• 0 Posts
  • 90 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 2nd, 2023

help-circle




  • It’s not going away any time soon. There’s currently 2 to 3 times as many humans as what would be long term sustainable with the way that we live. That means that it’s going to be a problem for at least many decades, but more likely a few centuries. It’s definitely not yesteryears problem. And sustainability should always remain a concern, in everything that we do. Many countries (not the USA obviously) are already taking steps to be more sustainable, but it’s baby steps compared to what is needed.


  • To sustain the current amount of humans, we are using unsustainable methods. That makes us unsustainable as well.

    Some estimates from Wikipedia: “Climate change, excess nutrient loading (particularly nitrogen and phosphorus), increased ocean acidity, rapid biodiversity loss, and other global trends suggest humanity is causing global ecological degradation and threatening ecosystem services that human societies depend on.[9][10][11] Because these environmental impacts are all directly related to human numbers, recent estimates of a sustainable human population often suggest substantially lower figures, between 2 and 4 billion.[12][13][14] Paul R. Ehrlich stated in 2018 that the optimum population is between 1.5 and 2 billion.[15] Geographer Chris Tucker estimates that 3 billion is a sustainable number, provided human societies rapidly deploy less harmful technologies and best management practices.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_population


  • Would the outcome have been the same without people in the media repeatedly bringing this to everyone’s attention? Probably not, because there would have been no public pressure against it, while the shadow groups that want this would have still been lobbying the politicians.

    Something bad is going to happen.
    Some people advocate to stop that bad thing.
    Even more people are holding their clutches that the bad thing might happen.
    Because of public pressure, action is undertaken to prevent the bad thing from happening.
    Thanks to those efforts, the bad thing is successfully averted.

    Some random person: that bad thing was never going to happen, look at all those gullible people who were panicking over nothing, we could have just done nothing and the outcome would have been the same.

    Also known as the “preparedness paradox”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preparedness_paradox


  • A direct link to the article from op: https://larslofgren.com/codesmith-reddit-reputation-attack/

    Reading that list of tactics was kinda depressing, because I could name a bunch of them with their debating name, even when they’re not being named as such by the author. Gish gallop, misrepresentation, throwing shade, ad hominem arguments. I never learned any of these terms in school, yet I know them now, bravo internet. But here they were used not for the low stakes of winning an online argument, but with real life negative consequences for a bunch of seemingly well meaning people. I hope kids now are being prepared in schools for this new online reality, but I fear that’s just not the case in most countries.








  • Do you have a source of where they are saying that?

    I have seen an article about the Australian political action group that was claiming credit for getting the games banned. The story behind the start of the controversy.

    And I have seen an article about the communication from Steam that they were banning games which were in conflict with the rules of their payment providers. The result basically.

    But I’ve only seen conjecture and speculation about what went on to get from the start to the result. I haven’t seen any article that spelled out exactly what the different payment providers demanded from the gaming platforms, nor anything about what they discussed in between them.

    Edit: after 12 hours there’s 4 downvoters and 0 sources. Another victory for vibes over facts.



  • Blabla, google it, yet you ignore all evidence that was posted to the contrary of your beliefs. As expected you come up empty handed because you have nothing except your own vitriol.

    I get that you are a bitter and resentful person, but that is a choice that you are making. I’ll try to explain below and I get that the text will be longer than you are used to, but I do implore you to read it. I’d like to try and help you get some perspective.

    You don’t have to make up things and present them as facts. You don’t have to resent other people who try to show you that some beliefs that you hold, have no factual basis. We don’t try to inform people like you out of malice, but it’s to help others to be more informed and to help people in general make more informed decisions.

    I suspect that your wilful ignorance has often brought you into useless conflicts where you ended up resenting the other participants because they were dismissive of you and your opinions. But that’s not their fault. You are the one chosing to reject facts and resenting those that do not accept your beliefs over factual evidence. Your resentment and frustration has it’s origin within your own choices, which has one major potential upside for you: you can chose to stop being that bitter resentful person.

    Don’t make things up, respect other people’s opinions, be open to the possibility that some of your beliefs might not be true. Do those 3 simple things and you will find that interactions in your life will on average be much more agreeable and positive for you.