No it’s real simple, you lot act like these big tech companies are evil personified but happily look the other way or hand out whataboutism like candy when it is some group, institution or ideology you support doing the same or even more fucked up shit.
Bunch of delusional fanatics.
Are you seriously comparing systemic rape and abuse to your “big company bad” ideology?
That’s fucked up.
I mean did you read what I wrote or did you just go into fanboy mode?
Firstly, Hunter was not the first person to write an opinion piece, or to write from the perspective of the subject. So “inventing” gonzo journalism? What the fuck does that even mean.
I like his style of writing, but it is commentary. Not journalism.
Literally the name journalism gives you insight as to what the approach of writing is meant to be. A journal is a series of entries in a book denoting objective facts. Commentary on one’s experiences is called a dairy.
I can’t discount your point of view. But I disagree with it.
Hunter S, while awesome, was not a journalist. He was a commentator. He injected his perspective into his writing. That isn’t journalism, that is commentary.
Do we want this to be the equivalent of editorials?
That’s basically all media these days and look how fucked they are.
I’m not asking for it to be peer reviewed, that also sucks based on the current view of the “publish or die” culture of academia.
I have no easy answers. I only have questions and counterpoints.
I’m not saying RS is irrelevant. But it is still not academic papers. As much as they piss me off.
I don’t disagree with your point that he was just a symptom of an underlying problem.
Problems are pretty nuanced when discussing systemic issues.
People, ideology, beliefs… These are all small parts but together they make a big picture.
All I really want is that people think at a multidimensional level.
Oh fuck off he was responsible for the death of millions of people. That’s such bullshit I already feel dirty just asking for some sources.
You are going to give me an IamRight link to support your claim, I’m going to post a rebuttal showing I can prove Aliens rule the earth because “here is a webink” and then you are going to dismiss me with some cliche bullshit about “hurr durr sheeples, troll, shill” argument.
So let’s cut the crap. Your agenda is to support the narrative of the populists, and my agenda is to argue against binary arguments.
Can we move on now?
Remind me when this guy commanded troops?
I must have missed that part in history lessons. Unless you are saying that all advisors to the leadership are responsible for the leaders actions.
Well actually those who continue it as well right, for example every US president since Roosevelt.
Hang on, let’s start the list, please feel free to add to it; Stephen Hadley, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell…
Yawn, not really interested in your dismissal. I wanted to ask that we have a News channel without an opinion comment in the headlines.
But you don’t want that so let’s go.
To quote you Kissenger was responsible for “millions of deaths”, and lived his last days “Like Hitler living out his days…”
So source for Kissenger killing millions? You mean he was an advisor during Reagon? So Bush is not responsible for Iraq? Only his advisors? Get fucked!
Kissenger fled NAZI GERMANY at 15 with his family to the US, then drafted in 1943 to fight the Nazis. Something none of us know about.
The guy was not a saint. But you want to inject your view in a news thread and I just showed you a counter point. So go on and double down you dismissive prat.
So you counter an inflammatory title with hyperbole. In 2021, in just Afghanistan, 14 percent of people killed were women and children.
In Palestine people are dying daily. In Ukraine they are fighting against a mad man… So on and so forth.
But here is a guy who for over 40 years has been out of the power structure, has no influence and dies when most of the grips you lot claim happened before you were born, but you have a massive hardon for him.
Must be nice to fight against a problem that doesn’t exist.
If you are going to have a news thread and allow opinionated titles, that means your community supports political commentary headlines and not factual news.
The titles should be nothing other than neural summaries.
“Henry Kissenger died at age 100, He was a controversial figure in American politics”. That’s a factual title.
The published title of this post is opinionated commentary and not factual news posting.
EDIT: You won’t even support the idea of non-bias news posts. And you expect to be taken seriously. Fucking shaking my head right now.
They could, but that is expensive and a large tower doesn’t hold much water when compared to a dam. Also the force of that water would require an extremely strong structure.
Most of the water battery solutions use natural formations to contain the water at higher elevations for storage.
I was referring to the comment that transoceanic electrical transmission is too expensive and impractical.
In the case of the NT - Singapore project, it is probably the most practical and cost effective option IF solar is the way they want to go.
That’s possible. You will still need to have the generation somewhere, and if you are going solar then the Northern Territory is an ideal location as it has very little rain and abundance of sunshine.
I’m not suggesting your idea is invalidated by the example I give. I’m simply pointing out that in this example, transoceanic electrical transmission isn’t a bad idea.
When all things are considered in this specific example. The infrastructure cost is outweighed by the impracticality of Singapore generating solar energy.
I’ll assume you are unfamiliar with the size of Singapore and the geography of the Northern Territory.
Singapore lacks the space for pumped storage. Singapore’s density is 8592 per square kilometre. Compare this to India at only 481 or the US at 37.
The Northern Territory in Australia is extremely flat and extremely arid, as such it lacks the topography to build water storage and the water required for it.
deleted by creator
Cosmic’s argument is pretty simple actually. They support Argentinian claims to the Falklands and everything is irrelevant.
I have watch this arseclown post links that don’t actually support their claim, misrepresented the content of those links and just argue in bad faith because they want to prove their point and not debate the facts.
It is literally in the Wikipedia sources you keep using that you claim to have read.
So we will put that claim to have read the article down as another in your long line of fabrications.
That’s literally like saying Victorinox helps support crime because people who commit crime sometimes use knives.
You are literally washing over the fact that this atrocity was fuelled and perpetrated by religious fanatics and corrupted governments.
Literally the only part which speaks about Facebook is that “social media may have helped spread the violent message” and that Facebook refused to share user data with investigators. Which without a warrant is standard practice.
You are doing the equivalent of putting pictures on a board and drawing strings between them.