"That was a period vastly longer than the civilization which has brought us a growing security against the beast that prowls by night. And the beast remains part of our heritage, unforgotten; it pads through the dark back-ways of our minds, peers out into our dreams. There is a kinship, a bond, between it and us. It's part of the raw substance of life; if necessary, we'll create new forms for it. As the original monsters of the environment dwindled into relative insignificance, man invented mythological terrors to replace them, new heroes to confront his inventions. It was as if he sensed a lack-and dragons and griffins, werewolves and vampires were born to hunt the outer dark again and restore to it what was missing."
A link to the relevant paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21806658/
[Ameliorative effects of stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) on testosterone-induced prostatic hyperplasia in rats]
It's the 21st century. Schools, media, politicians, commentators remind us about multiple world wars, millions of "sacrifices" for "freedom". We have technology that was unimaginable to our parents and grandparents.
So what is going on in the world? Who is putting the brakes on human progress?
The UN is an empty shell. Prominent countries which historically created the conditions for endless conflict - let's call them out: the US, Russia, UK, France, China (coincidentally, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council) - are sitting back, diplomatically allowing atrocities and injustices to unfold.
Why is this being allowed to happen?
This isn't even a time to point fingers, assign blame. We need to hold ourselves to the highest ideals.
We already have tens, hundreds, thousands, of talented individuals - graduates from the top universities of the world, who know how to make the world a better place. They understand history, morality, and ethics to an excruciating degree. Where are they? Why are they not in top decision-making positions in governments?
Why are our political structures still struggling with basic competencies? A House of Dynamite was a perfect movie to follow on from Oppenheimer. Scientists created a superweapon; politicians ran with it, and blackmailed the world. It's pathetic and deplorable.
Because sovereign states demanded that it would be an empty shell, and this was accepted because otherwise there would be nothing.
For example, the ICC. Nobody can be convicted by the ICC unless their country allows it. And even that is going too far for essentially all countries, even founding member states like South Africa (who explicitly went against UN treaties they signed to protect Al-Bashir and Putin)
They also recently split the automobile UI part off from the Phone bits. That joint work was part of the problem for FOSSing everything, since they have deals with Car manufacturers which depend on their IP.
Only Android needs Google Play. The thrust of this post is that there's a third alternative which is neither iOS nor Android - and that's a killer feature.
Now it's up to capricious EU leadership whether to support a sovereign OS, including mandating that banks and other institutions open up their requirements to use solely US-controlled devices.
And yet Sailfish is a mature mobile OS, sufficient in many cases to be a daily driver, and an essential EU-based alternative to the Apple/Google monopoly. So there's that...
On a more superficial front, the UI is far ahead of both iOS and Android. Complaining about it being closed-source misses the point: the platform is Linux, and other than the proprietary front-end, everything else in Sailfish is wide open to hacking and independent development. So there's that too...
I've been down this road before, and been brutally downvoted, but I'll say it again:
- corporations are responsible for creating products which can be recycled;
- the consumer is responsible for proper disposal of their waste, and also for electing officials who have actual policies on reducing or eliminating pollution;
- local government is responsible for setting up recycling centers, and for enforcing correct behavior in consumers.
The consumer is at the bottom of all this, directly responsible for polluting the environment.
Oft-stated opinions like yours are lazy and ignorant.
It’s not a radical thought to hold corporations accountable after they have limited our choices and controlled markets. So many things most Americans buy are manufactured needs so built into the culture that we think we need it. Proctor and gamble have written books about strategy that synthesize a market.
ok, but I find this simplification to be what is lazy. Obviously the world isn't as clear cut as only those 3 groups as if they're not intertwined.
And what does "directly responsible for polluting the environment" even mean? If I pay someone to take my trash out and throw it in the ocean am I all of a sudden excempt because I'm not the one "directly" polluting?
Pollution comes from a complex system so it has to be solved as such. Blaming individual participants (specially the ones with less money and power) is reducing the responsability of the rest which is the perfect excuse to do nothing
I'm furious because I see a non-stop behavior of consumers dumping their garbage, either in nature, or in municipal waste sites next to bins because they're too goddamned lazy to literally lift up their arms - let alone not sorting garbage for recycling.
And this is in a major city in middle Europe, one of the centers of "civilization".
If it's this bad here, what must it be like in countries with less developed social and economic systems?
This is the core of consumer responsibility, and it's a dismal failure.
That's a whole other argument about which I have even stronger opinions - namely about the dismal failure of government, and the flaws in our democratic systems that allow corporations to infiltrate governments and manipulate policies.
https://youtu.be/G8LmxwOgBhA
If that's real, and not anthropomorphized, it shows that sharks are complex creatures, not mindless predators.
And it also tragically shows how much damage we humans do to the natural world. Sport fishing? Not so much for the fish...