So “it was only a joke” is also back on the menu? Wow, times are rolling back fast!

Even the term itself is a generalising stereotype. But it we are to have a somewhat serious discussion about it, I’d say It’s a human condition, not a gendered condition. For example, given what is (not) known about our respective genders, you felt the need to explain this.

So stereotyping gender is back on the menu? Are hair color jokes still taboo?

You dropped your /S ;)

I know where you are comming from, however. But the thing is, not doing that isn’t helping any either. And one thing that needs to be said, which isn’t reported on nearly as much as it should, the EU green deal, fit for 55, while it still isn’t enough, is legislation which has passed, which has teeth and which will keep EU working to reduce carbon emissions. And will keep us running as fast as we can to be able to make the cut offs and deadlines.

I agree. To many are happy to think its somebody else’s fault and that “our children will pay for me”.

Another hurdle, and nobody likes to admit it, is that a whole lot of the emissions stem from the wants and needs of the people. Not the wealth in itself. So the responsibility falls differently than the wealth distribution.

Make no mistake, We need to be better at taxing wealth, with all it’s unwanted social and economic effects and disregard for the ecological ones, but it might prove trickier than expected.

An LLM once explained to me that it didn’t know, it simulated an answer. I found that descriptive.

That’s optimization for you. Just a 27% increase in size would allow a whole lot of more shapes, but think of the economy!

I did not in any way mean to suggest sensitivity is not a factor, only to suggest that light sensitivity may be more of a spectrum and that there are persons living in a darker world than others. So, it may not be a person on the top of the bell curve that need more light, but someone on the other end of the spectrum entirely.

Since the top comment in this thread was about needing more light in an already bright room i meamt to say that there might be reasons why people around us prefer 1 or 100000 lumen…

Apparently all eyes are not created equal in ability to transfer light to the retina. Some has narrower or wider fields of vision as well. So, where your eyes may be well adapted to low light levels, others may not be. In a world with no artificial shadows and the sun high on the sky for most of the year, being able to filter out sun light might have been a pro, while now needing lots of artificial lights to see straight.

A flayer shooter with Oz, you say? Well, the lore is there.

But why are they all touching themselves?

What if we changed it to “Mexican warns of remorseless criminals north of the boarder”?

So, basically, there is a difference on one side or the other on a line of a map somewhere? There is a Russia and not-Russia. So even Kreml doesn’t think Chrimea is part of Russia…

Which with the self driving* cybertruck has been upgraded to “my truck left me…”

As for music, some of that bland mainstream pop…

Childhood? Still fit most of those!

What would have been the biggest difference had you known back then?

As predicted. The EU policies on solar will drive the same excess in every country. Germany is also going for hydrogen with a large hydrogen network already built and excess electricity would be a great source of power for green hydrogen production (which is vehemently inefficient, but if it’s free…)

Q-6 is still within the bounds of the system, though. True Anarchy chess doesn’t need such systems^^

Totally unlike the other fielded armies globally at the moment.

/S

I know what you mean. The oldest building i pass every day is from dates from 1250, but compared to the parts of Europe rich in architecture that’s not really very old…

No, we need to be able to keep two thoughts in our heads at the same time or we are bound to repeat the mistakes. Terror and oppression is terrible regardless of what the purpetrator and the victim are called.