Living in a city with many bicycle lanes along major streets, the toxicity of exhaust gases worries me and doesn’t come as a surprise. Sucks that most people don’t know or care about that
I do feel many of these nations should just straight up rent ports and such to China instead of taking the loans, in exchange for a lump sum payment, with restrictions for military use/limitations, and usage in support of war.
Might not get quite as much money, but seems far more favorable than the outcomes of belt-and-road loans (not just in the unlikelihood of debt repayment, but how the funding is used [vendor/company restrictions]).
This was the entire point. If you loan out money that immediately gets paid to construction firms you own, you’re effectively just charging people (with interest) to be neocolonialized.
I’m glad to see this discussion starting gathering attention. In general, I think we should start looking more and more at car sharing over car owning: nobody needs an SUV every day, but you might enjoy a longer trip driving one. So short term rental should be incentivized to decrease the overall number of cars on the road and parking lots.
Not Australian, but looking through the proposal, it seemed pretty basic. It’s pretty sad that even a relatively toothless measure like this couldn’t pass. Though I’m definitely not throwing stones, I’m in America.
And, frankly, without conservatives in general. They’re an existential threat, starting from the fact that they’re opposed to doing anything about climate change (well anything that doesn’t make it worse, anyhow), not to mention that a nontrivial percentage of them would love to see me and others like me murdered because of our gender identity
At this point I suspect it's a new scam. These people are clearly deliberately not paying their lawyers. Once the lawyers are done, they move on to new ones.
I'm wondering whether the lawyers are complicit – I guess not. But I honestly have no idea whether Trump & co. are generating profits through this scheme.
Edit: so, one way to establish a scam in this way is for the lawyers to demonstrate how they'd defend other conservatives. By defending people around Trump, these lawyers, for example, might be introduced to potential conservative clients. When they find enough clients they call it a day, and cancel the contract with the powerful people who don't pay them.
So maybe they are only performing token work at the moment? Handing in documents late, not bothering to read evidence etc
That is brilliant actually.
Most lawyers do the minimum work possible anyhow in my experience — have ditched four so far.
The very first one failed to write the letter he promised and yet billed me for our one hour meeting (where he failed to disclose costs). I naively thought he was an anomaly. I did win my case with my fifth lawyer eventually.
Lets get 1 thing straight, no he most likely didnt invent this, a team at 3M did. You always see these stories about rich kids and how they did this amazing thing while at their internship where their dad is the lab manager/owner when in reality these companies just wanted a poster child who was just some intern that is still learning about what titration means. I would bet that the extent of this kids biochemistry knowledge is that mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell.
I stayed at a holiday inn last night thats how I know. Do you really need proof that a 12 year old in middle school figured something out that people with PhDs have not done?
If this kid did anything other than throw shit at the wall then ill deliver a video of me eating my entire stack of textbooks from college.
Considering I know someone, personally, who also made a scientific advancement at a young age, yes, it is possible.
They taught themselves python, then how to inference and train machine learning models, then used image recognition models to detect their sister’s illness, which had visual signs.
They had to get help from someone with a phd to test this on a larger scale, cuz resources, but I absolutely believe a middle/high schooler could do it.
If you read the article, you’ll realize that he didn’t invent the active components that fight cancer. He invented a new vehicle to deliver such components - the soap.
For all intents and purposes, the headline is accurate. He invented the soap to treat skin cancer.
Little Bobby invents a robot that can peel potatoes. Will you say that little Bobby didn’t really do anything because he didn’t invent robots, blades or potatoes?
Little Bobby had an idea for a potato peeling robot and then somebody else took his idea and actually made it while Bobby is still daydreaming about it.
Will you say little Bobby invented a new kind of robot?
while you may not like the example, the truth is a lot of these types of things required organizations and teams to develop (modern word for invent, because I have had interactions with people that illiterate), but that doesn’t fit in the popular narrative of the genius inventor who through hard work and determination made the world better and got rich for it.
I dressed up as Darth Vader and took my kids out. It was popular. I had several kids assure me they were on the side of the Empire. Then when they got past me, they were like, “I’m really a Jedi,” and run away. It was a good time other than I was completely blind. I couldn’t have chased those little younglings down if I’d wanted.
Anyway what were we talking about? Broke dipshits who chose irrelevance when they had the option of being rich and silent? Meh.
Mods appears to be flexible with rule and take gentler approach when it’s not abuse. That’s a good approach.
The line can be blurry between US News that’s relevant at the local/national level and fit better within c/usnews, and relevant globally and may fit better in c/worldnews readers. Here I’d argue it’s the former.
theguardian.com
Active