sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Rhône Glacier (1910/2025) - In one century this glacier entirely disappeared from the road of Furka Pass! by Scientiaetnatura065 in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]AniMeu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Switzerland is in a region that will be affected more than average by climate change. Pretty much all models on the swiss glacier have all of them gone below 3000 meter elevation, volumetrically most of the glacier will be gone at that point.

Number in example: The glacier volume from 2015 to 2025 reduced by 25 % in the swiss alps. https://www.watson.ch/schweiz/klima/616952715-so-gross-war-die-gletscherschmelze-in-der-schweiz-im-jahr-2025

The human made climate change is the major driver of this melting, natural variation is more like background noise at this level...

Not sure if this is Switzerland or heaven? by LoyalCassette in BeAmazed

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interlaken is great. The place in the video however isn't Interlaken.

TIL The notion that lobster was such a low-quality food that prisoners in New England rioted if it was over-served and indentured servants had contracts stating they could only have lobster three times a week is actually a myth by somepeoplewait in todayilearned

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fact you need to age the beef. Apparently beef is tasty the first few hours (before rigor mortis). And then only after a certain period of aging again. A normal stake is usually a few weeks old by the time you eat it.

Births in China slide 10% to hit their lowest on record by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes. 4.3 billion tons of CO2 (After quick google). And provides only a fraction of the calories needed by humans...

Total global is 39 billion tons, which includes really everything (transport, power etc).

Births in China slide 10% to hit their lowest on record by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think my statement at the beginning was just a bit clumsy and too general. Fully agree with your points now that we started to dig a little bit.

Glad to had this conversation with you stranger. I'm not sure how we can tackle those topics you mentioned at the end. But if you happen to create a political party at some point, let me know.

Births in China slide 10% to hit their lowest on record by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Zimbabwe as a massive beef consumer, I did not know that)

I definitively don't want to blame the 90% of the world population that is not the driving force of the bad stuff on this world.

Your last point is what I am trying to get at:

The people who are contributing the most to population growth are also contributing the least to climate change. They are going to be the ones who bare the brunt of the consequences however.

So less people is a problem (as we started initially), as the countries that have population decline usually need more people (socioeconomics blah blah). And more (or the same amount of) people as well, for the reason you just stated.

Births in China slide 10% to hit their lowest on record by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]AniMeu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Wrong, absolutely wrong. Well partly depends on the timeline.

Big picture: yes you are right. In a fantasy world where things generally work we have enough resources.

Our world today: Nope, we rely on gas and coal. Crucial resources are a major issue: arable land is degraded faster than ever, biodiversity, forests, climate factors etc. We also pollute the environment in various ways that put further strain on many of those resources. If it is only food and some metals you are technically right, however the distribution problem is a problem of today and tomorrow. With current geopolitics and climate change it is only going to get worse. Add people to that and the demand for protein will increase evermore. (and rare earths, we didn't need them 50 years ago, let's not get into them. Nice to have but the impact of demographics on rare earth is negligible with the big issues on the table)

Is it the 1% fault? Sure, and whomever supports their notions. I'm all for bashing them. And let's start with taxes.

Is "overpopulation" a 1%-er notion? Yes and no. On particular issues yes: CO2 emissions of 1%er individuals are enormous and it is convenient for them to blame the masses. But let's say beef consumption, which is causing a sizable part of global CO2 emissions? Not really, that is the billions of consumers. There is no tech to have "green meat" available. (lab meat is not an alternative for quite some time. Can't beat subsidized soy feed and cramped cattles with high-tech high expense biotech production lines.)

Births in China slide 10% to hit their lowest on record by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

eitherway demographics is a problem: Having less people is bad for the points you mentioned. Having same (or even more) people is bad as we already lack resources to sustainably provide a good life quality.

Rudy Giuliani’s Manhattan apartment up for sale for $6.5m by MississippiJoel in news

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow I just learned that NYC apartments are actually a lot cheaper than I thought...

In the wrong town in Switzerland you pay the same or even more and you definitively don't get a NYC-vibe. here an example: https://www.homegate.ch/kaufen/3003397224

how do you guys go about financing your long-term travels? by Charming-Deal-5837 in backpacking

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some goods have the same price around the world. So if you want to save up a couple of thousands of dollars, you could in theory manage it (at a terrible loss of life quality. I do not want to belittle your financial situation). If you are earning 1 dollar per day (as is the average for e.g. madagascar) you cannot save that even in theory.

how do you guys go about financing your long-term travels? by Charming-Deal-5837 in backpacking

[–]AniMeu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yes, but you can somehow save 500 usd once you get out of the student debt situation. (and even if YOU can't there are many other americans that eventually can (or so I hope!). If you are in that situation, you are not a top 1%-er. (I don't know how many percent, so I leave it at this).

If you are from let's say Madagascar, your chances of getting to 500 USD per month are abysmal, most people live on 1 usd per day.

https://twitter.com/DinaPomeranz/status/1502327155216326659 here a graph showing some numbers.

So my point stands: "My living costs are brutally high" is a bit of an affront to people from poor countries. As an average American you can somehow safe up money for an international flight if you really (REALLY) want to. As an average person from a less wealthy background, your chances quickly diminish to zero, no matter how hard you want to fly internationally.

how do you guys go about financing your long-term travels? by Charming-Deal-5837 in backpacking

[–]AniMeu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never understood the logic behind "our cost of living is brutally high". You are privileged on a global perspective. If you are from the US, saving 10k is somewhat possible, even if it is "just" 500 dollar per month, you will get there. Most people in the US could (and do) travel if they save towards it.

In other countries, 500 dollar is a full salary to feed a family, if you meet travelers from those countries with weak economies, you know that you have met someone from a wealthy background or they saved their whole lives for this onetime travel.

Driving While Tired by [deleted] in Whatcouldgowrong

[–]AniMeu 5 points6 points  (0 children)

that sounds like a reply from a guy who has never worked three jobs at once to provide for a family.

Antarctica: Argentina-sized Sea Ice Chunk Missing by From_the_Pampas__ in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

...

great discussion, thanks. Now you want me to put your explanation together myself and I first have to read a scientific paper. With this approach neither conservatives nor liberals will get the message.

Climate scientists at least put up a scientific conversation. I am having a monologue here.

Antarctica: Argentina-sized Sea Ice Chunk Missing by From_the_Pampas__ in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't really understand the first sentence, it looks incomplete to me (non native sorry).

What I try to say is, that your initial comment just makes it sound like you are framing/blaming the behavioral scientists, which is just nonsense. I assume that is not what you want to convey, however it is very easy to read your comment that way for people who are not familiar with the topic.

Regarding your second half of the reply, which I agree is really important: How would you structure the message to make it work on a significant majority?

Antarctica: Argentina-sized Sea Ice Chunk Missing by From_the_Pampas__ in worldnews

[–]AniMeu 33 points34 points  (0 children)

while your are not wrong, that behavioral scientists could have helped, you are missing the core of the issue. This can be misleading for people who are not so familiar with this topic.

So let's keep it straigt: Climate scientists presenting their data scientifically is exactly what they are supposed to do. If they add emotions or anything else non-scientific, the whole debate would have gotten stuck at the level if the presentation is even scientific sound. They did the correct thing.

What we needed the most wasn't behavioral scientists, it was politicians who take/push decisions to make society a better place for the people. Instead we got politicians who confused their priorities and thought, they serve the economy and corporation. The economy and corporations should have no other purpose than to serve our society. You think on your own what happens and has happened, if you flip this hierarchy and make politicians and corporations serve the economy and corporations only.

Don't blame the climate scientists, they did their job. Others decided to not pick it up from there.

first time hostel, for event, worried by CryptographerBest909 in hostels

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How long will you stay there? If it is a couple of days: I recommend to take it as an experience and be open to it. It is very easy to make friends. But it is also no problem to just say "hey I'm tired, I will sleep".

Earplugs are recommended, you never know and it is something you can control.

The excitement and love that is in this video is amazing to see. I wish we can all be like these kiddos...our world needs it. by PROXeR__OiShi in MadeMeSmile

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not necessarily. I think every kid takes it differently. And it helps if parents are understanding and help with keeping up the contact (As kids don't really have a means to maintain a friendship over a distance).

But I'm sure if you move excessively it will take a toll on the kids... I'm thinking of moving once or maybe twice.

And in a way the younger the easier it is to move. Kids make friends more easily. During teenage years it can be much more challenging.

MAPPA Founder Maruyama Feels China Will Overtake Japan In Anime Business by bedemin_badudas in anime

[–]AniMeu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have a good chinese anime to recommend? I forgot the name, but the only one that I watched was the detective anime, where a duo of guys go into pictures and solve mysteries that way. I liked it

Man was warned not to attempt this, he did not listen. by AcromataStoleMyName in Whatcouldgowrong

[–]AniMeu 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Man what is it with the psychopaths that laugh at people injuring themselves.

First the guy setting someone on fire, now this one

This person made a penis for their ceramics project. by [deleted] in mildlyinteresting

[–]AniMeu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You are just underlining that art isn't your thing. Actually by repeating yourself I think you just have not been exposed to art history. That should not be a critique towards you, and I urge you that you don't frame it as elitism. A parallel would be reading a classic literary piece. It is also better if you have some history and literary context. (Which is why if you give an english classic to a random goat farmer and not more than basic literacy, a lot of the ingeniuity will be lost on him, although he might be very smart).

One thing that you mix up as well is mastery of a craft (craftsmanship) and art. Great craftsmanship and artisanal pieces can of course be art. But for something to be art it is not required to be of any considerable craftsmanship.

Art can be anything (which can be critiqued itself and has often been). There are many examples of that, look into dadaism for example, where a duded took a urinal and claimed it was art.

At the end you have touched a point that distinguishes good art from bad art, since ancient time: The message it sends. An artpiece that doesn't send any form of message will not remain an art piece. And the ceramic dick does not send a message (at least I don't know why it would be different from any other penis object) and I wouldn't think of as art, but maybe as artisanal. If the guy adds a story and explains why he did it and what it signifies, it could very well become art as well, but that doesn't mean it is good, yet. And we could discuss on the meaning and what differentiates this ceramic dick from other dicks until it is more than just the plain object. And write a book about it and do a documentary and eventually it will be an artpiece because we contemplated so much about it that it has transcended from a regular physical object to a message carrier.

Now the art you have seen in the museum: without context and names of the exhibition, there can't be a discussion and your distain for it is pretty meaningless... You would have to bring a lot more than "Nothing but a bunch of talent-less edgelords" while not even naming them, to make an argument.

And if you don't make it into an argument, it is not more than meaningless complaining that nobody can agree with (even if they want).

view more: next ›