artonge

No, as usual, don’t hate the player, hate the game. Facebook benefits from a huge network effect that locks people in if they want to keep in touch with their close ones. There is no alternative as you can't built a concurrent because facebook do not allow any interaction from the outside world. So people come to facebook to keep in touch, and stay because the content is addictive. Note that moste people are not posting, so they are not even contributing to the content. Note also that social networks are using our brain biase to keep us addicted.

Not been on facebook fore some years now, but it is not "just" a medium. It is optimized to keep you on the site as much as possible, to show you as many ads as possible. This comes with the hard price of showing you what is divisive, as it keeps you engaged. So they do are responsible for prioritizing divisive posts and allowing ads that are so well targeted that they can make you tilt.

From the FAQ:

What is the relationship between Overture and OpenStreetMap?

Overture is a data-centric map project, not a community of individual map editors. Therefore, Overture is intended to be complementary to OSM. We combine OSM with other sources to produce new open map data sets. Overture data will be available for use by the OpenStreetMap community under compatible open data licenses. Overture members are encouraged to contribute to OSM directly.

Sadly, emissions taxes impact the poorest first while being almost pain free for the richest.

I've just seen your other comment:

> 1. Fear of meritocracy 2. Fear of countries not negotiating an equalitarian deal 3. Fear of the awful science of “that camp” (and I know exactly what 3 arguments you’ll oppose, so, don’t bother with the direct answer, please assume everything you want to answer is already understood and incorrect, and go straight to a second level of answers).

1. Meritocracy is a way to make you feel better for having more than others. In a finite world, having more than other means stealing from them. Nobody merits more than somebody else. At least not at the scale it is happening now. And don't assume that you work more than others.

2. I don't understand what you mean.

3. What is "that camp" ? What scientific studies are you talking about ?

You seem to think that you work more, or harder than other people, hence you are given more "consumption rights". Please consider that:

- A lot of people are not working to consume more, and it does not prevent them to work hard. They just aren't fulfilling themselves through consumerism. - A lot of people are working harder than you, for less. Should we take parts of your share a give it to them ? Spoiler alert, you will be constrained below 2T of CO2 emission, that's for sure, because you are not working harder than others. - In a finite world, emitting more than your share means stepping on somebody else's share. But why would have that privilege if you are not working more? - In a finite world, stepping on someone else's share that you are not permitted to take leads to a conflict. Conflict means war in a planetary context.

If I may suggest, if what's blocking you from emitting less, is your desire to consume more, you should try to change that, as your consumption capability will reduce in the future, whether you want it or not. This is because our energy sources are becoming less abundant, which means less consumption capability for the same amount of work.

You might have posted on the wrong comment because I don't think anything I wrote could have led you to believe that I am a "a passive fossil fuel lobby repeater." ;).

What the planet can absorb divided by the number of people.

> Why do I have the same goal as an Indian or Nepalese person?

I do not understand, why not ?

1. Replacement battery would help with reparability, which is one step toward the sobriety needed to fight climate change.

2. I feel like the customers do not have much of a choice if no product allows to replace the battery. So there is no way to vote with our wallet.

3. Which cookie disaster? I only see a directive that enforce companies to reveal when they are tracking users.

The movie is only a few years old, so drones were already a solution back then.

They did not use them because of the noise. Being filmed while climbing was already disturbing for Alex, so drones making a lot of noise was a no go.

I am not sure that I agree with you, climate change is a crisis. The time frame to act was short and we missed it. Now we can only limit the damages.

I would argue that wealth distribution is also a good reason to have taxes.