sweetpotato

joined 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

This has to be the most dystopian thing I've ever read. If the rich and the elites have the power to read our thoughts (outside of a lab) with 80-90% accuracy, I genuinely don't know what the point of living will be. Our eternal enslavement will be completed, they could control our emotions, desires and needs, we would literally become animals.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

My issue with nuclear energy isn't that it's dangerous or that it's inherently bad. The world needs a stable source of energy that compensates for wind and solar fluctuations anyways. For the current realistic alternatives that's either going to be nuclear or coal/oil/natural gas. We have nothing else for this purpose, end of discussion.

My problem is the assumption underlying this discussion about nuclear energy that it somehow will solve all of our problems or that it will somehow allow us to continue doing business as usual. That's categorically not the case. The climate crisis has multiple fronts that need to be dealt with and the emissions is just one of them. Even if we somehow managed to find the funds and resources to replace all non renewable energy with nuclear, we would still have solved just 10% of the problem, and considering that this cheap new energy will allow us to increase our activities and interventions in the planet, the situation will only worsen.

Nuclear energy is of course useful, but it's not the answer. Never has technology been the answer for a social and political issue. We can't "science and invent" our way out of this, it's not about the tech, it's about who decides how it will be used, who will profit from it, who and how much will be affected by it etc. If you want to advocate for a way to deal with the climate crisis you have to propose a complete social and political plan that will obviously include available technologies, so stop focusing on technologies and start focusing on society and who takes the decisions.

One simple example would be the following: no matter how green your energy is, if the trend in the US is to have increasingly bigger cars and no public transport, then the energy demands will always increase and no matter how many nuclear plants you build, they will only serve as an additional source and not as a replacement. So no matter how many plants you build, the climate will only deteriorate.

This is literally how the people in charge have decided it will work. Any new developing energy source that is invented serves only to increase the consumption, not to replace previous technologies. That's the case with solar and wind as well. So all of this discussion you all make about nuclear Vs oil or whatever is literally irrelevant. The problem is social and political, not technological.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

What does it mean to be against a religion? As in you don't follow it? Or that you oppress people following it?

[–] [email protected] 131 points 2 months ago (4 children)

So it's ok to call students that are protesting against a genocide Nazis but not the people actually committing the genocide. Got it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

If only it had a widget like the other news apps

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

It's a pocketbook era, but this feature will work for any pocketbook model that can highlight text, because the notes are exported through the pocketbook cloud in the app/website.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Fuck them. I'd rather donate quadruple the money for premium to my favourite creators directly than give a single penny to this parasitic mega corporation.

The issue is not only the ads, it's the stupid shit it throws you to keep you hooked, it's the stupid shorts that literally no one asked for, it's every stupid little thing that fights for your attention. Basically the app doesn't work for you, it works against you. That's not the case with third party apps, they have you, the user, in mind, not their profits.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Interesting thoughts. Personally I use a pocketbook to read. It's been pretty good with a red light backlight for the dark(that is gentle for the eyes before sleep) a built-in dictionary and the ability to export notes from books. This is everything I need in an ereader. Unfortunately it has a browser, some unnecessary small games and some other features that anyone who buys relatively expensive ereaders(hence is committed to reading books) won't possibly ever need.

But the unnecessary features won't bother you too much. The UI is clean and easy to navigate.

Pocketbook is not open source or anything, but at least I don't fund Amazon's monopoly, it's a smaller company and it's definitely value for money imo.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Good, your attention is a commodity, don't let advertisers steal it. We've been assaulted with enough ads in public spaces already.