I am aware of waxed cardboard. I dismissed it because I thought that relying solely on it to store a liquid sounded a bit too ambitious. But it might work so yeah, I should have considered it.
Besides, how would an all-paper bottle even work? Liquid soap is, well, liquid. Paper soaks through when it's in contact with a liquid. The only other way to do such a bottle would be to use coated paper, which is less recyclable than an inner plastic bottle.
It gets even worse when you have props for building a more realistic sewage plant, all of which are actually just sewage projects with different visuals. Of course you want all those components in place, often more than one of them so it looks right... and suddenly your plant is way more powerful than it needs to be.
Keiner sagt, dass gesunde Ernährung Schwurbelei ist. Aber "Nahrungsmittel helfen den Organen, die so ähnlich aussehen" ist völliger Unsinn.
Ich meine, Karotten sehen nicht mal wie Augen aus. Litschis sehen wie Augen aus, oder Nashibirnen. Oder Eier. Karotten sollten statt dessen gut für die Finger sein. Und statt Sellerie sollte Spargel gut für die Knochen sein. Und Feldsalat kann nicht gut für uns sein; der ähnelt nichts im Körper.
Auf dem Poster werden Zufälle als Regel verkauft. Das ist grober Unfug und wird zurecht angeprangert.
Subways as the main form of public transit. If there's a place farther than three blocks from the nearest subway entrance, there's something wrong.
Overly lavish sewage plants. Yes, my city of 20.000 needs to be able to treat the sewage of 1.000.000 people. What if some more people move in, hmm?
Solar power. Solar power everywhere. Except for a few legacy wind turbines, solar power is the only option. You'd think fossil fuels had never been invented if you look at my cities.
Unfortunately, it follows the current Gnome design language. Gnome's approach to UI design doesn't click with some people, me included. I feel that while the main UI has not changed much since GIMP 2, the dialogs have become far less intuitive to use.
Even worse. The business model was "offer a service at a loss, get investors to fund you on promises that your customer base will allow you to turn a profit if it just gets big enough, repeat". Basically you're funding growth with the promise of future growth. Enshittification happens when the investors stop believing in the promised future profits and force the business to generate some right now.
Here's the idea: A plane that carries a radar emitter so strong that it blows out the receivers on enemy radar towers/SAM sites/ARAD missiles. It's tethered to another plane that carries a nuclear reactor to power it. And another one carrying a cooling system.
(Note: I'm not talking about a radar jammer. Jamming is a chickenshit solution that stops being useful when the jammer stops working. I'm talking about physically destroying the receivers by overloading them.)
Certain things can't reasonably be accelerated. Factories have a maximum output and building new ones (with all the infrastructure they need) isn't instantaneous. Armies need to be trained to different standards. And all of that stuff costs money.
For example: Germany just took on half a trillion Euros in debt to raise "special assets", that's equal to 1/9 of our GDP. Those special assets will be used to overhaul our infrastructure (which has been rotting away during two decades of austerity politics) and to get our armed forces into fighting shape. Both of that is required for effective defense production.
But we can't just tell KDNS to deliver 1000 Leopard 2A8s by the end of the week. Those need to be built. If we want them to be built faster we have to build or refit factories – which we're actually doing; there are plans to use a Volkswagen plant to build tanks instead of cars. But even if we can build more tanks that won't do us any good if we can't manufacture enough shells, have enough tank crews, have the infrastructure to move everything around etc. etc. etc.
The pax americana has always been built on the premise that the USA provide military capabilities to their allies specifically so that the allies won't compete with them on that stage. Going from that to having to be able to potentially defend against the States in a very short time is a logistical nightmare. In the case of Germany, this comes on top of our infrastructure being shit because the conservatives have spent two decades demonstrating the full depth of their economic ineptitude.
For the time being, the best we have is the fact that the EU is also a military alliance and that France has enough nukes to glass all American metropolitan areas.
It's easy enough once you've tracked one down. Just don't track someone down to inform them that you've turned articles upside down and you should be good.
One problem is that in a world without major problems, stakes have to be low (which is perfectly fine and can make for an engaging story) or an external threat has to be introduced. The latter can easily feel forced or disconnected with the world.
I wonder how it would be to have a nonlinear game set in two time periods. One is a solarpunk-ish idyll under threat (with the protagonist's actions focused on protecting it) and the other is a preceding industrial dystopia (with the protagonist's actions focused on effecting change for the better).
Throughout the game the player first learns that the dystopian protagonist's actions did succeed in changing the world for the better but also that the threats faced by the idyllic period are consequences of those actions. The message is that even ideal decisions can have negative effects down the line, "happily ever after" endings don't really exist, and happiness requires maintenance. Yet, change for the better is both possible and worth the effort.
We absolutely do. The paper is plastic-layered, which is how beverage cartons generally work.