I read that: sorry if I phrased it like you were a climate change denier. It was meant to be more general.

Definition of the word fact:

• A fact is an occurrence in the real world
• a statement which is found to be true after hearing evidence
• a verifiable and objective observation in science
• a true proposition or something that makes a proposition true

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact_(disambiguation)

A fact needs to be true to be called “fact”, therefore a fact cannot be false as long as it is a fact. Of course, facts can later be proven wrong revoking their status as a fact.

With debate I meant subjective opinionated debate. My bad, I should have made that more clear. Objective debate & research is what makes science science.

Ofc we can debate, whether it is good to censor information. Censorship is / has been done by almost every country (democratic or not), mainly in times of war, during a dictatorship, or in a (political) crisis as a measure of directing the political course and to gain stability. Of course, restrictive censorship may lead to dissatisfaction or dumb decisions by the government if criticism is silenced.

The way I see it, the discourse should be held freely as long as it isn’t harmful for anybody. An example, if someone says murder should be legalized or that killing a certain ethnicity is the right thing to do, censorship and exclusion is in my opinion the right thing to do since you are taking measurements to protect lives.

Climate change (if not stopped) is very likely to pose a direct or indirect threat to millions of people and every year of discussion brings us closer to the climate crisis resulting in: 1st mass migration (with the current sentiment towards migration worldwide it’s likely those people won’t be helped), 2nd war on resources and 3rd a global financial crisis. And this is why I think censoring climate change denial is correct (there’s nothing wrong with objective criticism, I am talking about outright denial).

But I gotta admit it’s hard where to draw the line.

• Flatpak is open source, Snap isn’t
• Flatpak allows other repositories besides the official one, therefore having the ability to be decentralised, Snap doesn’t
• Canonical (the company behind Snap and Ubuntu) is hated for some past decisions they made with Ubuntu
• and more

(The only thing I really prefer Snap over Flatpak is that you need the whole package name in Flatpak (like com.valvesoftware.Steam for Steam) whilst you can simply use “steam” in snap but that’s due to decentralisation vs centralisation I guess and overall a minor problem for me)

But climate is not an opinion. It doesn’t change just because the debate forces it to. Politics is debatable, economics is debatable, climate is scientific. Science is where you have to prove your point by providing actual evidence instead of saying “well I think it is so and therefore I am right”… And not just that, your evidence has to be reproducible and is getting reviewed by a plethora of other scientists with most of them having their lives devoted to that subject.

In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan: “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

And therefore you should keep it shut until you can provide actual independent source based evidence that your points are valid but as it stands after decades of research on climate even oil companies have given in to the facts and are now trying to greenwash themselves by “offsetting emissions” and - with all respect - the only ones that are still backing climate change denial are profiting off of it, trolls that don’t actually mean what they say and think they are sooo clever by showing everyone how big of douchebags they are, or the stupid followers of first and second.

This fight has never been fair mate. Oil companies have held back their own studies for decades because those studies weren’t distortable enough to match their views. They do not need scientists paid by “the alternative power industry” to prove them wrong, they managed that themselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings

There is a quote from a very good HBO series that fits quite well here: “Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later that debt is paid.”

https://piped.video/watch?v=adhkn9lt76c

Apart from that, the comparison to Nazi Germany is used in such a sloppy way that it (even if unintended) casualizes the National Socialist ideology. There is a HUGE difference between censoring information regarded as wrong and National Socialism, like bolstering nationalist identity or discrediting and exterminating (or at least attempting to exterminate) other races - just to name a few examples. So for the sake of its danger please do not use it as a buzzword to overemphasize your point.

I can totally see your point there. I wished for Nato to be gone and even tho my view has slightly shifted, I definitely see the criticism. As for political reforms, I mainly back them because they suit my views, but of course that doesn’t necessarily mean they are objectively good. It’s a hard one. I mean, of course: if it was that easy, we probably wouldn’t have heated discussions about it.

And in conflict, truth is what dies first, so my main hope for the future is that the past becomes clearer.

Idk if you will find it ironic, but what I hate most about the war besides people dying is, that I cannot even wear my grandpa’s NVA uniform at Halloween without getting those weird (is he really backing THOSE GUYS) looks. This pigeonhole black-and-white-thinking makes me sick because it splits instead of unifying us in a time where the Far-Right is on the rise.

Oh thanks, I searched if someone had already asked this but I forgot about newpipe & freetube and only searched for piped.

Anyways, thank you so much for your answer and the detailed research you did! ^^

Thanks for your detailed reply and sorry for my belated one.

I definitely do back almost all of the points you made. As I said the USA loves to play devious little diplomatic plays but on the other hand, the way I see it is NATO offering those countries help to stop Russia from using military force to force through their will in what are still independent countries. I certainly do not like how Ukraine is developing in the sense of Nationalism. But the way I see it every aggressive Russian action has further catalyzed it. From Crimea to Donbass up until the SMO and the various crimes against humanity that were committed.

And furthermore I see NATO’s guarantee to the sovereignty of Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia as a way to prevent Russia from executing further military operations in the future.

So for me the blame lies on both sides. With the only reason for not supporting Russia being, that Russia started the war and that Russia’s president can de facto rule for as long as he pleases as long as he gets voted for in a country where the media is heavily cracked upon and where the opposition has the sudden urge to “commit suicide”. And I fear that Russia taking the land they currently hold control of would spark enormous hatred towards Russia just like the partition of Germany, Austria & the Ottoman Empire did after WW1. Actually increasing the tensions further until the conflict reignites.

But I do want to say, that the way you see it is a way it can be seen. I want to thank you for all the effort you put into this instead of just denouncing me. You had some very good points that were likely more convincing than mine, idk I don’t really keep track of that.

I’m not good at this and I don’t really love it that much either which has got nothing to do with you but with me just being the one giving in as soon as someone makes a point that I do not feel the need to counteract.

Discussions with people like you, even if we may not have the same opinion, are the reason I am glad my instance is still federated with you guys because if I didn’t have you, I’d feel trapped in the echo chamber.

Thank you!

What exactly is the problem with 14. this is how it should be. After all, borders shouldn’t be recognised for nothing you know.

69. does indeed highlight the goal of Ukraine becoming an eventual member but it doesn’t state when. They’d certainly need to clarify Crimea first so that Ukraine doesn’t join and trigger Article 5 on Crimea. And as I said, looking at Sweden I’d not be so sure about the if either.

And even if Ukraine became a member state it wouldn’t be that easy to just attack Russia and expect NATO to help. They’re not allowed to trigger Article 5 if they are the aggressor and triggering Article 4 would likely not succeed as the risks of (nuclear) backlash are too high. I am aware that I am making assumptions here, and that this part might vary depending on the picture you have of NATO and their member states but I am certain, that they would not be so stupid to trigger a war that would likely be very unpopular within the populations of the various member states. But that point is overall highly debatable.

Regarding the point about Nato expansion: yes, the fact that it has expanded regardless of that oral treaty is a pity. But on the other hand, why would you so desperately hold on to something that apparently wasn’t even worth making a REAL treaty for. A signed one on paper. You cannot tell me anybody would be naive enough to take something that was orally agreed on without a signed treaty on paper for granted when the last decades have made it clear that sometimes even signed treaties aren’t worth their paper. Of course it’s a move of betrayal for Russia but as I mentioned, the US is good at provoking and oral assurances aren’t exactly something I would trust.

And on the other Hand, Russia hasn’t been that innocent either with a habit of solving disagreements with especially Georgia & Ukraine by using deterrence and the sledgehammer. And fair enough, that Ukraine hasn’t been innocent either. That’s for example why I was pretty neutral / hostile towards both sides before the war began. I especially dislike(d) how badly Ukraine tried and still tries to erase it’s Soviet history.

But (at least for me) that still does not justify the means.

Regarding your last claim: do you have any evidence to back that up? I heard numerous claims that both Russia & Nato got invasion plans for plenty of countries. I read articles (or in that case just their headlines because I thought of them to be absurd) that Russia had concrete plans for attacking Japan and Kazakhstan and what not, and likewise I read these kinda claims from the other side.

But as far as I am concerned these sorts of articles only exist to lure you towards a side and or make quick cash by spreading havoc and hate.

In any case I might call it a day. I need to get some stuff done. Was a nice debate tho. Might reply tomorrow if there’s anything else. Stay safe & healthy my lemmygrader comrades haha.

Regarding the 2nd point I just cannot see it.

Whilst I do admit that the US loves their devious little diplomatic plays I doubt Ukraine would have joined NATO. Take Sweden as an example to showcase how hard it actually is for a country to join the alliance if one country doesn’t play the game. And pre-war Ukraine would likely have faced backlash by more than just one country.

Even during the war when public support in the west for Ukraine was at it’s peak, when asked about if he could concretize what safety guarantees the G7 countries could give to a post-war Ukraine, German chancellor Olaf Scholz just replied: “Yes, I could…” and refused to elaborate further.

And French president Macron once considered NATO as a whole to be “brain dead” and wanted to shift it’s focus away from it. (A view I shared back then)

And now, a few years later NATO is - even by a lot of people who once opposed it - regarded as a safety guarantee with Finland and Sweden joining. So if the plan was to prevent an aggressive NATO expansion towards Russia’s borders that plan failed miserably and at the cost of thousands of civilians and soldiers, the world economics and the environment.

Only the arms industry profits now.

A.k.a. Kbin’s karma system when rexit/fleddit happened

Which leads to reposting, karma whoring, karma requirements and “ThAnK yOu FoR aLl ThE uPvOtEs” comments.

Personally I think the aim should be to have fun (inclusive) or enhance your or someone else’s knowledge and not to brag about how much internet points you have :')

On the other hand, I sometimes like to get lost in account statistics so I’m also not completely against them as long as one sees them as values only and not as some sort of (dick) comparison.

Ah, I went to play Pokémon Unite instead (even tho Nintendo and their Switch & Mobile only approach)… Bluestacks is an option but not a particularly good one…

And then there’s Tencent - but you encounter Tencent kinda everywhere right now so ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

Do I need to explain any further?

Ah my bad, tbh I do know this but I kinda forgot that bc I’m a bit stressed out lately hence my late and hasty replies

Anyways tysm for getting it right ^^

Tru dat, I meant, 1 GB/s or 1000 MB/s.

Thanks for pointing that out ^^

Uhhm, doesn’t one get a router after subscribing to an ISP’s (Interner service provider’s) internet offer? Those always worked for me

Dunno where they’re living but my dad lives in an eastern German “suburb” (which irl is just a 500 ppl village that happens to be within a 15km radius of a bigger city) and gets 1000GB/s through fiber optic whilst paying about 50 EUR. So maybe they meant 1k GB/s, they’re just living in no man’s land or German broadband prices vary dramatically.

Woah, thanks so much for that detailed comment. I really learned a lot today (and my day has barely started yet).

I had to write a small shop web app for my programming finals using C# and Razor pages. I then had an internship where my team and I developed a Blazor app using MudBlazor which was a really cool experience. It was back then when I when I really felt how Firefox and Chromium have their little differences since I developed it using Firefox and it was broken on Chromium.

I’ve since not done much tho because I’ve focused more on the networking path but that info was really exciting me to try setting that up on my test project just for fun ^-^

Tbh, I don’t use that many plugins either. Besides U-Block I got:

Plasma Integration so I can search bookmarks via KRunner;

Dark Reader because I don’t like bright colours;

Gesturify because I love mouse gestures;

Some translator (I’ve forgotten their name)

Simple Tab Groups to stay organized;

Progressive Web Apps for Firefox (but I’m currently testing which plugin works best)

Honorable mention: Tab Discard, which I used to have but Firefox kinda has something similar now (or at least Floorp has, they also got their own Workspaces so I also don’t need STG any more)

Oh, cool. I’ve barely scratched the surface on that topic, therefore I got a few more questions concerning PWA and Electron apps:

Are PWAs “only” websites that are shown as an app or do they have features that would distinct them from “normal websites”?

Can PWAs reserve disk space for offline downloads for example (Spotify has got a PWA but that one is mainly their website shown as an app). And I probably can’t install a listener via PWA like Discord does for their Rich Presence, can I?

I expect the last one to be a no because that’s probably not what you’d use a PWA for as far as I understand, but I’m especially interested about the first question