Is this the most fuckcars poster ever? NGL I lowkey love the implication that the only purpose of cars is to kill people 🥰

So people can just downvote it instead right? That’s literal direct democracy at play - if there’s more people that like the bot they’ll upvote it and it will have a positive score - saying “just bury your head in the sand if you don’t agree with this message” is the reason we’re in this political mess in the first place…

Which is why the bot is not useful - it literally tries to standardize political stances when that’s actually impossible.

Same reason I don’t trust it - imagine rating fking BBC (the literal pro-state violence, austerity supporting, anti-immigration governmental mouth piece as “left-center”)

It just distorts people’s perception of what political biases are and makes them complacent by relying on an automated bot to do the important work of using your own judgment for what constitutes as moral or justified.

By letting it platform itself on lemmy, it’s basically inserting itself as the de facto expert on the topic - so for example, people overseas might see BBC rated as left-center and highly factual and start believing that wanting to “secure your borders” is a thing that UK leftist want. Well excuse me if I don’t want a privately owned (even if open source) US company deciding what political views others should have.

Being grateful is pretty neat but make sure to reciprocate! - “Suck her clit every morning to thank her for choosing you” 🥰

Using your brain

I think we’re both describing the same flat earth argument - still my point is that while there is a correlation between the coming out and the subsequent radicalization, it would be overly simplistic to claim direct causation. The coming out event acted as a catalyst that revealed and perhaps accelerated pre-existing tendencies in the family member who became radicalized, but it did not cause the bigotry itself.

thank you for the kind words :)

but then why blame the people that are saying “uhm you really shouldn’t be joining a cult (bigotry) that harms everyone” instead of the cult leaders (the bigoted mouthpieces pushing harmful rhetoric)?

it’s like saying that if your family never made claims the earth is round you would have never looked up anything related to it and wouldn’t have become a flat earther.

idk maybe it’s just that as LGBTQ+ i don’t like to think that if i were to come out it would cause my family to turn into bigots (which just makes me never want to bring it up 🤷)

memes aside it does look pretty neat - simple .apk installs, yaml system configs, automatic boot rollback, easy multi-gpu support - all solid user focused features - will have to see how it develops but so far it seems like a better alternative to the likes of PopOS

I would argue it isn’t direct cause and effect as most likely that member has always harbored those feelings but being confronted with their beliefs is the catalyst that makes them veer into openly bigoted territory.

I think what OP is trying to say is that by claiming LGBTQ+ people coming out is the cause of people’s bigotry it will only make them less likely to come out but wouldn’t actually reduce the number of bigots in the world. (I know that’s probably not the argument you were trying to make, but it’s what it sounded like from the outside)

Here’s some math on that “revolutionary” idea to put things into perspective, as it turns out, it’s pretty underwhelming:

• If we used ALL the aluminum produced globally in a year (about 65 million tons), we’d get around 7.30 million tons of hydrogen.
• While that might sound like a lot, it really isn’t… That hydrogen would contain about 8.30 x 10^14 BTUs of energy.
• Meanwhile, our annual global methane production is sitting pretty at 1.14 x 10^17 BTU.
• Doing the math, and our “amazing” aluminum-to-hydrogen process gives us a whopping 0.73% of the energy we get from methane…

And remember, this is assuming we use EVERY SINGLE BIT of aluminum we produce globally!

Obv hydrogen is “cleaner” than gas, but the point is the scale - this method is a drop in the ocean compared to current energy usage.

TL;DR: Using ALL the world’s annual aluminum production to make hydrogen would only give us 0.73% of the energy we get from natural gas…

.

.

.

.

For the math nerds, here’s more detail on the chemistry and energy calc:

• The reaction: 2 Al + 6 H2O → 2 Al(OH)3 + 3 H2
• Global aluminum production: ~65 million metric tons/year
• Molar mass of Al = 26.98 g/mol
• Moles of Al = 65,000,000,000 kg / 0.02698 kg/mol = 2.41 x 10^12 moles
• H2 produced = (2.41 x 10^12 moles Al * 3) / 2 = 3.62 x 10^12 moles H2
• Mass of H2 = 3.62 x 10^12 moles * 2.016 g/mol = 7.30 x 10^12 g = 7.30 million metric tons

BTU Calculation:

• Energy content of H2 = 113,738 BTU/kg
• Total energy from H2 = 7.30 x 10^9 kg * 113,738 BTU/kg = 8.30 x 10^14 BTU

Methane Comparison:

• Annual natural gas production ≈ 4,000 billion cubic meters
• Assuming 80% methane content: 3,200 billion cubic meters of methane
• Energy content of methane ≈ 35,663 BTU/m^3
• Total energy from methane = 3,200 x 10^9 m^3 * 35,663 BTU/m^3 = 1.14 x 10^17 BTU
• Ratio: (8.30 x 10^14) /(1.14 x 10^17) = 0.0073 or 0.73%

it’s still a Li-ion (like most current rechargeables) but the electrolyte - the medium that transfers the ions from the anode to the cathode - (the + and -) inside the battery is made of a solid material instead of the current gen liquid ones. The benefits are less weight/size (as liquids take up more space than solids) and a more stable composition - the liquid electrolyte can’t leak - the way batteries get gunky and corroded if left for a while

What I don’t get is why spend the effort dealing with YTs shit just to increase their userbase when we should be focusing on shifting people away from YT and into decentralized solutions like PeerTube anyways?

That’s easy. People who wish others to die. They die first. If they are willing to accept sacrificing others, they die first.

I didn’t agree to die. Or to be killed. Or murdered. Yet I have to be executed all the same, because they don’t care if you die or not.

First to die.

Still let’s not forget the right-wing policies from their manifesto:

• Increasing military spending by 13 billion

• Increase police funding

• More border security force to “stop the boats”

• Build more prisons

• Pour money into polluting industries (car gigafactories, steel production, “carbon capture”)

• Keep oil and gas production in the North Sea for decades, with the only focus on jobs and none on environmental issues.

So yeah I guess it’s better to have an authoritarian social-ish democratic state than an outright fascist one but that’s not a very high bar and will only work until the climate crisis boils us all alive :)

Isn’t this just a DIY brushless dynamo? Am I missing something? Still cool tho

I mean you could have asked why Israel attacks refugee camps in the first place (even before Hamas)?

Or do you think that atrocities like "women and children were stripped, lined up, photographed and then slaughtered by automatic fire" doesn’t breed resentment? (not that Hamas didn’t do the same on 7.11 but let’s not pretend Israel isn’t at least as complicit as Hamas in the overall conflict)

I’ll admit using civilians as shields is indeed dreadful - but my main point is acknowledging that violence only breeds more violence and that the first step to preventing more deaths is dismantling the current terror state form of Israel, not killing more and more civilians as some form of extirpation…

I’ll leave you with this - if there’s no oppressor to rally against, what would give Hamas power?

I mean you came in swinging with the whole “but why is Hamas holding hostages in a refugee camp” line which is actual whataboutism when the thread is about the IDF killing over 200 people.

Why not ask why the IDF doesn’t have procedures in place to prevent civilian casualties? Why not ask why is it impossible to send ground troops instead of carpet bombing Gaza? Why not ask why does Hamas exist in the first place? Is there a single thing you’ll admit the IDF/Israel has done wrong that isn’t somehow the fault of Hamas?

Your lack of humanity was already showing, but I didn’t think you’d be so unable to retort that you’d just forfeit the debate…

You accuse me of whataboutism then you just use it yourself.

Yes, I don’t think Hamas should be using human shields but I also don’t think Israel should be settling land even before the partitioning of Palestine. (I mean the idea of a foreign state partitioning land they don’t inhabit is insane, but let’s ignore that for the sake of argument)

How do you not see using civilian encampments as a makeshift human wall just as immoral?

And we can play the whole who started it first game as much as we want but it doesn’t negate the fact that even after unfavorable borders for Palestine were established - settlers continued to take over land with the support of the IDF - where is the defense in burning homes and expelling Palestinians from land not even within the borders of Israel?? (oh but it was contested territory you see so that gives us the right to massacre people, yes I am very intelligent…)

Saying Hamas is the reason the IDF is killing civilians completely misses the history of the struggle - what’s next the Nakba was also Hamas’ fault then?

So then would you hold Israel to the same standard of using human shields that you do Hamas?

If so would you claim the Hamas attacks on the 7th were justified because they attacked settler towns like Be’eri, whose ideological purpose of existing this close to Gaza was specifically to create a civilian border (literal large scale human shield)?

Using civilians to protect any military objective (including the land you’ve settled by force) is appalling - but let’s not pretend only one side is doing it.

If you really care about peace - petition your leaders for a one state solution where both Israelis and Palestinians (no matter their religion) are allowed to coexist and are equal in the eyes of the law and the people.