Like the Sacklers who got rich by... providing the best opiates. Or Zuck, who got rich by... destroying the fabric of our society. Or Big Oil, which got rich by... destroying ecosystems and dooming us all. Or United Fruit Company which got rich by... brutally colonizing Latin America.
It's almost as if the profit motive optimized for profit, not any other outcome that was in any way beneficial to anyone but the ones... profiting.
It takes a deep ideological commitment to close ones eyes to the reality in front of us.
Our planet is literally dying.
The oceans are boiling [0], marine life is dying [1]. Land close to the water will be land under water soon [2]. The ice caps are melting and setting free all sorts of diseases. [3]
Large parts of our planet on fire all the time now, here's one from Australia from this year [4], but I'm sure you've read about wildfires in Australia last year, California every year, Greece last year etc etc.
The problem is it's an optimizing function for the rich getting richer, not for the good of society, not for reducing human suffering, not even, y'know, the survival of the human race.
Indeed. It is true. However, it's not exactly helping if the other side of the pond burns gas turbines to power their AI dreams and tells us to "just get AC bro".
AC does make the problem worse, the issue is just that climate change is mostly out of Europe's control.
Their walls are autoclaved aerated concrete, which is pretty good at both insulating (so less cooling needed) and absorbing/diffusing humidity, so I think in their case it's fine.
It's mostly about the perception that AC is a band-aid that doesn't just stall fixing the root cause of climate change caused by excessive energy consumption, but actively makes it worse.
> It is precisely on Facebook and Instagram where you find the only popular movements against the current order in Europe, and the citizen journalists who expose and scrutinize the powers. It's a giant political threat towards those in power.
Also known as Russian, Iranian, Israeli and Chinese bot farms.
The EU is an institution that is democratically legitimized at every level (Either through direct elections in the parliament or through elections to the appropriate national government in the case of the Council / Commission). Sure, it's not perfect and sometimes the Conservatives do some messed up lawfare to introduce fucked up things like Chat Control, but at least they were voted in and can be voted out again.
Big Tech is some foreign rich dudes being dictators of their little fiefdom doing whatever they can to make themselves even richer. We have zero control over them and what they do to our society in this pursuit. No elections. No recalls. No public votes.
The only correct reaction is for the sovereign to assert its sovereignty and lay out some ground rules.
> - Creation of new jobs, continuing reforms and investment in education, lifelong learning, and employment to create opportunities for everyone
- Avoidance of protectionism, and coordination of fiscal and monetary policies
- - Making Europe the market leader in green technology.
Market ideology -> Right wing
- Increasing the share of renewable energy to at least 20 percent of the energy mix by 2020.
Done through incentives, not nationalized industry -> market ideology, right wing.
- Family-friendly flexibility for working parents, better child care and housing, family-friendly fiscal policies, encouragement of parental leave
Classic birtherism -> right wing
- A new strategy to attract skilled workers from the rest of the world to make Europe's economy more competitive, more dynamic and more knowledge-driven
Importing cheap labor for European capitalists -> right wing
Indeed. The vote, however, was about stopping Chat Control. The key term is "derogation" in the title.
A "yes" vote was a vote against Chat Control. It failed because it needed an absolute majority of 361/) votes to defeat the "urgent procedure" lawfare by Metsina, a conservative.
I think they mean local scanning for CSAM - which feels like a reasonable solution that preserves privacy, but still addresses the real problem of, y'know, child abuse?
Like the Sacklers who got rich by... providing the best opiates. Or Zuck, who got rich by... destroying the fabric of our society. Or Big Oil, which got rich by... destroying ecosystems and dooming us all. Or United Fruit Company which got rich by... brutally colonizing Latin America.
It's almost as if the profit motive optimized for profit, not any other outcome that was in any way beneficial to anyone but the ones... profiting.