As if to prove my point… All you had to do was tell me the argument I made and all you did was “This is how it’s genocide denial”. It’s exactly what I said you do.

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

I’m going to start from here because this is how you show how disingenuous you are. I straight up said I don’t agree with the genocide deniers and what do you do? You still lump me in with them. Your entire mindset here is “If they don’t agree with me they must be genocide deniers”. Fuck off with that shit.

You don’t even try to understand what I’m saying, all you see is that I don’t agree with you and so you mental gymnastic yourself into believing I’m doing genocide denial. Once again, fuck off with that shit.

Go on man, shut me up. Retell my point back to me.

So you’re mixing up two different meaning of AI to say that AI doesn’t mean the same thing everywhere? When people are talking about bats, the flying mammals, do you also interject with “bats are use to hit a ball” to make some point? No, because deliberately mixing up homonyms is stupid.

It’s pretty clear what kind of AI people are talking about here. Nobody was discussing game AI.

You can sit on your high horse and talk about how people are cutting off pieces of their soul “for strategy”, but don’t be surprised when genocide continues and you get fascism shoved down your throat.

Genuinely not sure if joking or actually dumb.

I’m yet to find a comment section that isn’t full of you fuckers.

I’m going to start from here because this is how you show how disingenuous you are. I straight up said I don’t agree with the genocide deniers and what do you do? You still lump me in with them. Your entire mindset here is “If they don’t agree with me they must be genocide deniers”. Fuck off with that shit.

I don’t know about that, I think political possibility goes beyond who will be convinced to change their vote because you told people to stop complaining about Biden.

Like for instance, you acknowledging that the US is going to do genocide no matter what seems like a pretty damning thing to say, no? Seems like something worth saying. Seems like maybe we should condemn people who do genocide, or are willing to helm a nation that will make them complicit in genocide no matter what, because those are people that are going to do a genocide.

Political possibilities goes beyond when you stop complaining about a part of the problem and start criticizing the problem as a whole. Biden is only a part of the problem, the real problem is that the majority political landscape of US supports Israel. You can’t even get a real presidential candidate who would oppose Israel because it would go against the party line. And yet you’re convinced it’s Biden you should be complaining about.

Seems like maybe getting people on board with a system change involves pointing out that it is an inexorable genocide machine. And if that’s what it takes to stop the genocides - and you seem to agree with me on this - then maybe we should, I don’t know, talk about it?

Which is why you should talk about all the politicians supporting the genocide and not just focus on one. Why aren’t you complaining about Trump? Why aren’t you complaining about Mitch McConnell or Chuck Schumer? Why aren’t you complaining about everyone in congress who voted to aid Israel? Why is it that you only complain about Biden?

I think if you think you need to do this to get someone elected, that’s actually counterproductive. Like maybe people associating Biden with genocide denial is going to make it harder for them to hold their nose and vote strategically like you want. It’s very hard to imagine the voter who would care about the genocide and yet be fooled into voting for Biden because people kept his genocide support on the down-low. Seems like you’re cutting off little pieces of your soul for the sake of a strategy that isn’t going to really work, unless you’ve got an A-to-B for me on how telling people to stop complaining about Biden’s genocide support helps him win election.

It’s not about getting Biden elected, it’s about making sure Trump does not get elected. That’s what your elections have always been about, voting against the guy you hate more. If you don’t vote for Biden you’re indirectly voting for Trump because the system boils down to you either get Biden or you get Trump. And it doesn’t matter who gets elected, America will still support genocide. This vote isn’t about genocide, it’s about whether American will get a fascist leader or not. You can sit on your high horse and talk about how people are cutting off pieces of their soul “for strategy”, but don’t be surprised when genocide continues and you get fascism shoved down your throat.

Actually I’m just pointing out that you’re complaining about something that won’t change. You can complain about Biden being a capitalist but every final presidential candidate has been a capitalist for I don’t even know for how many decades. You’re complaining into the void because unless the system itself changes there’s no chance to have a socialist president.

Similarly you’re complaining about Biden supporting genocide but the alternative, Trump, has pretty much said he will go gloves off and give Israel whatever they need. In fact you probably couldn’t find a president in the last 20 years who wouldn’t be supporting Israel. It’s not a specific president or presidential candidate that is supporting genocide, it’s the entire system. The only thing you realistically accomplish by complaining about Biden is sowing division.

As for the “genocide deniers”, well some people are just dumb and we have to accept that.

And don’t forget capitalist Joe. Nobody is talking about the actual capitalism Joe is supporting because you think you have a good reason for it.

It’s the least worst way he could put it in his PR statement, there’s no doubt in my mind what he did was worse than “inappropriate”.

Have you considered that it looks better because you’re used to seeing it that way? It’s the same with Fahrenheit vs Celsius, the one you’ve grown up with make more sense and is more pleasing to the eye.

On a completely irrelevant tangent, I hate FAFO. I see FAFO and it reminds me of FIFO and then I start thinking “but what does the A stand for?” First appended first out? First added first out? First assigned first out? And then I remember it has nothing to do with systems theory.

Can’t we just spell it out? FAFO just doesn’t have that kick. You spell FAFO and people will go" the fuck? " whereas you spell" fuck around, find out" and everyone goes “oh shit, that guy means business.”

It’s pretty public knowledge by now. If you search “ExxonMobil climate prediction” I’m sure you can find a starting point. I recommend finding all the Exxon papers because they’re quite eye opening.

So what are we supposed to do, halt all space flights until we figure this out?

Without further research going into how much damage it’s doing there’s no way to say what our next steps should be. Maybe everything we’re doing is still within acceptable limits? Maybe we need tighter regulation on materials going into space. Maybe some materials need to be outright banned.

The only reasonable thing we can do is study it further. Expecting instant result based on one study that only outlines a potential risk is quite frankly just doomerist behavior.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending corporations here. I’m simply stating the fact that climate change denial wasn’t the case of waiting until it’s “fully confirmed”, it was pretty much confirmed back in the 70s. They even had predictions for the next century on how things will go bad if nothing is done and the last time I checked we were pretty on course with their predictions. When it came to the scientific consensus, it was pretty much “fully confirmed”. It was simply the public opinion where it wasn’t “fully confirmed” because corporations deliberately ran disinformation to make it seem like scientists didn’t know what they were talking about.

But this paper isn’t really confirming anything. The paper itself says that the model does not account for all the factors and to literally quote the paper:

As reentry rates increase, it is crucial to further explore the concerns highlighted in this study.

This paper is not presenting a final conclusion, it’s presenting concerns that need further studies. let’s wait for further studies and if there’s scientific consensus about it being an issue I’m all for bringing out the pitchforks. In the mean let’s keep calm and dread over the doom and gloom that is climate change.

We were in the “we don’t know if we’re causing it” phase for a long time because big oil knew about global warming and deliberately ran disinformation campaigns so they could keep profiteering. Had Exxon done the right thing in the 70s we wouldn’t have this looming crisis.

I guess that’s the downside of not having a miniature reactor in your phone.

Luckily user replaceable batteries are coming with an EU regulation some time within the next 5 years, but so far fairphone is the most repairable phone you can have. I don’t think you can replace mobo or chipset, but it does allow replacing quite a few things. For me the 3 most important ones are battery, charging port and screen, as those are the most likely for me to get worn out or broken. I haven’t bought it yet because my current phone is still somewhat chugging along, but my next phone will definitely be a fairphone.

Interesting about about 2k, to give a nice round number.

Voyagers is estimated to have insufficient power for communication by 2032, so from its launch we’ll get a rounded 60 year battery life. Fairphone doesn’t have plutonium batteries (though that would be pretty cool) but you can replace batteries. Let’s say you replace the battery every 2 years which means you need 30 batteries. At 40€ a piece the cost of batteries is 1200€(and you get one extra battery with the phone). Add in the cost of the phone with the delivery of phone + 30 batteries and it comes out to about 2k.

Yeah. I’d totally buy an $800 million phone.

Realistically you can buy something like a Fairphone that lets you replace most parts that wear out or get damaged, which definitely increases the overall longevity of your phone. Or that CAT phone that’s supposed to be super durable if you’re prone to breaking your phone. Or if smart phones aren’t your deal you can maybe find the old reliable Nokia 3210, that phone does not break and the battery can be replaced.

If you have phone longevity issues then stop buying phones that are not designed to be used for a long time.

That’s like saying 14 lashes is more favorable than 15 lashes.

And the denazification claim was a stupid one in the first place because how does Russia verify that Ukraine is denazified? If Ukraine kicks out of the government all the suppose nazis, is Ukraine denazified? What if they all denounce nazism. Does that count? What’s stopping Russia from putting more people in their “nazi” list? It was a vague demand and shouldn’t have been a demand in the first place.