535
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

In a YouTube video, a voice in English announces that China has researched and developed its own ultra-thin 1-nanometer chip – a staggering claim given that the chip isn’t expected in commercial devices for another decade.

"Recent news from China has sent ripples of excitement and astonishment across the globe," gushes the voice-over on the China Charged YouTube channel. "This revolutionary breakthrough is more than a technological marvel; it is a game-changer that will redefine the global tech landscape."

"Prepare to have your mind blown," says another video, this time on the channel Unbelievable Projects. "Welcome to today's video, in which we'll discover why America remains behind China in infrastructure development."

These voices and their “good news” about China are evidence that the Chinese Communist Party and its overseas proxies are using artificial intelligence to flood YouTube with propaganda videos, according to a new report that describes a "coordinated inauthentic influence campaign" on the platform.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 30 points 2 years ago

That has more to do with you regurgitating misinformation, than it does with the Chinese.

Those arguments have been debunked ad nauseam.

[-] deft@ttrpg.network 6 points 2 years ago

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?

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 15 points 2 years ago

It literally isn't misinformation though?

It literally is...

EVs are still polluting

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.

[-] Sanyanov@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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"

[-] helenslunch@feddit.nl 4 points 2 years ago

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.

[-] Sanyanov@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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.

[-] deft@ttrpg.network 1 points 2 years ago

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

[-] sheogorath@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

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.

[-] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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

this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
535 points (100.0% liked)

World News

48917 readers
1649 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS