You won't listen anyway. Just look at your language, calling us idiots and fuckwits while pretending you're the level-headed one.
There's enough comments under just this meme and every single discussion on this topic explaining why that change is a direct attack on privacy and privacy being the reason why many of us chose Linux.
claimed by a left-wing extremist group.
"Claimed by someone saying they were a left-wing extremist group." - fify
Someone else claiming to be the same group distanced themselves from the attack and there are important clues pointing to the original post claiming the attack was written in Russian and machine-translated into German.
Expanding on that: in competitive electricity markets, in theory, total demand is met by the cheapest plants (by "marginal price": how much does an additional unit of electricity cost?) that are available.
The marginal price of PV, wind and hydropower is pretty much zero.
The next cheapest are usually older nuclear fission plants and coal power plants.
Then is a huge gap and then come newer nuclear plants and gas fired power plants.
But all of these plants aren't built over night. So maybe before all of the datacenters, total demand may have mostly been met by renewables and coal and gas power plants only operated a few hundred hours per year. Now, total demand rises and those plants need to operate more often. That's why the prices rise just because of demand increase. Other effects (e.g. changes in regulation, corporate greed, ...) might be at play as well.
Yeah, some people on the internet like to oversimplify and I get how your impression arises that those people bend the narrative how they like it.
On the other hand, it's pretty well-documented that
Also left-wing opposition inside western states is often demonized although we have similar aims as some highly-praised opposition movements in other countries.
That's a false dichotomy. We can also improve our technology while ditching capitalism.
Nothing factually wrong with the article, but it has this sound of "this technology will solve all our problems" to it that I find highly problematic. Seven out of nine planetary boundaries are exceeded, climate change just being one of them. And all of them are exceeded because of our wasteful and growth-oriented way of life.
Yeah, uneducated people might say something like that.
Mh, '0' is a nonempty string, so !'0' returns false. Then of course !(!'0') would return true. I'd absolutely expect this, Python does the same.
And the second thing is just JavaScript's type coercion shenanigans. In Python
bool('0') # returns True because of nonempty string
bool(int('0')) # returns False because 0 == False
Knowing that JavaScript does a lot of implicit type conversions, stuff like that doesn't strike me as very surprising.
We're talking about engineers here! We're using MATLAB or Python if we're programming at all.
Geht um den Opa des Oberfaschos in den VSA: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Trump
Edith: vergessen, dass ich auf ich_iel bin.
Aber er ist Schuld. Is klar.
Is what you describe really socialism though? Western leftists would probably call these policies social democracy. And yes, they make the life of people in that country better! Relatively high minimum wages, limits on prices (or price increases) for certain things (especially housing), mandatory paid sick leave, mandatory unemployment insurance, and so on are all things that some European countries have in some form or another. And yes, that makes most of our lives (I'm German) relatively great.
However, most of the housing, factories and land are still owned by capitalists. They still exploit their workers and tenants, the policies only soften the blows. In recent decades, the concentration of capital in a few families' hands has also skyrocketed here, which gives them political power (sometimes openly, sometimes covertly) and led to the erosion of many of these social democratic benefits. Also, a lot of the high social security in the west in the past century was only possible thanks to exploitation of people and nature in the global south.
That's why many leftists, at least in the west, don't think that social democracy is enough in the long term. Many even see social democrats as stabilizing the fundamentally corrupt capitalist system by covering up that corruption. For most of us, socialism would mean that, at the very least, big corporations are owned and lead by the workers themselves. That could be cooperatives in markets (market socialism) or that could be some kind of planned economy (not only state central planning, there's also proposals for somewhat or even totally distributed/decentralized schemes). The point here is that there are no more owners of productive forces, who don't participate themselves in production, i.e. capitalists. The existence of a separate capitalist class with a lot of power and opposed to the workers is a common denominator for unneccessary misery in this world. Eliminating that class (that doesn't mean eliminating the people, only expropriating them) would not magically solve all problems in the world, but it would make us freer to seek effective measures.