General Talk!!

[Shadow.97]

@Shadow - take some pics of the snow and upload them here! I'd like to see what I've been missing for 12 years now.

@Daniil - "hard to see" means that in the picture I couldn't see if the flag were those of the bygone Communist era. I do agree that the meaning of the Communist flag stands for something good, but here it has a very bad reputation. Communists were our mortal enemies for many years and the red flag is a hated symbol.

Of course I'm aware of the events of Bloody Sunday in 1905. Stalin may have built that memorial, but he has a short memory - he was 1000 times more despotic than Tsar Nicholas II.

Snow is gone but i will try to upload them through my phone. I tried to drag n drop but usb connection wasnt stable enough and well. It's not a fast method.

[humbert]

Oh, I understand what you meant. Maybe if at holidays weather will be fine, I'll shot a flag from shorter distance for you.  I guessed, that you will say that red flag is a hated symbol in USA. That is not surprising after many decades of Cold War. BTW, here is the same reputation of your, USA flag. Stars and stripes was "a symbol of bloody capitalism, oppression of the workers, unprovoked wars..." Sorry, I can't exactly remember the texts of old propaganda booklets. I'll ask my father, he has a number of this booklets and posters somewhere in the larder.
Many people think, that USA is the main enemy of Russia even now. 
BTW, was in USA same propaganda against USSR? I saw some old american "Civil Defence" films, there was toon monkeys in caps with ear-flaps with nuclear bombs under one arm (monkeys looks a bit like Khrustchev). Did all children in american schools  was trained to "duck and cover"?

It comes as no surprise that the Stars & Stripes would have a bad reputation over there. Keep in mind that in any war (hot or cold) demonization of the enemy through propaganda is critical, otherwise you will never get the population on your side and ready to fight. Here in America the enemy has been replaced - it's no longer the Communists, now it's terrorists such as [for example] Al Qaeda. I think many of the younger people don't know anything about the Communists, or probably wouldn't even recognize the Soviet flag.

I'm familiar with people over there still having a strange fear of the West. Putin is constantly screaming about NATO expanding, more recently about Ukraine wanting a closer relationship with the European Union. Honestly I don't know what he's afraid of, nobody in America or Western Europe has any intention of waging any kind of war against Russia.

As for "duck and cover", the only time it was done extensively was during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962 when the cold war almost became hot. I remember I was just a little kid starting school, and having to duck and cover several times when a bell rang. Thank goodness it was just a drill and never the real thing. I didn't even know why they were making us do that.

[Daniil]

I'm familiar with people over there still having a strange fear of the West. Putin is constantly screaming about NATO expanding, more recently about Ukraine wanting a closer relationship with the European Union. Honestly I don't know what he's afraid of, nobody in America or Western Europe has any intention of waging any kind of war against Russia.

I think that the main reason of this is economic power in a satellite countries. NATO isn't an enemy for Russia now, but if Ukraine enters in EU, some big business in Russia will loose a part of their profit. Because Putin is "in the profit share", of course he pounding his fist on the table.

As for "duck and cover", the only time it was done extensively was during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962 when the cold war almost became hot. I remember I was just a little kid starting school, and having to duck and cover several times when a bell rang. Thank goodness it was just a drill and never the real thing. I didn't even know why they were making us do that.

We had a special subject in school, "civil defence", even in middle 90-s. That was just an atavism of Soviet system, but it is a bit useful. Now on this subject children learns how to survive in terrorist acts and technogenic accidents.

[humbert]

I believe the reason many people in Europe and the rest of the industrialized world have few children is that they've come to the realization that kids are basically a luxury for the very rich. It's not just the heavy financial burden, it's also the amount of time one has to dedicate to the children. This detracts not only from work but also from whatever leisure time becomes available.

It's true that in the past families had more children. Then again the incidence of infant mortality was much higher than it is today.

[scarface]

Well said. But in reality, the poor families still have more children than the average, "luxury of the very rich" is too reductionist. I could obtain the figures for fertility from an institute of statistics for France for example and the figures speak for themselves. The department with the lowest fertility: Paris, and the department with the highest: Seine st Denis (the poor suburb of Paris). And the difference is high (fertility nearly twice as high).

[scarface]

In order to come back to the subject of the topic, Ive been using mcafee virusscan enterprise for years (Im leaving alone Gujjar, who is now full of dreams).
For me it's just a prevention, I think the last virus I had caught was Sasser, in 2004 or 2005.

[humbert]

Once again off the subject 

Scarface - believe me, kids are expensive, and not just financially - they drain your other resources as well, time in particular. One reason this planet is so overpopulated is so many irresponsible airheads reproducing like rats. Sometimes I think some people should be forcibly sterilized.

gujjar -> not to imply Pakistani culture is in any way "bad", but I for one have learned that many of the tenets central to my 2 cultures are deeply flawed, and decided not to buy into their guilt trips. I take the best from different cultures and set aside the bad. Thinking and open mindedness is much better than blind obedience.

[scarface]

Off topic again, here is a map of Pakistan, a very interesting country, with an enormous population, 6th in the world. And it's in fact very populated when we know that its population is concentrated in the East, notably in the region of Penjab.
I put a map of the density of population. I guess it has no secret for you anyway. Maybe I should update my topic "anamorphosis maps" with such maps. They are always interesting.

[scarface]

I guess Ahmad knows this map quite well too. The legendary density of the Nile delta and the desert of Egypt are famous.
When we look at it, we understand that Ahmad can't drive more than a few kilometers in the same direction without being stopped by the desert.


But when we look at these maps, we realize that the world is more and more urban. There is a significant number of the population on small territories. At least it's obvious when we look at maps shot by night, towns are all the more visible. This is a strong element of weakness for the future, because towns are sheltering a lot of people, but there is no food in a town, everything must be brought, It's important to be aware of that.

[scarface]

For France, a map that I know quite well, you have that. Once again, the red marks are showing the towns. The rule of Pareto can also be applied here (80% of the population is often on 20% of a territory), it's less obvious, because there is no real desert, but the PR, the region "nord" and the Rhone valley, which includes lyon and marseille, nearly stand for 40% of the population on small territories.