I'll try and help. Examples of historic fascist/totalitarian regimes are Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Soviet Russia. Contemporary examples are North Korea, China, Russia, et al.
In what way is the EU behaving in a way that is comparable to these without making the term completely meaningless?
Is it possible to pinch off a pop at "snack size" like this suggests? I'm asking because I have this exact same problem with my children at home. I don't know how they do it. But surely it's not something they can choose to do or not? Is it?
Capitalism and communism both need to same resources, they’re just distributed different.
I'm really not convinced by this. I'm not going to try and make an argument for communism. But the idea the amount of consumption under capitalism would be the same as under alternative economic systems is just absurd. The amount of waste created by planned obsolescence, fashion (fast and otherwise), consumption from status anxiety, the things people buy to cope with long working weeks and commutes. In addition to this the extra damage caused by the billionaires and mega rich.
We would still need access to the same types of resources under alternative economic systems. But there is so much waste created by things which are exclusive to capitalism.
I really wish this was true. Although I am sure he has done a huge amount to shift people to open source, I think his biggest legacy is going to be something much darker and worse than this. I just hope we are all around to discuss what his legacy is.
This is all demonstrably false and goes against the available evidence.
Here's a good Lancet study that investigates ultra processed foods by sub-type and looks at the health impact. Those who are meat and sugary drinks with artificial sweeteners had the highest incidences of cancer. Those who ate high amounts of ultra process plant based alternatives had a lower cancer rate than the base population. Believe what you want, but when it comes to cancer, eating ultra processed plant based products is better than meat.
If it's f2p I'm assuming there's going to be microtransactions to generate the income. Cosmetic microtransactions are conspicuous consumption and the 'value' comes from others seeing the items. Like skins on Fortnite, kids love showing them off to each other and that's what generates the frenzy that means they buy them. Add in a few other dark patterns (limited time sales, dodgy conversion into fake money, loot boxes, etc) and you've got a game that uses kids to extract massive amounts of money from their parents for nothing.
Unfortunately, this feels like the dominant model for a lot of big studio games now. I'm sure the next bit disappointment will be GTA. Although, interestingly FIFA / EA FC sounds like they're starting to realise that this might not be enough and are putting more effort into offline gameplay.
Was there a couple of sailors on the front just before it collided putting a fender down? Surely it wouldn't have had a chance of absorbing the impact of something like this? Looking at the images of the aftermath I can't imagine it ended well for them.
I agree that it should primarily be a parents responsibility to keep kids off social media. But the big problem with social media is that a large proportion of young children don't want to be on social media and recognise the detrimental impact it has on them, but the fear of missing out or being excluded is what keeps them on it. it then becomes a collective action problem, to get them off it you need to get a lot of their peers off it as well. There are movements where groups of parents try to do this, but reaching the critical mass necessary to do it is difficult.
Hopefully the ban keeps a large number off to reduce the pressure on kids to be on it and at the same time the parents can do their bit as well.
I'll try and help. Examples of historic fascist/totalitarian regimes are Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Soviet Russia. Contemporary examples are North Korea, China, Russia, et al.
In what way is the EU behaving in a way that is comparable to these without making the term completely meaningless?
Can you elaborate on how you think the EU is "playing around with totalitarianism and fascistic tendencies".
Is it possible to pinch off a pop at "snack size" like this suggests? I'm asking because I have this exact same problem with my children at home. I don't know how they do it. But surely it's not something they can choose to do or not? Is it?
I'm really not convinced by this. I'm not going to try and make an argument for communism. But the idea the amount of consumption under capitalism would be the same as under alternative economic systems is just absurd. The amount of waste created by planned obsolescence, fashion (fast and otherwise), consumption from status anxiety, the things people buy to cope with long working weeks and commutes. In addition to this the extra damage caused by the billionaires and mega rich.
We would still need access to the same types of resources under alternative economic systems. But there is so much waste created by things which are exclusive to capitalism.
I really wish this was true. Although I am sure he has done a huge amount to shift people to open source, I think his biggest legacy is going to be something much darker and worse than this. I just hope we are all around to discuss what his legacy is.
This is all demonstrably false and goes against the available evidence.
Here's a good Lancet study that investigates ultra processed foods by sub-type and looks at the health impact. Those who are meat and sugary drinks with artificial sweeteners had the highest incidences of cancer. Those who ate high amounts of ultra process plant based alternatives had a lower cancer rate than the base population. Believe what you want, but when it comes to cancer, eating ultra processed plant based products is better than meat.
If it's f2p I'm assuming there's going to be microtransactions to generate the income. Cosmetic microtransactions are conspicuous consumption and the 'value' comes from others seeing the items. Like skins on Fortnite, kids love showing them off to each other and that's what generates the frenzy that means they buy them. Add in a few other dark patterns (limited time sales, dodgy conversion into fake money, loot boxes, etc) and you've got a game that uses kids to extract massive amounts of money from their parents for nothing.
Unfortunately, this feels like the dominant model for a lot of big studio games now. I'm sure the next bit disappointment will be GTA. Although, interestingly FIFA / EA FC sounds like they're starting to realise that this might not be enough and are putting more effort into offline gameplay.
Was there a couple of sailors on the front just before it collided putting a fender down? Surely it wouldn't have had a chance of absorbing the impact of something like this? Looking at the images of the aftermath I can't imagine it ended well for them.
I agree that it should primarily be a parents responsibility to keep kids off social media. But the big problem with social media is that a large proportion of young children don't want to be on social media and recognise the detrimental impact it has on them, but the fear of missing out or being excluded is what keeps them on it. it then becomes a collective action problem, to get them off it you need to get a lot of their peers off it as well. There are movements where groups of parents try to do this, but reaching the critical mass necessary to do it is difficult.
Hopefully the ban keeps a large number off to reduce the pressure on kids to be on it and at the same time the parents can do their bit as well.
This is 100% the way. Not only is it cheaper, but it's so much more enjoyable to just use something rather than worry about keeping it perfect.
The Economist is British. This is absolutely about ridiculing Americans and their ridiculous ideas of being the envy of the world.
Sony patented this in 2010 to allow people to simultaneously watch two different videos on the same TV.