xxd

Finally found it! Megazone 23 Part I, at 55:24

Everyone: Hey, I’ve seen this claim before! Elmo: What do you mean you’ve seen it? It’s brand new!

Except that is not the strategy at all. They actually used a formula that has nothing to do with the countries tariffs, only with how much they import/export from/to the USA. Why else would they put a tariff on an uninhabited island? The penguins surely had a 0% tariff policy with the USA, which according to your logic would mean, that they would get a 0% tariff as per trumps policy. Instead, all tariffs are at least 10%, because if you actually applied the formula to all countries, some would end up with negative tariffs! I strongly recommend this video by Stand-up Maths to understand how the numbers are actually calculated.

What the actual fuck is wrong with these people

It’s not only the risk factor, people routinely oppose wind turbines just because they dislike how they look. and huge cooling towers are not exactly subtle.

but the ‘risk factor’ is a total non-issue in regards to making this decision. nuclear power could be 100% safe and it would still simply be far too expensive to be worth it.

It’s really sad to see that evidently more than half of the german population have an opinion on something which they have little to no understanding of. It’s frustrating what misinformation can achieve.

Nuclear power might work for some nations, but there is just no way it makes sense in germany. All previous plants are in dire need of renovation and will be hugely expensive to bring back up and running, and a new one is just as overly optimistic, as major construction projects routinely go far over budget here, and nuclear energy is already not price competitive with renewables. Nobody wants waste storage, let alone a power plant near them, and it would take years until a plant is even producing energy. By that time, it might already be redundant, because renewables and energy storage will be cheaper and more ubiquitous. there is just no way nuclear power makes sense for germany.

If anything it would be more a ‘tu quoque’ fallacy than whataboutism, because the latter tries to shift the attention to an unrelated topic, whereas here it is occupying land both times.

It certainly weakens the criticism, because the robber in your example might do the right thing, but if they really opposed robbing, surely they wouldn’t do it themselves? As you said, it makes them a hypocrite, and makes you question their motive for measuring two cases with a different yardstick.

You’d think that if you had to jump through that many hoops to invite someone to your country, mayyyybe a few alarm bells should ring in your head. But no, Merz is an expert at mental gymnastics and will gladly invite a war criminal before he considers rethinking his position.

If the anti-nuclear movement will die out with boomers getting old, surely you can explain why in this statistic, younger people are actually preferring the nuclear phase-out whereas the older generations were largely opposing it?

That ‘S’ looks wonky somehow. Otherwise good meme!

That’s… the whole point of this idea.

Time to place a supermassive black hole right next to the other university to slow their progress!

Great work on this project!

I’m envious that you have available data on your public transport! Where I live they’re still working on an API that has been advertised as “available soon” for multiple years :(

I have a very similar project with a pi zero and waveshare e-paper display! I’m showing the weather, a countdown to events I’m looking forward to and a virtual pet that changes pose every so often. Here is an older picture of it:

I love that you had such an annoying update experience that you went ahead and created 2 memes about it and postet into a total of 4 communities, only to vent your frustration. Keep going, this is great!

Reading this made me instantly have the gay frogs song stuck in my head again

Some of these AI results are really funny, but this has to be fake, right? Are the AI results really that fucked up? There is just no way!

Yeah, I agree. it’s not easy to determine truth, and whoever decides truth might introduce bias that then gets rolled out to everyone. With ongoing reserach or unknown information, you could just have a “currently being researched” or “not confirmed yet” attached to the information. I’m just saying that in an ideal world where this does work, it could be safer than relying on people being skeptical, because everyone fails to be skeptical about something eventually.

Yes, only fringe groups believe outlandish conspiracies, but it’s unrealistic to believe that most people, including you, can’t be influenced. Just think of ads or common misconceptions. everyone is susceptible to this to some degree, no one can have their guard up 24/7, regardless of being a child or an adult. Having a “firewall” for everything isn’t a good solution I’d say, but it’s not as if everybody is as resilient as you think.

I think you’re too optimistic as to how difficult it is to influence people. Just think of the various, obviously false, conspiracy theories that some people still believe. I think that for every person there is some piece of information/news, that is just believable enough without questioning it, that is going to nudge their opinion just ever so slightly. And with enough nudges, opinions can change.

Leaving aside the dystopian echo chamber that this could result in, you could argue that this would help with fake news by a lot. Fake news are so easy to spread and more present than ever. And for every person there is probably that one piece of news that is just believable enough to not question it. And then the next just believable piece of news. and another. I believe no one is immune to being influenced by fake stories, maybe even radicalized if they are targeted just right. A firewall just filtering out everything non-factual would already prevent so much societal damage I think.