Voroxpete @ Voroxpete @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

2,899

Joined

2 yr. ago

Even if we do pass some kind of "tipping point" (and you need to understand that every tipping point is just an arbitrary line that climate scientists draw to try to draw people's attention to the problem), we can still mitigate the damage. There is never a point where fighting climate change becomes worthless. The less we do now, the greater the damage will be in the future. That's all there is to it. Tipping points are just a way of illustrating that.

That's why it's an analogy, and not reality.

There is no point where hitting the brakes will not help. We can always reduce the amount of harm done.

That's not Trump being right, that's Trump hanging all of America's allies out to dry. A more serious effort to support Ukraine would make it functionally impossible for Russia to threaten Europe. More staunch support for NATO from the US would forestall any attempt at Russian aggression. The EU are setting military funding targets far beyond what Trump demanded, because this has nothing to do with Trump's demands and everything to do with his litany of failures.

Let's be clear about something; climate scientists almost universally agree that there is no such thing as "winning" or "losing" the fight against climate change (Suzuki, for the record, is a zoologist, not a climate scientist). This isn't a game, there's no referee, and no one gets a trophy at the end.

The battle against climate change is about mitigating harm. The worse we do, the more harm there will be. But there is never a point where it is "too late". The car is going to crash, but the sooner you hit the brakes, the less damaging the impact will be. Everything we do to push the needle will save lives. There is never a point where we get to throw up our hands and succumb to the comforting fantasy that it's "too late" to change anything.

I have a lot of respect for Suzuki, and I don't blame him for feeling defeated with everything that's happening, but spreading this kind of message is, dangerous, damaging, and flies entirely in the face of the science.

They're wrong. See my comment above.

Jessie what the fuck are you on about?

The audio clip in that source is just flat out wrong (and I'm pretty sure it's either AI generated or an American trying to do a British accent. Source: Am British). If you look at the phonetic symbols you'll see that they're identical for both pronunciations, and every other source agrees that the pronunciations are the same for UK and US.

Here's one with audio that isn't fucked - https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-pronunciations/ensign

Seconding this. Itzg's server is so easy, I taught my 15 year old niece to run one.

"It is a POLITICAL WITCH HUNT, very similar to the Witch Hunt that I was forced to endure," said Trump.

So you're saying he's guilty too?

Gorgeous!

In the comments section of another, a TikTok user responded to a thread outlining the current administration's anti-LGBTQ actions by saying, "None of that has anything to do with us being gay."

Compliance will not save you, you craven fucking cowards. They have never been quiet about how much they hate gay people, and the fact that they're focused so heavily on attacking trans people right now is only because they want to pick off the weakest of the herd first.

Bigotry is the enemy of all people. None of us is free until all of us are free.

Being a country singer from Burlington is so fucking funny to me. Like, that is the most middle class, suburban place you could possibly live. The entire city is just an endless sea of overpriced chain restaurants. This man has never smelled manure in his life.

I'm genuinely struggling to believe that you're being anything other than intentionally disingenuous here, because it's hard to imagine how anyone operating in good faith could manage to miss a point so completely and utterly.

But on the off chance that you're serious; the logic is that purpose has far more moral weight to it than means. Punching out a Nazi to save the black man he was trying to beat to death in the gutter is a morally good thing to do. Punching out a trans person because you're a hateful bigot is a morally bad thing to do. Do I need to elaborate on that? I feel like I shouldn't have to, but then it feels like I shouldn't have to be explaining any of this.

If you were in a sealed room with a thousand starving children, a padlocked shipping container full of food labelled "Property of Jeff Bezos", and a set of bolt-cutters, what would you do? Because if the answer is anything other than "Break the lock open", your entire moral system is completely and utterly fucked, and I do not know how to explain it to you any more plainly than that. If you actually believe that property rights are more important than human lives, then I honestly think you might need serious and extensive therapy to undo whatever damage has been done to you.

Yeah, I'm all for pro-Palestine activism; fully support this cause, and I have no moral objections to destroying some property to do it. Human lives are more important than inanimate objects. But I really wish they could have come up with a version of this plan that didn't involve fucking over Ukraine.

Unfortunately I suspect a lot of these people may be of the stripe of Leftist that treats anything relating to war - including arming the victims of unprovoked territorial aggression - as morally wrong, meaning they likely saw this as killing two birds with one stone.

Yes. People are more important than property. If your reaction to vandalism in service of protesting a genocide is to be upset about the vandalism, you need to sit back and really think about whether your moral compass needs some recalibration.

Ah, the Jordan Peterson defense. "That depends on your definition of 'have', 'used', 'a', and 'computer'."

What we've seen very clearly with fair use is that you end up being forced to defend it, as opposed to it being presumed. That means it's very easy for a rightsholder with money to go after every use, fair or not, and force the user to spend time and money defending themselves (and also probably face a preliminary injunction that takes the image down until the case is over, which will often be after its newsworthy).

Doesn't this guy regularly stream from a laptop in a desperate attempt to seem cool?

It's not the standard because it will likely have a LOT of unintended consequences.

How do you share evidence of police brutality if they can use copyright to take down the video? How do newspapers print pictures of people if they have to get the rightsholders permission first? How do we share photos of Elon Musk doing a Nazi salute if he can just sue every site that posts it for unauthorized use of his likeness?

Unless this has some extremely stringent and well written limitations, it has the potential to be a very bad idea.

I mean, yeah, I'd show up with my pup for that.

Nah, Trump doesn't want this to escalate. Exactly the opposite in fact. He wants to hit Iran, then call a ceasefire, so he can say that he boldly applied a mixture of force and diplomacy to resolve the situation (you know, the one that his constant enabling of Isreal and his pull out from the Iran nuclear deal created). He's looking for a quick win, not a protracted conflict.

This seems counterintuitive because of the obvious similarities to the George Bush playbook. Start a war in the Middle East, become a wartime president, get re-elected/made president for life. But it's not 2001 anymore. American attitudes have changed. In particular, the right have really soured on the whole war in the Middle East thing. America regularly cycles between World Police and Total Isolationism, and right now MAGA is leading the charge deep into an Isolationist era. They see foreign wars and foreign aid as the same bucket; money spent on people who aren't them.

So Trump is trapped between his base, who have no interest in another forever war, and his need to put at least one win on the board for his absolute disaster of a presidency. The optimal out for him here is a quick resolution, which is why he is absolutely losing his shit over Isreal constantly escalating the situation, and Iran having the sheer audacity to strike back despite his oh so clear instructions.