15
Swappable Batteries (pixel.infosec.exchange)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

he racks such wealth because he is a shareholder who leeches off of the effort of 1000s of people like you that do actual honest work.

225
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
437
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
66
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Another attempt by imperialists to shift attention from their wealth hoarding by scapegoating immigrants who are the real value creators: they pay taxes to sustain public services, but also benefit the rich with good value labor. Rest of the population would complain: oh, no! immigrants now are lowering the bar for life quality, while in fact they aren't the real enemy. Hopefully people would see right through it.

The Canadian economy experienced a contraction “unprecedented outside a recession,” according to a new analysis from National Bank Financial, a trend driven, at least in part, by a population spike that has squeezed per capita GDP growth.

The bank’s monthly economic analysis says that “signs of an economic slowdown have been multiplying.”

“Consumption stagnated for the second quarter in a row, a stinging setback in the current demographic context characterized by record population increases,” the report says.

The recalculated GDP per capita — which the bank’s economists had estimated had contracted by 2.4 per cent — now sits, they say, at a 4.4 per cent contraction during the third quarter.

The report also finds that while Canada’s inflation rate is at 3.1 per cent, costs for shelter are growing at six per cent annually.

The first nine months of 2023 saw the single fastest population growth since Confederation. Around one million people joined the Canadian population in that time, exceeding growth in 2022, already a record year for population growth. Since July 1, 430,635 people have come to call Canada home.

Less consumerim and lower GDP is the way: living a happy life with the advent of technology should theoratically allow us to work 1 day per week and dedicate the rest of the week to be spend with family and pursuing personal interests, all while having reliable public services like health and transport, while maintaining an ecological lifestyle so the offspring could inherit a healthy habitat. People need to unite to make this a reality, because we are weak when we are divided. We don't need flying cars nor Mars to be populated, a sustainable future is easily achievable for the bottom 80%.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

italians (and the japanese) can see through the bs all along

[-] [email protected] 35 points 6 months ago
303
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I am aware that the use of such source is frowned upon. Nonetheless, the elonjettracker dude got busted from X© and now has his own sub. Interesting content to say the least, and it does help put things into perspective. Also i hope Lemmy implements flairs as a feature, this post could thus use a discussion flair, to signal that such content is up for debate.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

true, but some countries like Qatar are wholly relying on oil to exist. Who will it be taxing ? itself ? maybe rest of the world could help tax it by avoiding its products and services (qatari airlines, telecom companies, etc their wealth is disguised under so many forms)

108
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

A full breakdown of the top 10 celebrity CO2e offenders:

  1. Taylor Swift: 8,293.54 tonnes (per year), or 1,184.8 times more than the average person's total annual emissions.

  2. Floyd Mayweather: 7,076.8 tCO2e (tonnes of CO2 emitted, per year)

  3. Jay-Z: 6,981.3 tCO2e

  4. A-Rod ( J-Lo's ex-fiance and baseball player) : 5,342.7 tCO2e

  5. Blake Shelton: 4495 tCO2e

  6. Steven Spielberg: 4,465 tCO2e

  7. Kim Kardashian: 4268.5 tCO2e

  8. Mark Wahlberg: 3772.85 tCO2e

  9. Oprah Winfrey: 3,493.17 tCO2e

  10. Travis Scott (Kylie Jenner’s Beau) : 3033.3 tCO2e

425
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
34
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
232
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
30
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Unusually, for the actual rocket launch, the CO2 isn’t really the biggest deal here. It’s possible to use rocket fuel without any carbon in it at all – NASA has been using liquid hydrogen for decades, and Jeff Bezos’ rocket used it too. But commercial hydrogen is made in a very carbon-intensive way, although it’s possible to make with zero emissions.

So it’s hard to untangle rocket launch emissions. We need more research before we can be really definitive, although we know it’s not great. As a ballpark, one researcher has suggested that per person, a space tourism flight is 50-100 times worse for the atmosphere than a long-distance plane flight.

In SpaceX’s case, the Scope 1 emissions are the emissions from the rocket fuel, transporting rockets and SpaceX employees about, and any fuel burned during testing and building.

But SpaceX doesn’t publish its emissions widely. Tesla, Inc., one of Elon Musk’s other ventures, is also surprisingly opaque about the emissions required to build its electric cars – something other electric car manufacturers have been much more open about. And Musk himself doesn’t seem particularly interested in addressing this. In fact, he recently tweeted that corporate environmental and social governance – a common method of reporting and addressing environmental impacts – was “the devil incarnate”.

Daddy Elona on the other side launching rockets like hot potates, while some people trying to lower their thermostat and eat ecofriendly food. is it vain ? idk ..

115
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
11
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

in reddit someone argued that Lemmy isn't user friendly because you have to make several accounts in several 'instance' thingy's and thus not practical at all. tbh if it takes unpracticality to fend off those single braincell people then all the better: might as well require 2fa and an iris scan just to post a comment or sign in smh

[-] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

did the same transition when switched to Lemmy. Very wise decision to take.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Myth number one is that degrowth is the same as recession, but the speaker argues that while both are symptoms of a growth-based economy, recession is actually a harmful decline in economic output.

Myth number two is that degrowth means a reduction in all economic sectors, but the speaker explains that while certain sectors need to be curtailed, others need to be expanded to meet fundamental human needs.

Myth number three is that degrowthers want everyone to be poorer, but the speaker argues that degrowth aims for rethinking wealth towards collective wellbeing and commonwealth, rather than personal income and inter-personal competition.

Myth number four is that degrowthers hate modernity/progress/development and want to "go back," but the speaker explains that degrowth thinkers question this and seek viable and equitable ways of moving forward to more sustainable futures.

Finally, myth number five is that the degrowth movement is just a small group of out-of-touch Western academics, but the speaker argues that degrowth draws on a pluriverse of perspectives and includes voices from different geographical areas and social classes.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

"We take out the combustion engine and we have a frame which uses the old points of the engine," Timo Walden, project manager at e-Revolt and one of the company’s first investors, explained. "And so we can easily swap only the engine with the new frame and the components. And that's why we are much faster than an individual solution. So, the frame here is a big part of our fastness". The company says it usually takes on average around a day to complete the process, which includes stripping the old engine block out of the car and replacing it with its patented battery technology and engine frame, as well as the full digitalisation of the vehicle. Costing between €12,000 and €15,000 to complete the job, the price point may give some reassurance to many consumers who currently can’t stretch their budgets to buy a new EV.

Article too vague in that regard, but it seems such cars are allowed to transit on german roads, so assumingly they are safe to drive.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago

sardine blockchain

[-] [email protected] 39 points 7 months ago

the whole middle east really

[-] [email protected] 31 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

tbh its true: apart from my french instance where i like to hang out, most of Lemmy is just memes, Linux related posts, or self hosting posts. No meaningful content for ur average person really. In fact i scroll throu 'All' in new and reach yesterday's posts in just few minutes, given the amount of 'not so meaningful content' i am filtering ..

view more: next ›

iraq_lobster

joined 1 year ago