Nevajag lepoties ar to ka nepatērē medijus vai nemāki Googlet 😅
14.03.2026 13:38
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Nevajag lepoties ar to ka nepatērē medijus vai nemāki Googlet 😅
Did Trump put Steve and Jared, all-purpose diplomats in front of the room to assure everyone that everything would be fine?
Was there no objection from the military? Have they drunk the Trump Kool-aid?
Did Trump throw a tantrum when anyone disagreed?
I just don't get this.
'Every submarine can carry more destructive power than was used in all of the 2WW...
If we ever had to use our arsenal, no country no matter how powerful will be able to escape it, no country no matter how vast will ever be able to recover.'
Full speech:
jp.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/deplaceme...
Francija paplašinās savu kodolarsenālu un nodrošinās kodolatturēšanu Eiropai (ASV vietā).
Neviens mani neraksturotu kā Trampa fanu... Bet Irāņu vadība nogalināja desmitiem tūkstošus protestētājus Janvārī šausminoši necilvēcīgi.
Turklāt Irānas Šahedi krīt uz Ukraiņu galvām. Šis palīdz arī Latvijas un Ukrainas drošībai, pat ja Trampam nav ilgtermiņa plāna.
www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas...
The political effects of X's feed algorithm https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10098-2 Received: 16 December 2024 Accepted: 4 January 2026 Published online: 18 February 2026 Open access • Check for updates Germain Gauthier,5, Roland Hodler?5, Philine Widmer35 & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya3,4,5 m Feed algorithms are widely suspected to influence political attitudes. However, previous evidence from switching off the algorithm on Meta platforms found no political effects'. Here we present results from a 2023 field experiment on Elon Musk's platform X shedding light on this puzzle. We assigned active US-based users randomly to either an algorithmic or a chronological feed for 7 weeks, measuring political attitudes and online behaviour. Switching from a chronological to an algorithmic feed increased engagement and shifted political opinion towards more conservative positions, particularly regarding policy priorities, perceptions of criminal investigations into Donald Trump and views on the war in Ukraine. In contrast, switching from the algorithmic to the chronological feed had no comparable effects. Neither switching the algorithm on nor switching it off significantly affected affective polarization or self-reported partisanship. To investigate the mechanism, we analysed users' feed content and behaviour. We found that the algorithm promotes conservative content and demotes posts by traditional media. Exposure to algorithmic content leads users to follow conservative political activist accounts, which they continue to follow even after switching off the algorithm, helping explain the asymmetry in effects. These results suggest that initial exposure to X's algorithm has persistent effects on users' current political attitudes and account-following behaviour, even in the absence of a detectable effect on partisanship.
A new paper shows that less than 2 months of exposure to Twitter’s algorithmic feed significantly shifts people’s political views to the right.
Moving from chronological feed to the algorithmic feed also increases engagement.
This is one of the most concerning papers I’ve read in awhile.
Nav TIK slikti.
Rubio just made a speech to the European defense community in Munich that did not mention Ukraine. Or democracy. Or US business deals with Russia. Or the administration's plans to support the European far right. But there were lots of nice words about our common civilization.
Remembrance is not a violation
#RemembranceIsNotAViolation
Vēl viens iemesls piešķirt 3-zvaigžņu ordeni!
Trampa "ieguldījums" Ukrainas atbalstā / Krievijas vājināšanā.
Top socioloģijas kompānija vairs nepublicēs datus par Trampa (NE) popularitāti.
Pašcenzūra ir visefektīvākā cenzūra.
(ASV viss kārtībā - Trampam miera prēmiju!)
Trakākais ir, ka daudziem cilvēkiem LU šis viss šķita pilnībā OK. Vēl arvien šķiet - nekāda rīcība vēl nav bijusi.
Kauns LU.
Kategoriski noraidu sacījienu, ka Trampa darbības ir ļoti OK, jo lika Eiropai sapurināties un beidzot gādāt par savu drošību. Tas būtu tāpat kā teikt:"Re, cik labi, ka tavs kauslis kaimiņš tev izsita durvis un tev sadeva pa muti, jo tu beidzot biji spiesta saņemties dārgām bleķa durvīm un atslēgām."
Tā ir kļūdaina analoģija un appeal to consequences. Secināt, ka kaut kas ir patiess, jo (it kā) noved pie vēlamā rezultāta.
Turklāt tas ir arī non sequitur (no tā neizriet). Eiropa fokusējas uz aizsardzību, nevis minētā dēļ, bet jo asv vairs nav uzticams partneris un Tramps ir haosa aģents.
"Putins ir ģeniāls stratēģis, kurš spēlē 3D šahu."
Krievija ir liela. Krievija ir draudīga.
Vienlaikus Krievija ir neefektīva, izsmēlusi savus militāros resursus, iestigusi.
archive.ph/EpZCi
Nenu nav jāpatīk Trampam, lai patiktu Trampa stils un illiberal virziens. Aptaujās stingras rokas piekritēji vienmēr bijuši daudz Latvijā.
Nav šāds redzēts Latvijā, bet no tiem datiem diezgan droši var pieņemt, ka Tramps nav populārs un diezgan droši, ka pēdējā gada laikā populārāks nav palicis.
Rīt Saeimā ārpolitikas debates. Partijas pozicionēsies vēlēšanām par Trampu.
Konservatīvo sajūsma par Trampu gan makes little strategic sense - viņš nav populārs Latvijā (04.25 aptauja).
Bet vai viņi māk lasīt aptaujas...
Leader of the Unfree world.
Denmark and EU kept diplomacy open while signalling credible deterrence: invasion would be costlv and resisted militarily; tariffs would lead to EU retaliation.
This pushed the issue into US domestic politics, where this was highly unpopular and would have wasted Trump's limited political capital.
Since beginning his second term as president, Donald Trump has done just about everything balance-of-threat theory warns against, and with predictably negative results.
foreignpolicy.com/2026/01/23/t...
Eiropieši beidzot saprata, ka pielīst Trampam liek Eiropai tikai izskatīties vājai.
Atliek tikai parādīt pretī spēku un "ģeniālais dealmakers" piekāpjas.
paulkrugman.substack.com/p/trump-0-eu...
Laipotājs-in-chief
Trampisms Latvijas politikā nav tikai Š.
Nacionālās apvienības (migrācijas) retorika ir "copy paste" no Trampa, neskatoties uz to, ka Latvijā tā nav problēma.
ZZS savukārt ir trampveidīga jau kopš 90. gadiem, jo aiz tās stāv trampveidīgs oligarhs ar alternatīvu un uz austrumiem vērstu skatījumu.
Kurš nelaipo, tas... nekļūst par prezidentu?
www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/202...
This line graph illustrates the percentage change in agency staff levels from the previous year for nine major U.S. federal scientific and health organizations between the fiscal years 2016 and 2025. The agencies tracked include the CDC, Department of Energy, EPA, FDA, NASA, NIH, NIST, NOAA, and NSF. For the majority of the timeline between 2016 and 2023, the agencies show relatively stable fluctuations, generally staying within a range of +5% to -5% change per year. However, there is a dramatic and uniform plummet starting in the 2024–25 period. Every agency depicted shows a sharp downward trajectory, with staffing losses ranging from approximately -15% to over -25%. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shows the most significant decline, dropping to roughly -26%, while the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) shows the least severe but still substantial drop at approximately -15%.
This is the most astonishing graph of what the Trump regime has done to US science. They have destroyed the federal science workforce across the board. The negative impacts on Americans will be felt for generations, and the US might never be the same again.
www.nature.com/immersive/d4...
There is no strategy
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...
