> Calling every storm a once in a century storm or saying how once a century events now happen every year (you'll hear both of these claims often) does nothing but discredit climate change.
Isn't it the other way? If climate change makes storms more intense, then "(previously) once-a-century storm happening more often than once a century" is precisely what you would expect to see.
I agree that there are too many breathless headlines and not enough scientific rigor, but that happens with any topic, not just climate change.
* Also, nothing can really "discredit climate change" in the same sense nothing can discredit covid-19 or the war in Ukraine. It's happening, we all know it's happening, the most we could argue about is how it would impact the world.
Making the 'fundimental difference' the focus seems like laying the foundation to a claim that AI lacks some ability because of the difference. The difference does mean you cannot infer abilities present in one by detecting them in the other. This is the similar to, and as about as profound as, saying that you cannot say that rocks can move fast because of their lack of legs. Which is true, but says nothing about the ability of rocks to move fast by other means.
That's incredibly petty and I like it. Half of America has only contempt for anyone who tries to play nice, get played, and cries that it's not fair. If you want to win, you have to play to win. If you want people to stop listening to Elon Musk, you have to make him a loser.
Please elucidate me on your opinions about women’s rights then:
Reproductive rights?
Paid maternity leave?
Equal pay?
Equal civil rights?
Acknowledging domestic labor as vital to the economy and supporting it?
It seems to me that people who get hot and bothered about “protecting” women’s restrooms don’t actually care about women, they just don’t like queer people.
For your information, I support reproductive rights including the right to abortion and I believe that paid maternity leave that is generous both in amount paid and length of time before and after birth is much-needed policy. Equal pay for the same work and equal civil rights are of course essential, and domestic labour should be valued highly rather than taken for granted like so much contribution of women is.
I also support equal rights for same-sex couples, including the right to get married.
Let's say you believe that trans women are men. And you believe you need to protect cis women. The number of trans women is so vanishingly small, that you've spent a huge amount of energy to prevent the 0.5% case. Legislating always has an opportunity cost, putting forward a bill means not putting forward other bills.
Women suffer domestic violence and sexual violence. 33% of women in the US report experiencing domestic violence. Protect women from that!
Because there are so many ways women suffer in this country, it's very difficult to take on good faith that anyone is protecting them by legislating against trans women. You could choose to solve any problem that affects women orders of magnitude more, but those problems see orders of magnitude fewer bills, if any at all.
No, the data shows this isn't about protecting women, it's about hurting trans people.
By this same logic, do you believe that no laws should be or should have been introduced that enable these males to access women's spaces and services? As there are only a vanishingly small number of such males, so spending a huge amount of legislative energy to give them what they want is a waste of time which could have been used for more worthy laws, like ones to prevent domestic violence.
They're deliberately trying to bolster smaller industry starters... the market in in danger of being a monopoly split between 1 or 2 US brands and the flood Chinese brands...
Tesla is in no danger from this piece of legislation.
Nah, you just have to double-down on what Musk himself has started: Complete the poisoning of the Tesla brand.
Musk committed CEO malpractice. Utter malpractice. One of the cornerstone pillars of Tesla is environmentalist progressivism. There is no way any democrat or environmentalist or liberal can look at this election and stomach buying a Tesla in the future.
At LEAST 50% of Tesla's existing customer base is identified democrats. Every time Trump speaks in the next four years, identified democrats will viscerally feel that, and remember Musk, and blame Tesla.
A car company's MOST IMPORTANT customers are recurring customers. Brand loyalty is paramount to a car brand. Tesla does not have enough right wing converts, especially since they are generally in rural areas underserved or not served by charging infrastructure, to make up for the customer loss.
IMO Musk's stewardship of Tesla has shown huge amounts of failed opportunities:
Primarily, is that after 17 years, Tesla basically sells two cars: a crossover and a sedan, with two sizes. Medium sized and slightly bigger. No delivery trucks, minivans, real pickups, city cars, kei cars, station wagons, sports cars, convertibles, large SUVs, large pickups/commercial vehicle platforms. No heavy machinery, heavy equipment.
To that end, Tesla likely had ample opportunity to push its battery tech, drivetrains, and expertise into far more markets and segments by simply acquiring or partnering with a struggling ICE company (pick any one of a half-dozen that Geely or China have acquired in the last decade).
Tesla could have pushed for advanced/capable PHEVs of high quality (think the Chevy Volt but better) with that cross-partnership and achieved electrification and profits and education of mass market buyers into EV advantages much more quickly and at scale
Tesla could have used the acquired company for downmarket branding and cheaper EVs. It could allow the use of conventional OEM design to more rapidly bring vehicle types to market.
Tesla has not scaled production sufficiently in the last couple years in my opinion. A lot of that is lack of diversification of models, an inability/resistance to use OEM suppliers, and no longer being interested in "gigafactory"
construction with the same aggression.
Home solar and home storage is basically a joke and forgotten in Tesla, again, a waste of their once-great brand.
Repairability, quality, customer service, parts availability is pathetically bad, again because of resistance to OEM usage.
Finally, Tesla is likely the least favorite company of the three major ones he heads. He is AWOL from leadership essentially, and it shows.
All that and you didn't mention how the political bent started. Musk voted for Biden in Nov 2020 after all.
Biden had an official govt EV summit in 2021 in his first year where Tesla wasn't invited, and he praised GM's CEO as the pioneer and leader of EVs when it produced 25 EVs that quarter and Tesla produced ~200K. A ridiculous thing to do stand there and just lie.
Why? Because the auto union that heavily donates to Dem campaigns didn't want Tesla there. It shows Dems don't care about the environment as much as you think if they just decide to throw a company that was doing a lot for the environment under the bus for purely political reasons, including almost excluding Tesla from the federal EV credits to help the unions. Musk got the message.
Honestly I think it looks great - the design screams "I care for pedestrian safety" and "I'm a nice person, and I don't need to compensate for anything, because I have great sex life."
As a Korean, I second this assessment. The "Cia-cia" project is widely viewed as a misguided attempt to sell an unusual writing system to a tribe living in a sea of other tribes, all using Latin alphabets. Just imagine how much technical issues these poor people would face, should they actually adopt Hangul, when the entire remainder of Indonesia uses Latin alphabets.
Which is really ironic because when you are fighting a foreign aggressor (which was basically what American patriots were doing), what you really don't want is everyone running around on their own with their own guns. You need trained soldiers who can take commands and hold a line. Once you have them, for all your purpose, you can just keep all your guns in a locked armory, and it takes half a day to summon your soldiers and distribute weapons should the need arise.
And if you don't have the training, the best automatic rifles on the world won't help you. If your fighters can't even run to the nearest police station without hopping on a car, forget about it. You think you'll take the interstate to the battlefield when tyranny descends and black helicopters are flying around?
I understand and agree with your intention. I also don’t want to be around an untrained mob with guns. History is a bit more complicated though. During the American revolution, we were an untrained mob and would stand and fight as often as we would run away. Despite losing almost every battle, somehow the founding fathers prevailed. There are various explanations of course. But at the heart of it all was the willingness to fight.
Sadly, I'm skeptical about that. Covid killed a million Americans and half of America thinks the real enemy was the government telling people to stay home and wear masks. Drive down I-5 of CA's central valley, and you'll see signs saying "Congress created dust bowl."
In coming decades, I fully expect to see people blaming renewable energy and carbon tax for whatever new climate disaster we end up with. Hopefully we could ignore them, in the same way adults stop entertaining toddlers when shit happens.
I know people with three or four kids in the middle of Silicon Valley and I've never seen anyone talking ill of them because of that. Call me crazy, but I have a feeling that if you're a social pariah in Portland, OR then it's not because you have three kids.
When I lived in the Bay Area I was told multiple times I'm racist for having children. Can't help you with the logic because I didn't engage with them and avoided them going forward, but it happens.
I never said I'm spoken ill of, just that the cultural pressure to not have more kids is omnipresent. I'd label it a 'microagression' of sorts.
For example, after my third, I've been asked multiple times if I'm getting a vasectomy.
No one speaks ill of it, but I'm definitely one of the only ones with this many kids in the area. I can count on my hand the number of 3+ kid families in the neighborhood. Whereas for my parents generation... 3 is a typical family.
As for the pariah bit... having kids means that we're probably not going to be doing a bunch of the adult-only activities that people invite us to. With a baby always at home, it's unlikely we would do that kind of thing until our kids are grown and my wife well past menopause.
Parents today expect to not only have children but also to have an adult social life of a sort that my parents and grandparents never expected. Rather, adults socialized with their families mostly. That was considered typical.
It's jointly owned by Naver and Softbank. A few months ago, there was a public outcry in Korea when the Japanese government threatened to twist Naver's arm to give up its share of Line, and South Korea's inexplicably pro-Japanese government stayed mum. With both governments enjoying abysmal public support, I have no idea how it will eventually be settled.
Why wouldn't Koreans care? We're talking about 50% ownership of a messaging platform that's de facto standard in multiple Asian countries. Imagine the UK government trying to force Google to sell DeepMind.
Isn't it the other way? If climate change makes storms more intense, then "(previously) once-a-century storm happening more often than once a century" is precisely what you would expect to see.
I agree that there are too many breathless headlines and not enough scientific rigor, but that happens with any topic, not just climate change.
* Also, nothing can really "discredit climate change" in the same sense nothing can discredit covid-19 or the war in Ukraine. It's happening, we all know it's happening, the most we could argue about is how it would impact the world.
reply