Meh. According to the front page, @Communism is trending. Yet there are no posts and 2 subscribers.
I suppose that is one type of trend.

They aren't really far off it's just that the models don't show every feature of the climate because they are models, not reality. But regarding the broad strokes the models are accurate and relevant.
Also CNN peddles fear and useless information. They thrive on sensationalism, not by informing people.

In theory, yes. But I think for UBI to be successful we need to deal with the housing issue first. Otherwise landlords being able to gouge due to the housing shortage will do to UBI what student loans did to higher education.
I would defer to someone with far more knowledge about social work and conditions as to whether a single UBI-like payment can take over for the various agencies that currently pay for food stamps, welfare, etc. I suspect there is a lot more to them than just the cost and the payment.

No, it isn't.
Maybe some similarities, but no.

No one likes a 6% loss. Not in revenue and not regarding ad effectiveness either. Although I'm guessing a lot of the people here are part of the adblocking crowd.

I'm not going to cry if there are a lot less people here. Half the real people sound like bots on Reddit and the quality of discussions has hit bottom. No loss whatsoever if that isn't replicated.

One of the ways you can tell when politicians are bullshitting and just politicking is when they call for stuff like this without mentioning how fossil fuels will specifically be replaced and how those efforts will be encouraged or funded.
Anyone can cut out fossil fuels. You'll just have a lot less power and transportation available all of a sudden. It's not much different on a societal level, except it is worse, as we use fossil fuels for everything from fertilizer for food production to manufacturing and transporting the solar panels and wind turbines that will eventually make fossil fuels obsolete.

You don't have to trace shit to know fast food, fast fashion, and cruise lines are unsustainable. It is obvious we are producing more emissions when we fly for vacation, buy huge trucks and SUVs we don't need.
Much of what we need to do is both obvious and easy because it merely involves us NOT buying things.
And most of the worst stuff like fast food, fast fashion, huge vehicles, and excessive meat consumption don't do anything to sustain a higher quality of life. Many of them reduce it.

They loved that Art Deco style. I do too.

They've been spamming their posts of them sucking Russia's dick all over Lemmy. And getting massively downvoted every time, as it should be.

If people were buying the Fairphone there would be lots of incentive. But people just like to talk about how they care about the environment, human rights, etc. And then go buy the new iPhone.

This isn't unusual. TSMC and Foxconn, both Taiwanese companies, are heavily invested in China as well.
No one serious is implying or saying the US or the West should be completely economically uninvolved with China. Without trade there is much less reason or room for diplomacy. But no one is building cutting edge fabs there either.

Screw the environment. I demand convenience instead!

The level of entitlement people have nowadays is insane, especially regarding issues that they are happy to say are super important. They just refuse to give up an iota of cenvenience to do anything about it.

You can put them in a waterproof, dropproof case. That's what I did when I worked in a factory. And I hike a lot, which means getting caught in the rain. I haven't had a problem.

This is history, not news. Cool find for historians for sure, despite the horrendousness of the discovery.

Batteries are no more developed than affordable nuclear power at this point and are probably a bit behind. There is more of a supply chain for new nuclear power plants than for battery systems that are in the prototype stage at best.
I agree than the long term future is not nuclear but for this century, anything that can replace fossil fuels is welcome. In 20 years when the next new generation of nuclear plants is coming online if the large scale battery production for electrical generation is developed then we don't need to build any more.
If that doesn't happen, we'll be glad new nuclear plants are coming online.
Cheap, large batteries for large scale energy storage will likely happen, and relatively soon. But depending on that is counting a chickens that have not hatched.

Unless there is a near infinite supply of something, it is a commodity and there is a market for it, even in a perfectly anarchistic utopia. Things take land, labor, and capital to produce. That makes them a commodity no matter what, even if the state and everyone else all insist my labor belongs to them.

There's nothing communist about Russia now. They are trying to recreate the Russian Imperium, not the Soviet. Not that the Soviet was much better.

Next you're going to tell me someone made a robot that molests children too...

No, we have always had to make a compromise or a choice between sustainability, convenience, or price. The EU just decided to limit that choice to convenience or price.