reads title ... 😮
reads article
Of course, this expected time-to-decay has only shifted from 10^794^ years to 10^790^ years
ಠ_ಠ
laverabe
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
I agree that she should be more clear on demanding a ceasefire (although she did actually partly demand just that in March, at least for 6 weeks - and again during the debate), and that this war could probably be stopped if she made such demands. The current US administration is working to end the fighting, so not voting for the party that is actually working to end the war is at the detriment to the people of Gaza.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said two weeks ago that 90 percent of a ceasefire deal had been agreed upon.
Washington has been working for months with mediators Qatar and Egypt to try and bring Israel and Hamas to a final agreement.
Biden laid out a three-phase ceasefire proposal on May 31 saying that Israel had agreed to it.
Now compare that to Trump:
"From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel's hand behind its back, demanding an immediate ceasefire, always demanding ceasefire," Trump said, adding it "would only give Hamas time to regroup and launch a new October 7 style attack." Trump added: "I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast."
So he would basically allow a full scale genocide, no holds barred.
That being said though, this is likely not going to end anytime soon due to the massive pager/radio attack on Hezbollah that's likely going to make this whole quagmire even worse. And I 100% agree with you that the US/Kamala/Biden should put Israel in it's place before this whole powder keg turns into WWIII, which is not outside the realm of possibilities to anyone who has studied history and the role multiple global conflicts played in the past to lead to world war.
It seems to me like we didn't have this problem twenty years ago. If blinding LEDs are the problem, why not just not allow them anymore for headlights? It takes 5 seconds to pop in a new incandescent headlight on cars that have them, and well made ones can last 20+ years depending on the construction. Visibility is good and equivalent to some LEDs with higher end lamps, and it doesn't create a superbly unnatural light that impairs the other drivers, pedestrians, or nature. It would also reduce light pollution.
On very rare occasion, the progressive step forward, actually looks a lot like the road backwards. It would take a long time to implement, but anything worth doing is worth taking the time to do it right.
Auto sensing technology is going to be more of a glaring headache in 20 years, when you have half of the cars with failing sensors and everyone getting blinded even worse. Adaptive Driving Beams (ADB) are not a solution, it does not properly address the issues of glare, and it will likely only make the problem worse by further removing human interaction from headlight controls.
Oh you can't change apathy really. I was just suggesting if privacy friendly tech (ie: Linux) is to go mainstream, that it would have to be "easier" than what is currently out there to gain mainstream popularity.
Desktop linux is almost there, but the general population mostly uses mobile devices now, and phone Linux seems to be a dying prospect.
everytime I tell someone there are alternatives to using Google/Apple/etc their response is, "but it's just so easy". I guess you can call my view of that jaded, but people really don't care? I mean I'm not trying to be defeatest at all, it's just trying to accurately appraise people's apathy to apply a proper resolution to the problem.
The solution has to make it "easy" for people because that is what they expect of technology now.
Please remove if this sort of thing is not allowed. Trying to foster a discussion of various policy issues from week to week.
I've been seeing this more lately actually as a trend. I think policy makers (well at least some local and state) are getting smart to the idea that rezoning, while NIMBY's hate it, is really smart city wide policy. Reduces need for spending public funds on additional housing and reduces road maintenance and public services that are required to upkeep a car dependent city.
Seems like a good start on policy, have you thought about running for your local counsel, & state house/senate? That would probably be a good place to start to get experience/knowledge & people who do it for a living to point you in the right direction.
No worries, the title is editable if you wanted to change it btw.
If you're serious about this, what are your policy positions? Would you run as a D, R, or I?
That's what high beams are for... Cars don't need to light the dark side of the moon, drivers only need to see the roadway in front of them. Both provide ample illumination, it's just one allows you to see the color of a zit on a mouse 3 miles away, which is entirely not necessary for safe night driving.
And I was saying that some higher end incandescent lamps are equivalent to some LEDs. I know there are LEDs that far exceed the lumens of traditional lamps.