onethought
At some point, this view point, and this predicament is just "The Human Condition".[0]
[0] That's not a excuse to not try to fix the broken things around us. But perspective is important.
And yes, animals could go live in it, even if it was planted.
What's your alternative? boycott wood? Let the trees fall and rerelease their carbon as they rot?
Environmentalists trip over themselves on what “old growth” means.
It is a renewable resource, and Tasmanian forestry is one of the most advanced and sustainable industries in the world.
More people die from obesity, cars, flu, preventable illness, etc. But we discuss endless this one issue… it’s for political science reasons not humanity/moral/etc reasons.
In the Age of LLMs we could generate a fake digital existence as fast as we can delete a real one.
The goal is to appear like you complying without any evidence you are not. Graphene — build this feature!
They were founded in NZ by a NZer, they launch from NZ, their employees are NZers. Calling them a US company is equivalent to saying Google is Irish.
- If everyone took a Waymo... Waymo sucks. Not true of trains.
($/MW of power is stupid with nuclear in the age of solar and batteries, with basically zero safety concern... i.e. you can deploy solar and batteries to houses... not so much for nuclear)
The sound from a phone speaker is annoying, more so, than a typical in person talking. To me the solution lies somewhere in fixing that to make it sound more natural.
Everyone else claiming that some how having “loud” conversation is rude, feels like they’ve fallen into some anti-social hole… we are literally the only animal to have developed complex spoken language… it’s part of our humanity.
Meanwhile BYD had US money with a a friendly government enhancing it.
You shouldn’t be angry with Musk, you should be angry with Trump/Biden (ignore left/right they both let Asia take Battery and chip technology on their watch).
Not defending Elon, he’s clearly got some flaws, but Telsa’s expansion has been phenomenal, even with massive head winds against it, just look at Rivian, VW, Lucid, Ford, GM… or anyone if you want to talk about “squandering”.
Or are you counting OEMs rather than actual vehicles?
I would hazard a guess that your knowledge lead to better prompts, better approach... heck even understanding how to build a status bar menu on Mac OS is slightly expert knowledge.
You are illustrating the GP's point, not negating it.
Isn't that the point they are making?
I think "handywavy logic" is now being generous.
What about widening your heuristics to consider all of human history and see how much more freedom, autonomy and large scale coordination we have in place compared to say... the dark ages, or earlier.
(Funny how we say “save the planet” when we really mean “save people/complex life”).
You can't make statements like "you got out voted" when you actually mean "a few more people from your side turned out and voted, but actually likely the majority of the population doesn't agree with you".
You could argue that apathy is a vote in and of itself, but then you aren't a representative democracy.
The fallacy is where you use an authority in place of evidence. It is not fallacious to refer to consensus or experts.
Else, you end up basically in the "Do your own research"/vaccine denier/climate deniers/flat earth territory. Appeals to experts is not a logical fallacy. It's actually smart, because you get to leverage agreed facts (the earth is round) even though you've never actually been to space to see it for yourself.