I've yet to see any single new law proposal, that actually tackles this problem rather than misusing it's emotional trigger to get acceptance for surveillance and control
While my initial reaction was "Yes", I think that it's rather "No".
There are massive amounts of things to build and stuff to discover. And almost all of it, especially the physics, chemistry etc. stuff needs experimentation. Plenty of people had died or chronically made it difficult to do anything because of scientific experiments (think of Marie Curie or imagine what happens when you try to rediscover nuclear energy).
In our scenario, we say, that the person is immortal, but it could always happen, that they get stuck with certain illnesses or co. which significantly reduces their possible auctions. at some point they may be so limited, that they cannot do certain experiments at all and get stuck there forever.
so pathetic. many people download Chrome or firefox add their browser on their first time on an Windows. it's completely automatic these days in their brain. these people still get even more convinced of their opinion by this interception
I am exactly doubting your suggestion of tax paid donations. I don't think this will happen, unless we actually come together and try to actually enforce this on the political level in various countries.
After all, open source software is an essential and critical foundation since many decades - but I'm not sure, whether there is any government that has made a pledge to donate a certain amount of money per year into the development and funding of such general purpose software. (Maybe I'm wrong though.)
Before the fediverse can get any public funding, we need to make some political efforts. the UN is the largest such institution - and it took all the fiasco with the 2 world war to get many countries pledge to donate to it every year...
A decentralised platform like the Fediverses won't easily work with nation states and their taxes. Even with Wikipedia today, it's not funded directly via any government - but rather by certain universities giving some money to it + all the private doners.
And even if we get that working, power politics will mess this up like so often when things actually get troublesome.
It might be interesting to explore cryptocurrencies as for donations here though. They do have international liquidity and they can't be misused foe power politics.
Thinking like a scientist. Critical and evidence -based thinking and action can be unintuitive at times - but it's the most realistic way to perceive reality. It needs practice, but is tremendously helpful. And the world also really needs it.
APPEA believes the advertising was clear, factual and does not agree with the community panel findings.
Alright then. Let's make an advertisement, that all fossile fuel companies are f...ing engaging in climate homocide. I think, that this statement is quite clear and factual - and here is the evidence (and please ignore any "qualifiers" in that it only applied to certain companies).
People have learned from the times when a century ago doctors were recommending to smoke cigarettes in TV commercials for it's health benefits. And that was when their danger was already scientifically established.
Because the police also protects them. Any old fashion violent revolt will be not greeted by population (currently) and the police and government will prevent that with force. the funny thing is, that the police and co. consistently protect the interests of the rich more than the interests of the poor. you'll barely get discriminated if you're rich. and it happens often, that rich people in a city are known by the policemen and they know that they shouldn't fine them - as otherwise they're out of their job.
Many people actually have forgotten, that unions were created because the workers were starting to kill owners of factories/companies due to the massive exploitation. Unions were only powerful, because the alternative - namely violentl death for the owners by being outnumbered - was actually dangerous and had teeth. but these days, unions have much less teeth - and when strikes don't work, violence becomes necessary.
There are actually quite a few places where they buy bunkers - but with luxury and stuff. it's also marketed as a way of safe spot to retreat when the surface goes bad.
obviously, it's rather a big ,"we found a way to make money out of rich peoples fears and doubts" rather than actual security measures. if things really go bad, how are they going to know, that their security guards aren't going to ditch them? and if they isolate, then they cannot sustain their lifestyle in a bunker with bunker food.
This wouldn't be truely democratic. It would rather be just like donations. Government spending works, because it's all out into the same basket. If it weren't, then rich taxpayers would move the movey to projects they want - and as would have very little old-age welfare, because they don't pay much taxes anymk6and every group in society would put the money into their projects.
swnt @ swnt @feddit.de Posts 4Comments 112Joined 2 yr. ago 
I've yet to see any single new law proposal, that actually tackles this problem rather than misusing it's emotional trigger to get acceptance for surveillance and control