Draken93
But people look for already asked questions by searching for them. And I don't think that there are many things that are more frustrating, then finding a questions that describes your problem X perfectly and it has only answers to Y.
When I am asking: "Whenever I eat pizza in the morning, it tastes metallic to me. Has anyone an idea why that could be?"
I dont want someone to answer: "Why are you eating pizza for breakfast?"
This answer is worth nothing. Actually its even worse, cause answering it costs time.
Today the problem is less the lack of ressources, but that we destroy the eco-system with our current technology. We can not just use another technologie to exploit a different kind of ressource. Instead we need a technology that has less consequences or even one that undoes the damage we already made.
Fossile oil reserves where not developed around 1800. They developed over millions of years. And actually they were already used in the middle east, china and myanmar way before europeans&americans started to use them to replace the shrinking and therefore more expensive supply of whale oil.
IMO the usage of petroleum was fueled(no pun intended) by the market and the rising price of whale blubber. It could have been used way earlier but was not lucrative.
Sadly the technologies that destroy our environment are still more lucrative then existing solutions that could solve our problem. That is especially if you look at the investments that are still made in this sector. We have the technologies to solve our problems, they are called renewable energies.
The problem is that we need a technology that takes over the market share that is currently taken by technologies that damage the environment. But that is very hard, as it would need to be more lucrative.
Just having the technology does not help, if people still use the damaging technologys. Cause they alone are enough to reach certain tipping points. And after those, no technology can save us even if it would undo damage that we caused earlier.
It seems as Brave Search could be the first non-tracking search engine that combines satisfying search results with good presentation.
I was never completly happy with DuckDuckGo, probably they use(despite others) search results of Bing. DuckDuck together with Startpage(google results but bad presentation) works for me but is unconvinient.
The AI is hard enough, took a few games until I managed to beat it.
But the party changed over time and today it doesnt matter anymore. Same goes for die Linke in my opinion. The only thing that should count, are the targets of a party.
We have communist parties here but they almost get no votes ( DKP and MLPD)
We were ranked at place 11 but were downranked cause of continous attacks on journalists.[1] But the people wo did this are those who cry loudly: "We have no freedom of speech". I even read in this thread "Germany is a totalitarian dystopia with no free speech"
Those people are so far away from reality. I am concerned they might never find back.
[1] https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/deutschland/panorama/pressefr...
You are totally lost, I really hope for you that you will find the way back into reality.
I think it is way more problematic how he intentionally misinterprets a survey of 1283 people to spread the constructs in his head.
He cites one Survey of 1283 people and thinks he can deduce the consequences of european hate-speech-laws from that. Despite the fact that I doubt that this small poll is representative, his assumptions are completly wrong.
What the by him cited article implies is that people are carefull with their opinion not because of laws but because of potential backslash from other people. Many people avoid controverse opinions because they want to avoid arguments. And the way the german question is written, this kind of avoidance is included. This has nothing to do with german laws.
If I read "I have long been a critic of the German laws prohibiting certain symbols and phrases" I am disgusted. Prohibiting the Swastika is part of historical responsibility we have as a society. That has nothing to do with free speech and the fact that turley implies that says alot about his mindset.
Luckily saying "Put all Jews in gas chambers" is not considered free speech here. We have to prevent on all means that history repeats itself. And the paradox of intolerance[1] is an important part of that.
I do not want to discuss a higher incidence of HIV in the group of gay males compared to the whole population. That is a fact that is attributable to the fact that unprotected anal sex comes with a higher infection risk then unprotected vaginal sex.
But the OP claimes that "specifically [young] gay males think as long as they are safe from HIV, they are safe enough." That may be the result of unfortunate wording. But if not it is an allegation that the OP will have a very hard time to prove.
But there is no electric car with < then 0.1% of the energy consumption of a tesla.
For me that seems as if they came to the (correct) conclusion that BTC is not the future. Justifying that decision with the climate impact feels like a bad excuse.
Reading the docs I got the feeling that the product is designed for big cooperations only. But not for someone who wants real price control. The free account just made no sense to me.
I ended up renting a cloud server ~3€ a month. (Not AWS) Looking at this thread this was the best decision I could make.
I rented a small cloud instance from HETZNER for ~ 3€/month and host everything myself. If I need a DBaaS I go with the MongoDB Atlas or ElephantSQL free tier.
I prefer constantly paying 3€, over a free account that breaks my neck if I miss something.
In my direct environment many people broke with that tradition.
Things like:
- "We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism."
- Followed by him arguing that the attemp to reduce the gender gap (Which is imo clearly a result of sexism) is discriminating the poor white man.
- On Top the strange "Woman on average" part connected to "Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination"
My view on the tone of the whole memo changed. One could interpret it, as a "white guy whining about people taking his century old priviledges away".
BUT: I would need to talk with him about it, to really know what his intention was. Again, ignoring his short reference to the IQ tests, I did not have the feeling that he was openly considering certain people inferior. I would still be open to talk to him.
If Google fired him, just for this memo and not because of a combination of other things he said and did, it would be exeggerated. And it would support at least his points on "alienating conservatives"
It seams as if the memo was written in a good intention. What I took away from the text is that he mostly considers people different, not inferior, because of their gender. It would be dumb to completly disagree with that. I think rational and follow science, therefore I agree on some off his points. I disagree with the extend of his conclusions and imo he sometimes mixes up correlation and causality.
But those are all things one could discuss. He sounds like reasonable guy.
I am not quite sure what you mean with objections? If you mean that people are not willing to talk about those things: I accept it, and stop talking about it. (Aslong as it is no direct issue like those people using the N-word, or being racist in general.)
About disagreement: It would be pretty strange if everyone would have the same opionion? I ask people about their reasons and try to understand their point of view. If they have valid arguments that I was not aware of, I am open to change my opinion.
BUT: If people come at me saying: Climate Change is a hoax, The complete media and science is controlled by the elites etc... Then i stop talking to them, as they would never consider an argument opposing to their opinion as valid.
AND: If someone considers people inferior only because of their gender, their race or their religion? Then I tell them indirectly, to go and **** themselfs.*
* At work I would try to be more diplomatic. Otherwise a whole team dynamic could be destroyed. But In my personal environment, I am as direct as possible. I do not want those people in my life.