If we maintain the status quo, we’ll have cronies like Jeff Zucker taking the reigns of an established (fake) news organization, pushing propaganda that’s convenient for their world view all while claiming to be objective.
Refer to the CNN exposed / Jeff Zucker tapes if you’re curious to learn about how CNN decides what the narrative is.
It’s not about legitimacy, it’s about misleading people about your veil of objectivity when your biases, yes even AP leans left, come out through your authors and published work.
Is this because you disagree politically or because they’re “beyond the beyond, they’re way worse” or whatever thoughtless, meaningless comment Was typed?
These should be avoided. Ranking articles? How about visiting the sources and reading what they have to say instead of taking peoples word for it.
I always call bs when left leaning sources, who are just as opinionated as the right leaning sources, are closer to “neutral” than the right leaning sources are to neutral. It paints a picture that right leaning sources are “closer to the extremes” when I believe the opposite is true.
Is it possible it is the driest year on record for reasons outside of human impact?
Do we understand weather patterns enough to be confident in the conclusions?
Could the driest year on record be a random event?
This author seems to be reaching a conclusion first, then finding data to support that conclusion. Any time there is a superlative, we can conveniently apply the climate change label to it.
How about some humility?
I try to take these in good faith, but the author’s bio descriptions and stated employment at left leaning organizations are also reasons I approach this with skepticism.
Food for thought:
- How would you explain Warren’s (Berkshire Hathaway’s) recent investment in OXY? (Occidental Petroleum) Bad business/ investing strategy?
- What do people who claim to know things about the environment know about investing?
People need humility when the operate outside their domains. I think programmers and HN community are guilty of this, specifically on the climate issue. “I can build a system with users so I know the correct action for government to take to solve climate change.”
Side note: It’s so funny that you mention the adjective “leading”. Who decides that? That language always triggers the BS filter.
- Has that leading economist ever thought about oil and gas as a national security issue?
Younger generations overwhelmingly support climate change because there are incentives to develop support for the issue. Our public schools in the US do this. Why not target a malleable mind? Greta thinks we should stop using airplanes. Leonardho Dicaprio flys his private jet to French parties or whatever hollywood types enjoy doing, yet lectures others on how they should behave regarding the climate. Let’s hold back human progress because I know what is best for all.
One thing that bothers me is climate activists frequent reach for the government as a tool to disincentivize business. I don’t disagree that humans have materially changed the constituents of the earth. I disagree on the solution of using government to create more regulation. People don’t seem to understand the value in trade offs with energy.
Any comments on Elon creating a rocket company? How are rockets propelled? Following Greta’s logic, she thinks we shouldn’t launch rockets because it isn’t carbon neutral.
It depends...
When asked by regulators, 5% market share.
When asked by customers, 35% market share.
Joking aside, Peter Thiel has great commentary on how companies avoid the monopoly label by claiming to be part of a larger community. A classic example is that Google search has at least 70%+ market share. However, when asked by regulators, they’re a “tech company” with many competitors and have a significantly lower market share.
This is promoting victim culture. Many red flags and many GoFundMe links.
If you can’t afford a lifestyle, move. If you can’t afford the lifestyle, but continue to live there, don’t create a gofundme and craft a sob story highlighting your negligence.
On a positive note, you can get a job, graduate high school, and not have kids out of wedlock (dogs are not cheap either). You have all 3 of those going for you. You are tougher than you think.
You should reject all of those GoFundMe dollars or have a plan to repay people who donated.
This reads like a google advertisement. The site links to more pro-google stories before you reach the text of the article.
Despite both companies being fairly activist and left leaning, put me in the Apple over google camp. Google’s software is world class, their search, g-suite, and google maps are great tools.
Over time the company has burned my trust. (One example is james damore firing over a disagreement about basic biology). Warren Buffett, and I'm paraphrasing, said something like “I’m smart in spots, and I stick to those spots.” How can a company with so many talented individuals, get a basic concept so wrong? It’s hard to argue it’s not political.
I wonder if asking 1 thousand Americans is a good way of understanding which company is more trustworthy with data. I’m doubtful.
Here are the factors that come to mind regarding the popularity of vape pens.
1) Availability Bias - The weed pen can be on your desk or in your pocket. Coca Cola exploits this human misjudgement, and that's why you can have Coca cola all around the world. The takeaway is that you're more likely to consume because it is there.
2) Mobility - It's mobile, unlike a bong. Get high right before your favorite song at a concert. Whip out the vape pen.
3) Stealth A) (Form Factor) - I think these are becoming popular with teenagers primarily because, if a teenager wants to smoke in their parents house, and avoid detection from their parents, a vape pen is less obvious. The pen is objectively easier to hide than a flower setup.
B) (Stench) Vape pens don't smell as much. I've seen signs on businesses refusing service due to the marijuana stench on customers. People even smoke vapes in public and it's indistinguishable from vaping tobacco unless closely inspected or smelled. (The smell from vape pens exists, it's less noticeable than flower.)
4) Convenience - The steps to smoke a vape pen (push of a button and inhale) are simpler than the process of smoking out of a bong. We're dealing with stoners here! (Not all stoners are lazy, but many stereotypes are loosely based on truths.)
I think the value it adds is subjective. In my opinion, it is a fact that further describes the individual. In fairness, it may not be the most relevant point.
We have to appreciate that his place of birth it is a fact, whether one thinks it preloads preconceptions or not.
If we maintain the status quo, we’ll have cronies like Jeff Zucker taking the reigns of an established (fake) news organization, pushing propaganda that’s convenient for their world view all while claiming to be objective.
Refer to the CNN exposed / Jeff Zucker tapes if you’re curious to learn about how CNN decides what the narrative is.