving the ethnicities that originally constituted his country? First Nations, right?
Err - his parents paid for him to attend that school. it's a question of money, not talent.
@LPH A concern with "preserving the ethnicities that originally constitued one's country" is a proof that someone "loves his country"? I would say it's a proof one is a xenophobe, if the ethnicities that "originally" constituted a country could even be defined.
@Frank Even if admitted for legacy reasons or his father's gift to the school, that does not apply to the professors who had to give him passing grades. He still had to take exams and get grades. Universities draw the line at accepting gifts. They don't direct their professors to pass failing students. So he passed but didn't read much while in college.
His parents paid him or made a contribution to the school?
OMG, that is indeed worrisome. Is there a danger of you (your country) being "invaded by foreigners?". That's just a metaphor and veil for racism, IN THE US, in any case.
Nonsense talk! You know it is any country; the Nort-African and African people are silently invading Europe, Mexican continually cross American borders without papers; that is invasion, slow invasion, and we see the results.
@LPH - but... what invasion? You know there isn't really any "invasion" afoot, don't you?
What results do you see of immigration in the US? Which is not all from Mexicans, by the way?
Ah - let me look, yeah, that's right, the city in front of me is ablaze, it's pandemonium, the invaders have turned the city in a war zone... not.
In fact, with less Mexicans and other immigrants, we would have less leaf blower noise for sure. But lots of leaves left behind.
No veggies anymore either - I didn't much white folk tending the fields in 100F heat in CA...
Racist talk, and not based in actual fact. The first benefit of immigration to the US is for its economy, that would collapse without immigrants, legal or illegal.
@LPH stronghold? That is a fortification. You mean stranglehold, don't you? The number of immigrants legal or illegal does not "keep me from making any laws" re immigration. Yeah, I get it: you are an orange man supporter. But do you have the courage to tell us if you vote in the US or not? I bet you do not, from what I'm seeing here.
You keep saying "you" and "me" in troublesome ways. How about you express yourself more clearly without those references.
@LPH Yeah, well, it's beginning to look like I might. Anyway, in English, you don't establish a fortification. But you do establish a stranglehold. And frankly, I'm not up for carrying on talking to a person with your views. BYE BYE.
Basic, basic, it is not even figurative any more, although it remains figurative for me, first definition in OLD: an area in which there is a lot of support for a particular belief or group of people, especially a political party
@Lambie Telling you whether I vote or not is not a question of courage, at least not for me; either I wish to inform you about that or I don't, and I don't, as I believe it is completely beside the point. As to calling Trump the orange man, no, this sort of vulgarity has nothing to do in my language. In fact he is the white man in this election.
@LPH Ok, I came back to see what Frank would say. You said"Telling you whether I vote or not is not a question of courage, at least not for me; either I wish to inform you about that or I don't, and I don't,[ah, ok] as I believe it is completely beside the point[ seriously, beside the point to this discussion?] As to calling Trump the orange man, no, this sort of vulgar. [No, not vulgar. It's to avoid typing his name.]
You have every right to be a right-wing orange man supporter, who believes all the lies you are fed. But really, I would have expected better of you. The man is such a "poor quality individual" as one caller to NPR jokingly put it. He is just sickening. He's so yucky as a person, I'd run the other way if I saw him. UGH. This time I am leaving, this discussion with you.
