91 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2025
    1. Customs Enforcement raided her apartment for pro-Palestinian activity on her social media and participating in campus protests.

      How does this not violate the constitution? Don't we have the right to protest peacefully? Did they have/need a warrant?

    2. A recent string of legal U.S. residents being detained or deported following information found on their cellphones is worrying some travelers they'll be stopped when traveling through the country's border.

      Are they stopping everyone or just randomly?

  2. Mar 2025
    1. Horseback riding for pleasure, showboating, and swimming became fashionable, but women were not encouraged to exert themselves.

      Women not encouraged to exert themselves

  3. Feb 2025
    1. But Meta’s AI characters are also a way to slap a more friendly, humanlike face on a long, bloodless campaign of social automation.

      Interesting wording

    2. TikTok, which mostly replaced follow/follower relationships with opaque algorithmic distribution,

      I guess I've never thought of the difference between most social platforms and tiktok. Where normal social platforms are mostly based in content of people you follow, Tiktok is the complete opposite.

    3. It might not be a convincing story, but it’s a story:

      I guess on one hand, people indulge in fake stories all the time from tv, to sometimes even celebrities. So what makes this different?

    4. after years of characterizing fake and automated profiles as spam, it’s okay now if Meta is running the accounts and they’re a little more convincing?

      I really don't understand the idea itself. These accounts are essentially advanced spam.

    5. At the same time, it’s surely noticed that its platforms are already filling with AI slop anyway and that some of this slop was creating a lot of engagement, meaning that, in the ways that matter most to Meta, it’s not really slop at all.

      Maybe reasoning behind bot accounts?

  4. Dec 2024
    1. Visual indication of the hull collapse would have been preceded by loud creaks and pops. An acoustic analysis was not part of this simulation. The Titan had been equipped with a patented hull monitoring system and its sensors, most of which were located on the hull, would have been hooked up to alarms, so the alarms would have gone off. The protocol in such a situation is to drop ballast and ascend to a safer depth as fast as possible.

      Would they have heard the creaks and pops? this could have raised alarm to the passengers. A previous article even mentioned that they did drop weight, so that might support this.

    2. He analyzed three modes of failure—the viewport, the adhesive seal between the titanium endcaps and the collapse of the cylindrical hull.

      Not only was the design of the sub not certified but it had three areas of skepticism

    3. It may be of little consolation to the families of the victims of the Titan submersible that the implosion of the vessel took milliseconds. In that short amount of time, the brain cannot process pain.

      advocating that it was over before they knew it.

    1. saying that what they were doing was too experimental to carry passengers and that it needed to be certified and so on.”

      Lack of certification and still experimenting while holding the lives of people.

    2. in which there have been few accidents with nobody killed until now, Cameron noted that there are strict certification protocols for all other deep submergence vehicles that carry passengers except this one.

      Sounds like they got special treatment. Why?

    3. likened the Titan tragedy in which five people died this week to the sinking of the ill-fated ocean liner because of the safety warnings both received prior to their disasters.

      Similar fates and similar reasons.

    1. Carl Hartsfield, a retired Navy captain and a scientist from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said during a USCG briefing that the noises had been "described as banging."

      false hope? Could it have been the sub before imploding?

    2. "The debris is consistent with the catastrophic loss of the pressure chamber. Upon this determination, we immediately notified the families,

      Obvious base blame that it was the pressure chamber that caused the implosion. But that still leaves the question of "why did the pressure chamber fail"

    1. His estate’s attorneys described him as a seasoned veteran of underwater exploration who would not have participated in the Titan expedition if the company had been more transparent.

      Blame on lack of company transparency

    2. 984 feet (300 meters) off the bow of the Titani

      This is a different number than I've seen. a BBC article said "500m (1,600ft) from Titanic’s bow". Interesting.

    3. Concerns were raised in the aftermath of the disaster about whether the Titan was doomed due to its unconventional design and its creator’s refusal to submit to independent checks that are standard in the industry. Its implosion also raised questions about the viability and future of private deep-sea exploration.

      Seeing more and more concerns about the future of deep-sea exploration. Feels like "someone ruined it for all of us" type of vibes.

    4. According to the lawsuit, the Titan “dropped weights” about 90 minutes into its dive, indicating the team had aborted or attempted to abort the dive.

      First time seeing this information after looking at six other articles. This feels like its important enough to have been covered before.

    5. Attorneys for his estate said in an emailed statement that the “doomed submersible” had a “troubled history,” and that OceanGate failed to disclose key facts about the vessel and its durability.

      Blame on OceanGate again.

    6. saying the crew experienced “terror and mental anguish” before the disaster and accusing the sub’s operator of gross negligence.

      Gross negligence definitely has ground here but "terror and mental anguish"? How would they know?

    7. Crew of Titan sub knew they were going to die before implosion

      A totally new view. Haven't seen much of what happened on the sub before it imploded. One source talked about warning signals but they were unsure how quickly they would have gone off. This title is saying it as a fact.

    1. “Any chance of saving a life is worth continuing the mission,” the official said.

      This can be a counter argument to the previous opinion of "false hope". There was a chance that they could have still been out there, therefore the search was still worth it.

    2. This is an incredibly unforgiving environment down there on the sea floor and the debris is consistent with a catastrophic implosion of the vessel,”

      More about how dangerous and unforgiving the ocean is.

    3. He said false-hopes kept getting dangled as search teams looked for the missing passengers over the following days.

      confidently blames news and search teams for false hopes. He so easily figured out it had imploded.

    4. The takeaway is, make sure if you’re gonna go into a vehicle, whether it’s an aircraft or surface craft or a submersible, that it’s been through certifying agencies.”

      He seems to be placing blame on the passengers for not knowing that the submarine was completely certified.

    5. "Titanic" director worries implosion will have a negative impact on citizen explorers

      This sounds unfocused on the main issue. The issue that people were sent down in an unsafe submarine. It should have an impact on other explorers because something like this should never be allowed to happen again. (my opinion)

    6. Catastrophic implosion

      Catastrophic is a buzzword that has been used by most of the sources so far. Catastrophe def: an event causing great and often sudden damage or suffering; a disaster.

    1. The implosion itself was instantaneous, there would have been no time for the passengers to even register what was happening.

      No time to register the implosion but did they know something was wrong before the implosion?

    2. Did ocean sounds distract from the search?

      Could be asking if the ocean hadn't been so noisy could we have saved them before they imploded? However I thought they imploded rather quickly and likely before they even knew something was wrong with the vessel.

    3. “We all knew that the Titan was experimental. We were very confident, because obviously there'd been a few dives before that, and it seemed to be working well.”

      Dives before gave a false sense of security in the vessel

    4. He said the Oceangate team took safety seriously, with extensive briefings before each descent. But it wasn’t made clear to him that Titan had not been certified.

      No transparency of the lack of certification, but safe in other ways?

    5. Why did the authorities allow Titan to dive?

      new place of blame. so far we've blamed oceangate, the CEO of Oceangate, the danger of the water, and now the authorities.

    1. In July 2018, OceanGate sued a former director of marine operations, David Lochridge, over an engineering report he wrote saying the craft under development needed more testing and that passengers might be endangered when it reached "extreme depths," according to a lawsuit filed that year in U.S. District Court in Seattle.

      oceangate clearly doesn't like to check all of the boxes and will even go as far as a lawsuit against an employee who was advocating for safety

    2. Extreme tourism comes with inherent dangers

      The opinion that is prominent in this article is that it isn't really Oceangate's fault or the creator's fault, but that when you enjoy doing dangerous things, there can be dangerous outcomes.

    3. Missing Titanic sub took on extreme danger

      Makes the sub look brave rather than negligent. Also this emphasizes that the act of partaking in this thrilling even is for the danger.

    1. “The question is, was it the primary failure, or a secondary failure from something else happening?”

      This raises a good question. following a theme of "Who is to blame?".

    2. “We’ve made thousands and thousands and thousands of dives with other countries as well to these depths and have never had an incident,”

      Just because there haven't been past incidents, doesn't mean incidents are never going to happen.

    3. in 2018 warning that its “current experimental approach … could result in negative outcomes (from minor to catastrophic) that would have serious consequences for everyone in the industry.”

      "Expert" after expert raised concern, and yet nothing was done.

    4. in a 2018 lawsuit that the company’s testing and certification was insufficient and would “subject passengers to potential extreme danger in an experimental submersible.”

      Clearly an issue the company has seen before.

    5. OceanGate was also warned that a lack of third party scrutiny of the vessel during development could pose catastrophic safety problems.

      Why no third party? Is a third party common when evaluating submarines?

    6. Each trip would put tiny cracks in the structure. “This might be small and undetectable to start but would soon become critical and produce rapid and uncontrollable growth,” he said.

      How did no one notice this? Surely it would be detectable over time. If they knew the vessel was subjected to more pressure, wouldn't they make sure after every dive that no damage had been done?

    7. It was touted for a roomier cylinder-shaped cabin made of a carbon-fiber — a departure from the sphere-shaped cabins made of titanium used by most submersibles.

      Humans always want to find ways to make things more luxurious. In this case, the design was clearly meant to fit more people, and possibly make more money per trip, as opposed to a cramped sphere shape that holds less people.

    8. Experts say the Titan sub’s unconventional design may have destined it for disaster

      immediately, places blame on the design. "unconventional" "experts"

    9. its creator’s refusal to submit to independent checks that are standard in the industry.

      So far the creator is mentioned but nameless. This is placing blame on the creator and hinting at negligence.

  5. Nov 2024
    1. According to the survey, 47% of people plan to shop on their phones, while 9% say they'll purchase gifts through social media-targeted ads.

      Online shopping is definitely impactful in holiday consumerism.

    2. "I've got sons, you know, so the first thing they're going to think of is like, 'Hey this is what I want, Dad,' and I'll be like, 'OK, let me make room for that,'" Mitchell said.

      Very informal but I agree that parents often make room in their budgets or even go over budget to make Christmas special for their kids.

    3. aid Darien Neff of Minneapolis.

      They're quoting random consumers who likely filled out the survey. This makes me think that the sampling was done out on the street somewhere which wouldn't make it random.

    4. According to the 2024 Deloitte Minneapolis Holiday Retail Survey, they are expecting to spend 15% more to celebrate the holidays this year.

      I don't know how the sampling was conducted. It could have been random sampling since they had 4114 consumer responses.

    5. According to the 2024 Deloitte Minneapolis Holiday Retail Survey, they are expecting to spend 15% more to celebrate the holidays this year.

      The article didn't really go into much detail about how the survey was conducted but I found the information separately. The survey was conducted by a group called Deloitte and also conducted online by independent research companies. The survey was given to 4114 consumers and 41 retail executives. The margin of error is plus or minus 1 to 2 percentage points. The survey ran from august to september.

  6. Oct 2024
    1. "I took a bad angle to the ball," Cole said. "I wasn't sure how hard he hit it. By the time the ball got by me, I was not in a position to cover first. Neither of us were"

      Another authoritative source. He is also a player on the team giving insight as to ways they blew the lead.

    2. Judge appeared to take a peek at Hernández on the bases, which led to his first and only error of 2024. Hernández was able to hustle into second ahead of the throw. "I just didn't make the play," Judge told reporters after the season-ending loss.

      This is a source of authority because it is from a professional player that was involved in the game.

    3. The New York Yankees' efforts at making the most impossible of World Series comebacks came to grief with their 7-6 Game 5 loss to the Los Angeles Dodgers on Wednesday night. Game 5 was the loss that ended the series, which is a simple matter of record. Yet inning No. 5 may have been the single inning that snuffed out the Yankees' hopes. The Yankees' manifold mistakes of Game 5 weren't confined to that fifth inning, as we'll soon see, but it was that frame that did most of the undoing and allowed the Dodgers to prevent the series from going back to L.A. for a Game 6.

      This is an example of more context being given about the topic. We are learning how they "Blew" their lead.

    4. How Yankees blew five-run lead to lose World Series: Breaking down error-filled Game 5 that sank New York

      "blew" would be a metaphor in this headline. This would be a Argument is war metaphor. This entails that the Yankees blew up their lead, or ruined it, leading to a lost opportunity or ruined opportunity.

    1. "Women want a president who will secure our border, remove violent criminals from our neighborhoods, and put more money in our pockets — and that’s exactly why we are supporting President Trump," Leavitt said. "Kamala Harris must immediately condemn Mark Cuban’s disrespectful insult to women."

      They use this republican candidate for the Idaho House of Representatives as a source and quote him many times. I don't know exactly why he is speaking on the matter, and after research that still remains a mystery to me. He clearly politically aligns with Trump, therefore there is definitely a biasy here.

    2. The Trump campaign is blasting Mark Cuban, a top surrogate for Kamala Harris, for "extremely insulting" comments against women who support former President Donald Trump, demanding the vice president "immediately condemn" his remarks.

      By saying they are "blasting" Cuban, it is entailed that they are blowing him up or attacking him with weaponry.

    3. The Trump campaign is blasting Mark Cuban, a top surrogate for Kamala Harris, for "extremely insulting" comments against women who support former President Donald Trump, demanding the vice president "immediately condemn" his remarks.  if (window && window.foxstrike && Array.isArray(window.foxstrike.cmd)) { window.foxstrike.cmd.push(function(Strike) { Strike.insertAd('mobile', 'ban1', 'mobile-mw-ad-ban1', ''); }); } else { console.error('Error: window.foxstrike not found'); } Cuban appeared on ABC’s "The View" Thursday morning when he made the comments

      This metaphor is an example of Lakeoff and Johnson's "Argument is War". The language being used is war like language that adds a somewhat violent emphasis on the topic or words. They aren't literally blasting Mark Cuban.

    1. North Korea's government has not commented on the alleged deployment of troops to Russia. Moscow has dismissed it as "another fabrication."

      I speculate that this is dismissive behavior. I do believe that North Korea has troops in Russia and they plan to use them. While this is not fact, it is my opinion. I don't trust either country and neither does the US, South Korea, Ukraine, or most other countries in the world for that matter.

    2. The U.S. and South Korea have been concerned for months that in return for Kim's cooperation and support, Russia could provide North Korea with nuclear and advanced ballistic missile technology.

      A very scary idea. These two form a diabolical duo.

    3. The pact saw the leaders pledge to defend the other if either country was to come under attack, but officials in the U.S. and other Western capitals believe Russia, above all, has been keen to ensure a steady supply of North Korean weapons for its Ukraine war.

      More fact. Would Russia call in this pledge even if they have the upper hand? this also feels like a one sided deal in which Russia is getting more out of the relationship. Russia is receiving weapons and allegedly, troops. While North Korea isn't really under any threat to my knowledge. Is North Korea planning on needing Russian assistance in the near future?

    4. North Korea has been supplying Russia with artillery for its war in Ukraine for months.

      First hard fact. It is true that North Korea has been supplying Russia. I don't believe it is too far fetched that they are now sending troops to russia.

    5. World U.S. "seeing evidence" of North Korean troops in Russia as Ukraine war rages, Defense chief Lloyd Austin says By Charlie D'Agata Updated on: October 23, 2024 / 8:23 PM EDT / CBS News North Korea sends troops to Russia, U.S. says North Korea sends troops to Russia, U.S. says 02:52 Washington — Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said Tuesday that the U.S. was "seeing evidence that there are North Korean troops in Russia," offering the first comments by a senior U.S. official on the seemingly expanding ties between two major U.S. adversaries.  South Korean officials first raised the alarm about the North Korean deployments to Russia last week, saying Seoul's intelligence agencies had evidence that North Korean commandos were sent to Russia on their way to join Moscow's ongoing invasion of Ukraine."Exactly what they're doing is left to be seen," Austin said of the North Korean troops in Russia. He made the remarks to reporters during a visit to Rome.close dialogAdvertisementclose dialog/* effects for .bx-campaign-1322182 *//* custom css .bx-campaign-1322182 */@-webkit-keyframes bx-anim-1322182-spin { from { -webkit-transform: rotate(0deg); } to { -webkit-transform: rotate(360deg); }}@keyframes bx-anim-1322182-spin { from { transform: rotate(0deg); } to { transform: rotate(360deg); }}/* rendered styles .bx-campaign-1322182 */.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative> *:first-child {padding: 0;width: 100%;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative:before {min-height: 0;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182.bx-active-step-1 .bx-creative {background-color: transparent;border-style: none;max-width: 728px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182.bx-active-step-1 .bx-close {stroke: white;background-color: black;border-style: solid;border-color: white;border-width: 1px;box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 3px black;top: -10px;z-index: 2;left: 10px;}@media all {.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182.bx-active-step-1 .bx-close {width: 22px;height: 22px;}}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-group-1322182-rYv8Qti {width: 40px;position: absolute;left: 50%;top: 50%;transform: translate(-50%, -50%);}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-element-1322182-hZIlQjG> *:first-child {animation-name: bx-anim-1322182-spin;animation-duration: 800ms;animation-iteration-count: infinite;animation-timing-function: linear;margin-top: -25px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-element-1322182-hZIlQjG {width: auto;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-group-1322182-YpzzupB {position: relative;z-index: 1;width: 728px;height: 90px;padding: 0px;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-group-1322182-zyI9Vvr {padding: 10px;width: 100%;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-element-1322182-r4PLUT7 {width: auto;}.bxc.bx-campaign-1322182 .bx-element-1322182-r4PLUT7> *:first-child {padding: 2px 4px;font-size: 10px;color: rgb(255, 255, 255);text-transform: uppercase;background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.34);}He said if the North Korean troops were about to become active participants in Russia's war in Ukraine, it would be an indication that Putin — whose forces have been making territorial gains in recent months — could be in more trouble than many people realize. Some officials believe the gains along the front line in Ukraine have come at the cost of many thousands of Russian troops. South Korean officials suspect the Northern troops are being trained in Russia to fight on that front line. South Korean intelligence estimates suggest there are now about 3,000 Northern troops in Russia, but Ukrainian officials have been following the matter closely, too, and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and officials in South Korea have said the North could deploy more than 10,000 troops to Russia by the end of the year. What to know about the BRICS Summit being hosted by Putin 02:41 Ukrainian officials say they have not seen North Koreans fighting in the country yet

      Unless the Northern troops are just training, there still isn't really any evidence that this is happening. Just suspicion.

    6. South Korean officials suspect the Northern troops are being trained in Russia to fight on that front line. South Korean intelligence estimates suggest there are now about 3,000 Northern troops in Russia, but Ukrainian officials have been following the matter closely, too, and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and officials in South Korea have said the North could deploy more than 10,000 troops to Russia by the end of the year.

      This is a big difference in numbers. I don't know how they have come to that estimation. The end of the year is in just 2 months.

    7. He said if the North Korean troops were about to become active participants in Russia's war in Ukraine, it would be an indication that Putin — whose forces have been making territorial gains in recent months — could be in more trouble than many people realize. Some officials believe the gains along the front line in Ukraine have come at the cost of many thousands of Russian troops.

      So far this is all speculation. No facts have really been stated. If Putin is using North Korean troops, I feel like it could mean many things. Maybe instead of being in trouble, they're tryin to solidify their upper hand position by pulling in more troops.

    1. The former president was also in the Keystone State on Oct. 14 for a town hall event in Oaks, about 20 miles outside Philadelphia. The event made headlines after it was abruptly cut short once two attendees needed medical attention and the former president preempted the town hall, opting to play several songs off his playlist for about 40 minutes and sometimes sway along with the music.

      shifted topic from the headline.

    2. He then touched on how the economy, job numbers, and the border were doing while he was in office.

      Doesn't dive much deeper into this. Probably because it isn't related to Trump working at Mcdonald's but still an interesting addition.

    3. Harris has previously said she worked at the fast-food chain while in college. Without citing any evidence, Trump, on Sunday, disputed that she ever was a McDonald's employee.

      Factual comment. Although this statement might sound like it has some sort of bias,I don't believe it does. Trump has disputed Kamala's claims of being a former Mcdonald's employee and hasn't offered evidence for that claim. In regard to the uncertainty of whether she has or hasn't worked for Mcdonald's before, there is no evidence that she has or hasn't.

    4. "Upon learning of the former president's request, we approached it through the lens of one of our core values: we open our doors to everyone," the company said. "McDonald's does not endorse candidates for elected office and that remains true in this race for the next president. We are not red or blue – we are golden."

      I find it interesting that the Mcdonald's is making it clear to the public that they have no political affiliation in the race. Again, I do think it is necessary, but it leads me to ask further questions such as were the crew working with Trump happy with his attendance? Were employees given the option to work with him, or was it randomly mandatory regardless of the employee political opinions.

    5. A sign on the door from the franchise owner and operator acknowledges they're nonpartisan but says they proudly open their doors to everyone.

      Clearly, the Mcdonald's that hosted Trump made it clear that they are not biased or in favor of one party over the other. They may have had to make this clear for the sake of their business. I wouldn't find it hard to believe that some people may boycott or even damage, or threaten the restaurant just for having Trump.

    6. The former president handed out food to pre-selected supporters in five cars.

      This clearly defines to the reader the circumstances of Trump's "shift". We now know that the people in the drive through weren't just random but "pre-selected". We can now infer that he really was handing food out to real people, but they weren't just anybody.

    7. Trump works drive-thru at Pennsylvania McDonald's before town hall in Lancaster

      The first thing I noticed about this article was obviously the title. I like how it doesn't feel like there is an underlying agenda or bias. The title is very straightforward and factual. Clearly and simply states that Trump worked a drive-thru before town hall.