view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
I'm shocked.
They've also infiltrated the administration of lemmy.ml and specifically c/worldnews.
Can someone please explain to me the drama of Lemmy.ml and why everyone seems to be leaving it?
I don't know. I just saw a thread there yesterday about "young people are more favorable on China" and inevitably the discussion ended up being largely about the many Chinese atrocities, all of which the mods promptly removed, as well as leaving all the comments claiming that those were all CCP bots coming to...spread anti-Chinese propaganda?
I dunno, don't take my word for it, head over to worldnews@lemmy.ml and have a look for yourself through the barren comment sections.
Better yet, look at the modlog.
Lemmy.ml is run by ML. Marxist-LENINIST. They will not allow almost any critique of any government that falls under that umbrella ever. But will gladly hypocritically criticize any western power for the same thing.
If it was wrong for the US Britain and the west to do it. It's wrong for China, North Korea today or the Soviet Union in their time to have done it as well. Not a free pass for them to do it. When it comes to anything criticizing their political ideologies you may as well be on something like lemmy.conservative in many ways.
Proper link - couldn’t find the referenced thread
Complaint about the server from six months ago
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn't work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !worldnews@lemmy.ml
I mentioned EVs aren't the savior that people are pitching because they still require plastics and rare earth metals and often are fueled by electricity made with coal/oil.
They got so fucking mad lol
That has more to do with you regurgitating misinformation, than it does with the Chinese.
Those arguments have been debunked ad nauseam.
It literally isn't misinformation though? EVs are still polluting. There is no world with cars and buildings without pollution my guy especially now where we are at with technology.
Nothing has been debunked?
It literally is...
No one thinks they're not polluting. Everything you consume is polluting. But EVs pollute significantly less than their dino-fuel-powered counterparts, that's the point you're missing.
This debate is clearly one of different goalposts.
Electric car fans will fairly notice that electric cars are less bad than traditional ICE cars, and therefore the technology is good
Anti-car folks will also rightfully point out that there's too much focus on EVs at the time when we should move away from cars altogether, and that electric car future is also very unsustainable, just a little bit less, while giving the false impression of something "green"
I agree but it's not a "false impression". They ARE green. Just because they're not the most environmentally friendly thing on the planet doesn't mean they're not green.
I'd be elated if we all moved away from cars but that's simply not realistic anytime in the near future.
We should certainly establish the same definition of "green", as it is so wide it encompasses both of our positions.
I claim that most people expect EVs to be the solution for eco-friendly transportation that is sustainable and future-proof. And this is not true. That's what I meant.
It's important to clear out why it is unrealistic in order to address it. I see two reasons: 1.Governments not doing enough to promote and build effective public transit 2.People not willing to lose comfort of driving their own car - something that insulates them from other people and allows to move anywhere anytime.
And both are solvable through policy changes. First, we desperately need to invest in public transit. We can get money by taxing car sales more, which will shift both sides of the equation by making cars less affordable, while at the same time freeing up money for public transit development (of course, less sales of cars should be factored in). We need more routes, more comfortable conditions for passengers, more relatively low-scale options to drive passengers to less popular destinations. We also need to subsidize taxi and car rentals for cases when someone actually needs a car.
But those are the solutions that might get negative reaction of the public at first, and this tension is to me the most problematic (of course after lobbying made by automakers). Populist leaders will never go for that step, or they risk losing their popularity and influence.
Lmfao no I get the point you literally named what I'm saying and gloss over it and this is why this situation we are under is inevitable
For the energy source aspect, it's much more efficient to have a single big place to generate electricity compared to having millions of portable combustion engines running around inside cars. It's also easier to switch to a cleaner energy if a wind farm or a solar power plant if you're a state or some entity that's responsible for energy generation in your region.
TBH my biggest pet peeve on an EV is basically every EV is a privacy sucking machine. They record everything and send everything home. Give me a car like my old car that doesn't have any telemetry and the technology is simple enough I can even push start the car when the alternator is fully dead.
While it is true that a centralized energy source is more efficient and clean it still isn't enough. Even if every car was replaced by an EV it wouldn't solve our climate crisis. The only thing it would save is the automobile industry.
Here's so info
And more
These are conservative talking points that have been repeatedly dispelled. Where are you getting this info from?
These are not conservative talking points that's so disingenuous dude.
EVs require metals that aren't really too great to mine for our planet, most of the time that mining requires the use of diesel despite what we wanna believe.
I'm all for green energy and better awareness of our species pollution but you're basically being duped by Elon Musk wannabes promising the future that will turn out just like everything Elon does, absolutely trash and we're gonna wonder why we wasted time with half of this shit.
The real solution is cars gotta go, public transit needs to be the only transit and parking lots and roads gotta go but the car industry and the infrastructure we invested in is too worth it so we will follow the sunk cost off the cliff and people like you will support it because its slightly better than it used to be even though it is still bad.
Because drilling and transporting oil is so environmentally friendly? Comparatively it is significantly less destructive. Especially when you look at ocean drilling, which is the majority of it.
No dude, you are the one being duped by conservative propaganda. My sources have nothing to do with Elon Musk.
I mean yes, but now you're moving the goal posts.
No your original point was "EVs aren't the savior that people are pitching". They are exactly what people are pitching. If you read anything that said EVs were going to save the planet and end pollution, that was conservative strawman propaganda. If you read anything about EVs polluting more because they get their energy from coal plants, that was conservative propaganda.
EVs are a green alternative to fossil fuels. If you want to argue that we should get away from cars entirely, I think most here would agree with you, but that's not what you said.
You're not just wrong but needlessly and incredibly rude.
So? Don't police my tone. Argue the content. Nobody here has done that. They're just mad I'm pointing out EVs are kind of trash and a bad idea because they're prolonging a serious problem. This isn't an opinion, this is the truth.
We have limited resources, the end is actually in sight this time. Throughout all of human history we are crying the end is nigh, guess what? The end is actually nigh we should act like it. Not police people's tones and get pissy they're not saying it the way we wanna hear it
Don't tell me not to police your tone while being a needless jerk.
I did. It's not sticking.
Bye now.
Next can you talk about the problem with renewables? Just to come full circle
Nothing is wrong with renewables but you've definitely also read about greenwashing right?
It is basically that. For what people are proposing we need to change the entire economic system away from capitalism and this endless green line go up logic. Until then everything will continue to be this way no matter how we dress it.
Yeah, don't try to make anything better. It's a waste of time unless you're trying to overhaul the entire economic system.
What a smooth-brained take.
Literally makes nothing better prolongs the same problems
The only thing EVs save are the automobile industry.
The point is that the rise of electic cars slows down the kinds of fundamental shifts and, most importantly, policy changes we need in order to actually get sustainable.
While it can be seen as an improvement, at the end of the day we end up not taking measures we absolutely should. Everyone is just advertising EV's as a solution, which they are not. At best, it's a transient stage before people can finally accept they cannot drive a car in an environmentally friendly way, ever.
That's quite the conclusion jump. You can be critical of EVs from a leftist perspective even if so much EV hate is from conservatives.
EVs are an improvement from petrol powered vehicles but they are not in any way good. There is still plenty of pollution from the construction of the vehicle, the transport of materials, the atomized rubber from the tires, and the pollution from it's energy source (even if it's less total greenhouse gas emissions as opposed to a petrol based vehicle). EVs will not save the climate even if every car was replaced.
Here's more info
And some more
Lemmy.ml got mad about EV hate?? I generally see pretty well informed pro urbanism/public transport takes on there so I'm surprised. Maybe I'm just more used to hexbear
honestly they just expect more evidence
I think they're not moderated by Americans so their standard for what's "acceptable" is less "what's politically-aligned" but "what's backed by the available evidence"