I live in a city. Me being "disconnected" from nature has nothing to do with my phone. It's a personal choice to live as mosquito-free a life as I can. (Also I just genuinely enjoy living in a city.)
sunsets
What are you even on about? There's one every day.
each other
Literally the opposite of truth. Modern technology allows me to stay in contact with people I'd be unable to stay in touch with otherwise.
And more. When's the last time you saw a concert?
January.
Everyone is staring at their phones and not even enjoying the moment they're in.
Yeah, because my fucking commute would be so much more enjoyable if I spent it staring into the distance and/or at the other people on the train.
Many are depressed and drowning in meaninglessness.
And you think that's somehow a new development? I mean, I guess you don't have time to think about life if you spend every waking minute just trying to survive as a hunter-gatherer but I wouldn't call that better.
When we look at old pictures of beaches from the 90s (not even that old) everyone appears physically fit, bright, and happy. Did our gadgets really make us any more free, or happy?
Because as a general rule people don't take pictures of unhappy moments. Especially not when taking pictures is actually expensive, film wasn't cheap and neither was getting it developed.
but if the only solution is to go live in the woods, is it really worth it?
Yes.
Fuck no. I don't enjoy literally everything that's associated with living alone (and a small group with limited-at-best contact with the outside world counts as "alone" as far as I'm concerned, I enjoy meeting people) in the wilderness.
You seem to think that because you'd enjoy life as a hermit in the woods everyone would. No. No, we would not.
I read the books first, and while there are plenty of omissions and outright changes from the source material that I disagree with, cutting Tom Bombadil is not one of them.
I think you're overestimating the familiarity most people, even generally politically literate people, outside of Ireland and the UK have with Ireland and Irish politics.
They're writing for a global audience, and most people in the world simply wouldn't know what they're talking about if they referred to the taoiseach as taoiseach. It's no different from referring to the Spanish President of the Government (the actual title of the office) as the Spanish prime minister, yes, that's not technically the correct term but using language most people will immediately understand and understand correctly is generally considered to be more important.
Because phones got expensive. If a teacher confiscates a phone and drops it/it gets stolen from them, who's going to pay for it? At least that's the explanation my teachers gave around 2010 or so, when they announced they'd no longer confiscate phones.
I actually agree with him on the thickness, especially since I'd put the phone in a case which would add even more girth. It makes it less pocketable, and more importantly less easy to handle. My thumb can't easily reach all the way across the screen on my current, similarly sized and thinner phone already and the added few millimetres from the case do make it noticeably worse.
It's not the major thing that's keeping me away from the Fairphone (I'm just not the target demographic), but certainly isn't a point in it's favour.
The Houthi are the ruling regime in Yemen, not rebels. This is a way to make them sound illegitimate.
The legitimate government of Yemen still exists, is still recognised as the government of Yemen by the United Nations, and is still controlling significant amounts of territory roughly equivalent to former South Yemen.
They are trying impose sanctions against Israel
They are attacking random civilian ships that are not headed to or from Israel. That's not "sanctioning Israel", that's declaring war on the entire world.
I don't disagree on a moral level, but I don't think that "risk going to jail" is particularly good advice. If there's any social programmes or charities, see if you qualify before resorting to desperate measures.
We're gonna have to rethink definitions at some point. Yes, video games are still a comparatively new medium, but nobody would call a 2010 film a retro film, nevermind books or paintings.
I'm not. I'm calling out people who call me a bigot for not living up to their standards on ethical consumption. Personally I avoid Nestlé and their billion subsidiaries wherever humanly possible, but I am not calling everyone who doesn't pro-slavery. That's my issue, not the warranted labelling of Rowling as a bigoted piece of shit.
What a ridiculous take. First of, outside of certain parts of the internet most people aren't even aware of the issues surrounding Rowling, secondly you can very much acknowledge that she's a terrible excuse for a human being while still enjoying a game she had nothing to do with (yes, she gets royalties, but she has the kind of fuck you money that multiplies by merely existing anyway).
Wikipedia is run by a nonprofit. They don't monetise volunteer contributions and they don't paywall the knowledge on their site, they run on donations. It's not really a comparable situation.
Do they pay the people who answer the questions? I genuinely don't know. But if they don't then, yes, it is scummy to just profit off of someone else's work and not pay them.
They said the same thing about video games, TV, heavy metal, comic books and rock music. Crazy people exist, crazy people have always existed, and crazy people will always exist. Society has always been able to cope.
We're not the people they need to reach though. I don't think either of us needs convincing that urgent action is needed on climate change, it's our boomer parents, coworkers, etc. who need convincing. And if someone's attempt at helping with that ends up making climate activists look like deranged vandals then please for the love of God stop trying to help.
People were talking about climate change though. Movements like FFF (until Covid took the wind right out of their sails) had quite a bit of momentum, and actually were making it a mainstream topic.
Protests like this are getting people to talk about what you did, not about why you did it.
I live in a city. Me being "disconnected" from nature has nothing to do with my phone. It's a personal choice to live as mosquito-free a life as I can. (Also I just genuinely enjoy living in a city.)
What are you even on about? There's one every day.
Literally the opposite of truth. Modern technology allows me to stay in contact with people I'd be unable to stay in touch with otherwise.
January.
Yeah, because my fucking commute would be so much more enjoyable if I spent it staring into the distance and/or at the other people on the train.
And you think that's somehow a new development? I mean, I guess you don't have time to think about life if you spend every waking minute just trying to survive as a hunter-gatherer but I wouldn't call that better.
Because as a general rule people don't take pictures of unhappy moments. Especially not when taking pictures is actually expensive, film wasn't cheap and neither was getting it developed.
Fuck no. I don't enjoy literally everything that's associated with living alone (and a small group with limited-at-best contact with the outside world counts as "alone" as far as I'm concerned, I enjoy meeting people) in the wilderness.
You seem to think that because you'd enjoy life as a hermit in the woods everyone would. No. No, we would not.