A tricky read. "We provided no guidance so no one had a clue" vibes from it.
You didn't need to ask everywhere, just somewhere and make conclusions based on it. It would be mostly the same advice.
How can we talk to all the people who evacuated the on fire building because there wasnot clear assembly point.
Could have always rewritten Lemmy in Rust.
But the companies chosen for login is a slap in the face of anyone who cares about privacy.
If it is e2e encrypted, why would this change mitigate what they are concerned about?
Shida dropped the belt? I'm glad I didn't start watching again. Was close to purchasing this also. I get that WWE punishes the homer constantly, but always giving them the win, painfully predicable.
That is a massive disappointment. Hopefully Element gets their video calls sorted. Why can I not just have privacy tools that I can use? Why are the good ones taken away?
Sanity is restored.
Love KDE, and good to see them chipping away at these pain points.
The cows are bad it seems, but it's glossing over natural gas companies not maintaining their infrastructure of leaky pipes. They are both larger emission producers, and completely unnecessary and unjustifiable.
Edit: It's hard to feel that the environmental debate has been hijacked. Even when an article lists 2 higher sources of methane production with corporate leakage in gas pipes, the focus is solely on beef. Is this industrial astroturfing, or vegans that have their own skin in the game so to speak and this isn't about the environment. The environment is a complex topic that requires multifaceted solutions to solving different contributory factors, yet it's been condensed down to this weird meat eating witch hunt.
It was actually the BBC that documents this, and those expansions. Foreign policy wise, it's about as imperial as it comes. It's pro-Israel, pro-Ukraine, pro-NATO.
Even if the point you raise is technically correct, knowing interests in that area are uncomfortable about that and pushing through that, could be construed as a little antagonistic. The west had nuclear non-proliferation treaties in this regards post the cold war to remove tensions. This was one of those policies aimed at de-escalation. Even if it's technically legal, choosing actions that will piss off countries you're trying to work through de-escalations with either stupid or antagonistic.
I think the Russian propaganda line is that NATO started this, so Russia are justified. To make it clear, Russia aren't justified to invade a country and commit atrocities, but even then, in any situation, if you cannot look back at your own actions, and think is there something we could have done differently, you're doomed to repeat the same mistakes. There is often this weird view that your side can do no wrong. The reality is, both can, and there can be multiple assholes countries around the table, even if one is a far bigger asshole country.
I understand the concept of a safe space. I'm referring to the pro-China/Russia views. I'm a British democratic socialist. A proud lefty. I dislike large countries and their foreign policy (Russia, China and US). With that, I dislike my government's conduct in the world, and their actions in support Israel, and Saudi etc. I am frequently dismayed and embarrassed. However, some of the pro Stalin stuff is weird, disturbing and has festered for a while. Can you be principled when you condemn some atrocities and rationalise away others?
I will engage in debate of course, and challenge where fit. I don't think that echo chamber was good in some respects.
I'm not going to defend Azov, or their beliefs. Their prominence came when they were defending from invasion, including Mariupol in which civilians were killed, their homes were destroyed, and the city starved and flattened.
While no sane person thinks Azov is a good thing, why is the existence of misguided assholes worse than the flattening of a city and killing civilians?
"This city got razed to the ground" "Good, the people defending those civilians were bad people with bad tatoos"
How can you make that argument and consider yourself the good guy?
It's ok, you're not on reddit now.
Yup. British leftie here. I don't like NATO, or trust it, but it has a purpose to serve, and the last few years have definitely demonstrated it. I don't think any sane minded person could not justify Putin's actions in Ukraine without tying themselves in knots. White NATO has unreasonably expanded against their word in recent years, raising cities to the ground is never justified, attacking civilians and constantly hitting civilian infrastructure is never justified. It's a horrific speed run on collecting all war crimes, it seems.
If you set your language on account, it should bring back stuff set as your language and undefined.