• 8 Post
  • 38 Comment
Joined 8M ago
Cake day: Feb 17, 2021


This will help Lemmy to connect to feriverse too 😍

Miami, New Orleans, Venice, and a handful of other extremely low-lying cities could sink before 2100 unless strong measures are taken. If you live there, you should be extremely worried - but instead of giving up on having kids, consider moving somewhere else

how much money would it take to offset the carbon cost of your future child? That is, you can build machines that suck carbon out of the air - how much would it cost to use these machines to suck up exactly as much carbon as your future child will emit over their lifetime?

yes, climate change will probably mostly affect poor subsistence farmers - so not your own children. But isn’t it still immoral to have children, knowing that they’re making the problem worse for others? I think no.

Self Contradiction in next two

But so far, the droughts haven’t been bad enough that California stopped golf courses from watering their massive lawns to keep them perfectly green every day. But if anyone was actually dying of thirst, or even having enough trouble getting water that they might be motivated to vote out some politician over it, the government could redirect the golf course water, or any of a thousand other things like this, and everyone would have more than enough. You see this everywhere - lots of resources are being wasted for stupid political reasons. If the political calculus ever changed - as it will, if these problems ever start inconveniencing privileged First World citizens - then we can stop wasting the resources, and use them to address the symptoms of climate change instead.

Meanwhile, Republicans don’t care about this and have just as many children as ever. Since children tend to share their parents’ political beliefs, this skews elections in favor of the Republicans, who will prevent strong government action.

But if emissions decline at the same rate they’ve been declining recently, by the time your child is in their 20s that’ll be down to 7.5 tons.

Reading the article again will probably help, i think it’s self explanatory. I will try to briefly explain why i used “delusional” and "privileged’

  • The author is giving a privileged usa centric view, doesn’t seems to grasp the idea that a climate crisis in one country will affect others.( qoute1,qoute3)
  • Thinks that emissions are declining(qoute6)
  • Believes that voting can bring systemic change(qoute4,qoute5)
  • Believes in techno-copium like Carbon capture(qoute2)

There is probably more ridiculous takes in the article, but think this is suffice to prove my point. if you need any further clarification on these feel free to ask. but i’m a bit busy now so responses will be slow.

Thanks for the laugh. the author is hilariously delusional and privilaged

Adding a feature to the Lemmy codebase isn’t as easy as making an extension ( for devs who aren’t familiar with Lemmy codebase)

humans are imperfect, self-centered and that any society with this many of us is going to have some ugly parts.

Capitalist realism is one hell of a drug🤣

They pollute less for the simple reason that they’re poorer.

  • They pollute less for the simple reason that their economic model isn’t based on infinite growth.

  • They pollute less because their superior economic model generates less waste.

  • They pollute less because they will work for the betterment of the planet even if there is no profits to be earned from it

I also disagree with the argument of growth. Yeah the world is finite but we are very far from actually using even a tiny fraction of all the available resources. We can have growth for a while (better knowledge, comfort, healthcare) before we actually use up the resources of the earth.

😂 sure we should squeeze out everything out of nature, climate change will wait, do you even understand the scale of the crisis we are in? do you seriously think we can just keep exploiting the resources and don’t face it’s consequences?

but it’s not going to happen overnight and suddenly become some for of utopia. It’s going to be progressive and there are going to be some steps back.

When did I say any of this? I thought it was pretty clear that I’m not advocating for Utopian socialism.

If you want it to happen faster, you need to show people that better options are out there. Complaining about “the system” while doing nothing doesn’t help.

Doing Nothing? There must be a misunderstanding. or do you seriously think that not participating in a bourgeois election equates to nothing?

You’re denying that any progress is impossible. That’s simply not true.

The only meaningful progress is the progress from capitalism to socialism.

is it OK to address them as comrades?😇

features added since the last time i posted

  • Authentication…

It’s not an opinion. However it won’t hurt to put an option in settings to toggle the behavior

I’ll let you know when it’s ready for use

It’s supposed to be minimalist (as in very less metadata), the ui is just a placeholder it will be polished once the core logic is done,

Please open a issue on github on how to improve the config I didn’t put a lot of thought into it becuase I wanted to prioritize another issue

I’m not planning to implement the full api, so I’ll use it as a reference. thank you 🥰

😂 porting those features to rust looks like a good exercise

I’m developing a tui for lemmy :). …



No, I’m saying that instead creating a cult following around the artist, the art should be shared in dedicated communities, (like Lemmy) and mutual friendships should be created from discussions and conversations within the community.Thus the ‘influencer’ culture will be eliminated and people can focus more on the content of art without getting trapped in the parasocial relationships with the artist itself.

Fediverse and parasocial relationships

Fediverse and parasocial relationships …