Slashdot Mirror

https://ourworldindata.org/how...

If we aggressively pursue all of the low-cost abatement opportunities currently available, the total global economic cost would be â200-350 billion per year by 2030. This is less than one percent of the forecasted global GDP in 2030.

That is according to goals of Paris agreement.

From the other hand, damage from global climate change is predicted to be
https://www.independent.co.uk/...

As a result, the worldâ(TM)s gross domestic product would fall by $21 trillion by 2050, compared to $33 trillion under a âbusiness-as-usualâ(TM) approach that allows global warming of 2.5 degrees. This saving of $12 trillion (about £9.6 trillion) represents about 10 per cent of global GDP.

We need super polite and super "interested" in learning more.

You want Lenny.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

https://youtu.be/4lL870ixdsY

Apple.

Think I'm exaggerating? Australia just recently gave up on its effort to meet its Paris climate agreement carbon reduction targets.

Lots of folks gonna' be packing up and moving to escape rising seas and suffocating heat (e.g., S. Arizona).

Really, they "...weren't paying their taxes" and were about to be "disappeared" so they got the fuck out. https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Correct but to be fair we also have the (mostly) granola munching anti-vax crowd who wrongly think that their kid will immediately become autistic if they vaccinate them.

We elected an anti-vaxxer as president.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

There's a long list. Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin who completed her studies at Cambridge University but they did "not awarded a degree because of her sex; Cambridge did not grant degrees to women until 1948."
Left England for the USA and Harvard to write her PhD. "Stellar Atmospheres, A Contribution to the Observational Study of High Temperature in the Reversing Layers of Stars". Astronomers Otto Struve and Velta Zeberg called it "undoubtedly the most brilliant Ph.D. thesis ever written in astronomy".
And yet now the 21st century we still have tossers at CERN who claim Psychics is the domain of men only.

Next will be a Bill banning people from being mean on line.

I expect it will be just as easily enforced as this Bill.

Don't give up hope; England shows us the way in this!

Pfft. You clearly haven't read the latest issue of SJW Weekly. You're using math and that's been shown to perpetuate white privilege. Therefore, your analysis and solution are bigoted and invalid. You need to educate yourself on the current issues of intersectionality; until you do, you're in the Bigot Corner. Shame.

The London Pride march this year saw scenes where an activist lesbian group hijacked the front of the parade, laying down in front of it, protesting "trans activism" which they claimed "erased lesbianism". They then led the march after refusing to move from the head of the parade, so spectators were bemused to see anti-trans posters and slogans leading the LGBTQ+ event...

You literally cannot make this shit up.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Actually, that is literally the opposite of what the LGBTBBQ community believes. They believe that your gender identity and sexual orientation should not dictate every bit of life, which is why they think they should have the same rights as anyone else.

They say believe it, they don't do good job of living it. This is something that is pretty well-documented--go poke around some.

Here, since your search engine skills are not good enough to type in a phrase like 'biphobia in the lgbt community'--here are some of the top results (out of ~176,00) that I got when I did it, you can get more easily: HuffPo LGBT Sentinel Pride Bi Resource Center.. Switching to transphobia from biphobia, I get: The Independent (about the transphobic protest at the 2018 London Pride parade that got to lead the parade for a bit, I honestly wish I was making this up) Syracuse Peace Counsel The American Prospect; I will admit that the filtering on Google means I don't get quite as narrow a focus so some of the ~742,000 results it spit out are not necessarily relevant. Non-binary discrimination within the LGBT* community is primarily discussed in academic sources, though on occasion you will see things like this article from HuffPo.

You can also find out some really...ah...interesting stories by just listening to homosexual trans people talk about some of how they get treated. Some gays and lesbians only really out themselves as transphobic when they are dealing with non-straight trans people--which at one point caused me to drop a few friends because I'm not okay with this.

Countries on that side of the pond also do not have free speech. Someone might find it offensive and the police would get involved, people would be arrested or fined because "context and intent are irrelevant".

Is that people who play video games got the name "esports" to stick.

Well, when bridge, chess, and Go are sports ... what did you expect?

The answer is that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has recognised the World Bridge Federation as a sport organisation, and as such, bridge is subject to the same regulatory environment as any other Olympic sport.

Recognized by the IOC ... and apparently they have to do drug testing:

It is the semi-final of the World Bridge Championships and, after a gruelling nine hours of intense concentration for the 12th day in a row, I am greeted by the news that I may not wind down over some food and drink with my team, but must instead report to the World Anti- Doping Agency offices for a random drugs test.

So, in the sense that bridge is now recognised as a "mind sport", how is competitive video gaming any different?

Not to mention, ban one thing and they will use another: https://www.independent.co.uk/...

No where near the US levels of gun crime but already people in England are calling to ban large knives to solve the problem...

Now it seems either, all the regulation is counterproductive to the end goal or it doesn't do anything but cost money and thus energy

False. We had a severe problem in LA with air quality in the seventies, children with bleeding lesions on their lungs and the like. We instituted the CARB and cleaned that problem right up. However, the USA has been exporting its production to China, and the pollution doesn't stay in China. And sadly, it comes to Los Angeles. What's needed is not less regulation, it is more. As a nation (and not just California) we should place tariffs on goods which come from polluters, to account for the cost of the pollution. That would mean massive tariffs on Chinese goods. We don't do this because some already-rich pricks want to get richer by selling us the toxic fruit of Chinese pollution.

The regulations did what they were supposed to in California. But China doesn't have such regulations, and even where they do, the state-operated businesses don't have to follow them.

Search data is a munition in China. Google is just providing the guns and bullets. They aren't pulling the trigger, so that means it is fine. Right?

Does Google know that religion has been outlawed in China and that Uighur families are being split apart there? Their parents, about 1 million, have been sent to internment camps.
https://www.independent.co.uk/...

The orphanages are the most recent manifestation of Beijingâ(TM)s efforts to systematically distance young Muslims in Xinjiang from their families and culture. Uighurs fear such efforts are erasing their ethnic identity, one child at a time.

Nobody reads individual sentences from other books and then takes them (often out of context) as individual snacks of wisdom and truth.

Uh, yes they do. All they time. What is the modern news cycle but a collection of individual sentences (often out of context) from longer speeches or documents, then repackaged as eye catching headlines?

If you want to get more literary, I invite you to read the words of Shakespeare and find out just how many of his individual sentences have passed into common wisdom and truth .

Nope, you are wrong. Wind and solar plants in the UK not only produce more energy than nuclear plants, they are cheaper too.

Except for the minor matter of not having any police

And yet, areas as far away as Oakland are affected.

For smart people, these corporations in Silicon Valley (proper) are incredibly short-sighted—either that, or they don't give a shit about the community they are located in.

And the only thing the Independent deemed newsworthy was Elon Musk taking a single hit from a joint proffered by Rogan.

Elon Musk smokes cannabis during interview with Joe Rogan, before imagining what it's like to be a horse

The British grew up with bombings. Except they were being done by people with light coloured skin and Celtic bloodlines.

The British have been knifing each other for centuries. Even the current issues are related to poverty and have very little to do with skin colour.

The British have fewer traffic accidents than almost any other nation on the planet. They also deal with them extremely calmly - e.g. https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Areas of the UK may be turning into total shitholes, but I can at least hope they'll never drop so far that you'll feel at home in them, using such childish slurs as 'mudscums'.

I don't see a lot of calls for violence on the #antifa hashtag. Funny enough, most of the posts seem to be opposed to anti-fa (with a few leaning towards violence...

Here's a thought: Antifa is just a boogieman created by Fox News and other right wing media outlets to mask and excuse right wing violence with "Whataboutism".

So you have seen calls for violence on the antifa hashtag.

Antifa is a domestic terrorist organization. Is the Independent a right wing media outlet? What about Politico?

Defending active terrorism and a terrorist group causing thousands of crimes, many of them violent, and over 100 million in property damage within the US alone is a deplorable thing to do.

If Trump cannot block people on Twitter because that violates the first amendment, then I don't think that Twitter can block Trump either for the same reason. Double standards are bad for a democracy.

First amendment applies to government, not to a private company on his own infrastructure. Please don't talk about democracy before learning the ropes of it first.

If Trump cannot block people on Twitter because that violates the first amendment, then I don't think that Twitter can block Trump either for the same reason. Double standards are bad for a democracy.

in no way does that work backwards. Trump can't block people because of who he is as a government official. If he starts gramming he can't block people either. if he has email he can't block people. It's not a function of the social media. It's a function of the presidency. The same way we as a people are allowed to block politicians, social media can ban them.

If Trump cannot block people on Twitter because that violates the first amendment, then I don't think that Twitter can block Trump either for the same reason. Double standards are bad for a democracy.

If even 1/10th of all the bullshit spewed by US conservative media was true, the whole European continent would be utterly bankrupt, over run by barbarians and on fire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Overrun by barbarians is in progress, how long you think it will be before bankrupt and on fire ? (don't answer that's rhetorical)

This "contaminated water" is tritiated water, water with tritium (hydrogen-3) in it. It's safe in small quantities as it occurs naturally. No one is quite sure what levels of tritiated water is safe, and there is no doubt it is safe because, again, this stuff comes out of every faucet in the world. This water has been filtered of everything but the water, but it's still "contaminated" because it's the water itself that's radioactive and it's exceedingly difficult to remove the radioactive water from the not radioactive water. This highly dilute heavy water is probably not something you'd want to make your coffee with but it is certainly safe to dump in the ocean, which is precisely how they wish to dispose of it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Holding this water in tanks is just stupid. Probably dumping it all at once might be stupid but they could at least dump it out as quickly as the rainwater is collecting in the open top tanks so the problem isn't getting bigger.

This was a problem they figured out decades ago. Just dump the water. There's various legal limits around the world on how much can enter the environment because of limited information on it's toxicity but we do have at least some idea on how much is safe, because (yet again) this stuff occurs naturally.

People are NOT getting silenced.

Correct. What they are shutting down are the bots and fake accounts.

People can still spout their paranoid conspiracy theories and can still troll for lulz, they just have to do so from one account linked to their own name, not 1000 accounts linked to 1000 fake names,

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/mollie-tibbetts-death-russia-bots-alliance-securing-democracy-trump-cohen-manafort-a8505241.html
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/spot-russian-bot-social-media/
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/spot-russian-bot-social-media/

He lies about shit that doesn't matter. "Biggest inaugural crowd in history," that kind of thing.

According to Nielsen, Trump's inauguration ratings were the second highest in 36 years, and if you count online viewer, probably were the highest.

https://ew.com/tv/2017/01/21/trump-inauguration-ratings/

You have fallen for fake news, my friend.

No, it's not the same.

See, here's the thing. I should be able to walk into a polling place and vote. And, after the election, the ballots will be audited to determine whether my vote is legitimate.

I'd rather throw out a million votes from illegal immigrants after the election than prevent someone's 90 year-old grandmother from voting because she, wisely, does not have a driver's license.

For example, here's someone who voted twice. Guess what? They caught her. Here's an article with a bunch of other examples. They caught these people.

Yeah, I don't doubt that you could compile a huge list of lies for just about any politician, from Obama ("You can keep your doctor") all the way back to that time when George Washington promised his troops that there would be cake on the other side of the Delaware.

But the thing about Trump is, he lies by default. He lies reflexively. He lies about shit that doesn't matter. "Biggest inaugural crowd in history," that kind of thing. Trump would literally piss on your shoes and tell you it's raining.

That part is new and disturbing. It suggests that he's not only a typical lying politician, but some sort of psychopath.

Probably not. For example: https://www.independent.co.uk/...

Really you dumb fuk? You haven't heard about this before? You haven't heard of Tommy Robinson who was put into prison? If you really haven't heard about this ish before you need to take your head out of your a$$.

Government agencies from San Francisco to Stockholm to Berlin to London have had issues and have covered it up. Not all the rape and crime issues are the same. It's the silencing of reporting that counts.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal....
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-en...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
http://wjla.com/news/inside-yo...

I haven't vetted these articles. It just shows that if you were at all paying attention you would have seen this.

What's as disturbing as the physical violence is the coordinated news blackout. This is horrible. Not discussing a problem doesn't make it go away.

Honestly though, nobody goes to jail from Corporate America, they just give out fines.

Wanna bet? Remember musk on your first day in prison, beat somebody up or become somebodies bitch.

7 years of data to look forward to. ... The data from this probe will help tell the tale, if there are any of us left to crunch it.

Trump will be the 'last president'. Michael Moore, is that you?

by deviated_prevert. Yep, it is.

"Cramming children into one of those inflatables would not be a good idea; panic is the absolutely largest risk in this kind of rescue. And even the dive instructor testing it found it hard to remain calm inside of it"

Musk wasn't the only one working on a plan using some kind of inflatable although the person testing it said they were at best a Plan C or Plan D

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

And the story describing the actual rescue not only mentions plastic cocoons and flexible plastic stretchers with the boys wrapped in a space blanket and that the kids were given anti-anxiety medication and submerged up to 40 minutes at a time.
So "Cramming children into one of those inflatables" is basically what they did; they were wrapped like mummies for a good part of the trip.

You are completely missing what I am trying to say. Let us pretend we are attending a conference on qualfonic energy, which is completely made up. Let us suppose that someone has just given an address with a serious criticism of this form of energy. Would you be more likely to trust this criticism if it came from someone who has had nothing good to say about it or from someone who was a major proponent of it? Hopefully you can understand why people might take the comments from the latter person more seriously given no other information.

Neither. They both have motivations to lie. I'd want to fact check the claims of either person because the first one might be inventing a criticism and the second one may be omitting other major problems. You're a fool if you think either of them is more trustworthy than the other. Furthermore, a proponent admitting a minor flaw, is a classic hustle technique to get you to buy into the product that they're pitching.

If this were not the case you would understand why a source pointing out all of the things that Trump has lied about or misrepresented is not sufficient proof of your claim. You need to compare it to other politicians and I am not convinced that Trump is significantly worse. He certainly is not a truthful politician, but few are and we tend to forget the myriad lies and cover-ups of controversies that surround past politicians. I suspect that if we were discussing some subject where you were not in agreement with the conclusion, you would be quick to employ the same arguments I have used here, but you dislike Trump so much that your emotions blind you to reason.

Trump's lies corrode democracy.
There's a long history of presidential untruths. Here's why Donald Trump is 'in a class by himself.
How Does Trump Stack Up Against the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
Trump’s Lies vs. Obama’s
Donald Trump running the most dishonest White House ever, says historian
Comparing Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump on the Truth-O-Meter
Are Clinton and Trump the Biggest Liars Ever to Run for President?

That is not to say you are a bad person, because everyone is that way about something that they take personally. My point is that in this particular area, you are not a good source absent significant and quality evidence.

How much evidence do you need? If you're really interested, there's a lot more stuff on Trump's lack of honesty and his place in the world of American politics in respect to that, but I think it's telling that presidential historians (who ought to know quite a bit about past presidents) have (spoilers) ranked him last place out of all of America's presidents. That's pretty unusual, most politicians get ranked in the middle somewhere during their terms, neither best nor worst.

The upside is it will be so obvious that Republicans cannot deny it's happening.

However, they'll probably blame it on Democrats somehow, maybe claiming that catering to LGBTQ made God angry, who then baked Earth as punishment. You think I'm joking, don't you?

That's why I come here - best Krembots on the web. I love these guys. Either here or The Independent.

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

The next thing on the North Korean agenda: electricity for their subjects.

It would certainly be an amazing experiment to split a country in two, make one half capitalist and the other half socialist, and come back 75 years later to see what the different results were...

Let's ban sharp plastic objects, because bad people can use them to do bad things!

That's not a bad idea...

/sarc

So if I authentically believe grieving parents of murdered children are crisis actors paid off by George Soros, we're still cool Facebook?

Citation:

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

At least, when I lived in Portsmouth (UK), we were on Nynex cable. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NYNEX)

Dunno how widespread in the UK they were, but they were there. (Proof: http://www.m2.com/m2/web/story..., https://www.independent.co.uk/...).

A lot of Vern Unsworth's criticisms of Elon Musk are contradicted by many of Elon Musk's tweets (most of which pre-date the criticisms).

During a video interview, Vern Unsworth was asked for his opinion on Musk's submarine, and he responded, "He can stick his submarine where it hurts. It just had absolutely no chance of working. He had no conception of what the cave passage was like. The submarine, I believe, was about 5 foot 5 inches long, rigid, so it wouldn't have gone round corners, or around any obstacles. It wouldn't have made the first 50 metres into the cave from the dive start point. Just a PR stunt."
The interviewer then asked, "But he went into the cave, Tuesday?"
Vern Unsworth responded, "And was asked to leave very quickly. And so he should have been."

From what I read on Elon Musk's twitter feed: (1) Musk had exchanged emails with at least one of the cave divers (Musk posted a copy of the emails on his twitter feed) showing that the diver(s) wanted Musk to develop the submarine as a back-up rescue option; (2) Musk got confirmation from the diver(s) that the planned submarine was small/slim enough to be navigated around tight bends in the tunnels; (3) Musk not only made the initial submarine, but also made (or at least planned to make) a second submarine that was 30cm shorter (thus making it more nimble), plus an inflatable dummy which could be used on a dry run to test that the real submarines could successfully make the journey without risk of causing a blockage (if the inflatable dummy gets jammed in a tight corner, then just puncture it to remove it); (4) a team of SpaceX engineers worked for about 48 hours almost non-stop to develop the submarine; (5) Musk used a swimming pool near the SpaceX factory to carry out a test of the submarine's manoeuvrability before flying it to Thailand; (6) contrary to what Vern Unsworth claimed about Musk being asked to leave the cave, Musk tweeted, "Only people in sight were the Thai navy/army guys, who were great. Their navy seals escorted us in - total opposite of wanting us to leave".

I also read somewhere (either on Elon Musk's twitter feed or in a newspaper article) that another company had also been asked to see if it would be possible to make a small enough submarine, but the other company was unable to do so.

One newspaper article stated that Vern Unsworth is a caver with detailed knowledge of the cave system but is not a diver. This might go some way towards explaining the disconnect between Musk's and Unsworth's viewpoints: Musk had been in contact with divers who believed the submarine could work, and that its dimensions made it nimble enough for the tight corners and passages, and encouraged Musk (and a second company) to develop it as a backup rescue option; but perhaps those divers had not discussed this submarine backup plan with Unsworth, so Unsworth had assumed incorrectly that Musk didn't know enough to be able to help with the rescue". If this is true, then it could be argued that Vern Unsworth's comments were gratuitously insulting, untrue, and even defamatory. After all, despite Musk agreeing specifications with the divers, apparently he managed to develop something that was not fit for purpose. To me, that sounds like Unsworth was claiming Musk is an incompetent engineer. It is unsurprising that Elon Musk lost his temper and chose to respond with (presumably) untrue and defamatory insults. Unfortunate, but unsurprising.

What a lot of words you've had to write because of your hero's Toxic Muskulinity.

A lot of Vern Unsworth's criticisms of Elon Musk are contradicted by many of Elon Musk's tweets (most of which pre-date the criticisms).

During a video interview, Vern Unsworth was asked for his opinion on Musk's submarine, and he responded, "He can stick his submarine where it hurts. It just had absolutely no chance of working. He had no conception of what the cave passage was like. The submarine, I believe, was about 5 foot 5 inches long, rigid, so it wouldn't have gone round corners, or around any obstacles. It wouldn't have made the first 50 metres into the cave from the dive start point. Just a PR stunt." The interviewer then asked, "But he went into the cave, Tuesday?" Vern Unsworth responded, "And was asked to leave very quickly. And so he should have been."

From what I read on Elon Musk's twitter feed: (1) Musk had exchanged emails with at least one of the cave divers (Musk posted a copy of the emails on his twitter feed) showing that the diver(s) wanted Musk to develop the submarine as a back-up rescue option; (2) Musk got confirmation from the diver(s) that the planned submarine was small/slim enough to be navigated around tight bends in the tunnels; (3) Musk not only made the initial submarine, but also made (or at least planned to make) a second submarine that was 30cm shorter (thus making it more nimble), plus an inflatable dummy which could be used on a dry run to test that the real submarines could successfully make the journey without risk of causing a blockage (if the inflatable dummy gets jammed in a tight corner, then just puncture it to remove it); (4) a team of SpaceX engineers worked for about 48 hours almost non-stop to develop the submarine; (5) Musk used a swimming pool near the SpaceX factory to carry out a test of the submarine's manoeuvrability before flying it to Thailand; (6) contrary to what Vern Unsworth claimed about Musk being asked to leave the cave, Musk tweeted, "Only people in sight were the Thai navy/army guys, who were great. Their navy seals escorted us in - total opposite of wanting us to leave".

I also read somewhere (either on Elon Musk's twitter feed or in a newspaper article) that another company had also been asked to see if it would be possible to make a small enough submarine, but the other company was unable to do so.

One newspaper article stated that Vern Unsworth is a caver with detailed knowledge of the cave system but is not a diver. This might go some way towards explaining the disconnect between Musk's and Unsworth's viewpoints: Musk had been in contact with divers who believed the submarine could work, and that its dimensions made it nimble enough for the tight corners and passages, and encouraged Musk (and a second company) to develop it as a backup rescue option; but perhaps those divers had not discussed this submarine backup plan with Unsworth, so Unsworth had assumed incorrectly that Musk didn't know enough to be able to help with the rescue". If this is true, then it could be argued that Vern Unsworth's comments were gratuitously insulting, untrue, and even defamatory. After all, despite Musk agreeing specifications with the divers, apparently he managed to develop something that was not fit for purpose. To me, that sounds like Unsworth was claiming Musk is an incompetent engineer. It is unsurprising that Elon Musk lost his temper and chose to respond with (presumably) untrue and defamatory insults. Unfortunate, but unsurprising.

With personal assets estimated to be around 200 billion US Dollars.

http://fortune.com/2017/07/29/...

https://www.independent.co.uk/...

https://www.dw.com/en/china-le...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...