*Technically* they were engineered from the ground up to send a small projectile as far as possible using a chemical reaction.
I’m referring to this bit: they are not technically engineered to simply shoot a projectile. They are engineered for a specific purpose, which is to kill people. Your comment sounds like you want to downplay the role of requirements in the engineering process, like a lot of people here do.
You don’t know the first thing about requirements engineering. Technically, these assault rifles are primarily designed to kill/injure people, it’s 100% part of the stakeholder/requirements analysis in their systems engineering workflow.
An airliner is not designed to fly through the air. It’s designed to transport people and cargo from A to B within a given amount of time. Flying is just a means to achieve it.
There’s no shortage of resources available from feminists, trans advocates and medical professionals online
If they’re so abundant and easy to find, then why not simply share them? You can also link the other posts that explain your position.
confidently spread their harmful ignorance
If he has such an uninformed position, it should be very easy to defend against it instead of wasting everyone’s time by making ad hominem attacks? Maybe we can make the internet a better place by not spewing toxic abuse even if one feels attacked by an opinion, no matter how uninformed it is?
You are defending your ideology in the worst way possible, and believe me when I say this, but you will never convince anyone beyond your closed bubble of why we need to move forward as a society this way.
How about you try to enlighten him then, instead of throwing verbal abuse at him. He stated his opinion and you are free to debate him on that.
The fact that he gets attacked like this for his opinion is why I don’t engage in these discussions. Your kind of reaction will lose all support for your cause.
One of the funniest scenes in internet history.
A fully planned system has also shown to become highly inefficient
Nobody was arguing that.
I don’t think you understand what actually is meant by the term “capitalism”. Capitalism does not mean free markets. Capitalism primarily means the ownership of the means of production in private hands. You can come up with a system which is highly regulated, to some degree even planned, which can still be considered capitalistic.
On the other hand, it is easy to imagine a socialist system whose economy consist solely of companies fully owned by the people that work there, i.e. the workers, while the companies themselves engage in a competitive and free market. It would be just like today, except workers have a say in who leads the organization, and how, in a democratic process.
In short capitalism != free market and vice versa.
Hamas wouldn’t be necessary if they stopped treating Palestinians like animals.
I was merely pointing out the fact that your no-effort comment above contributed absolutely nothing to the conversation.
That said, I’m not against nuclear power per se. However, given the fact that we need to cut down on CO2 asap, while at the same time there is a clear lack of available resources to build/research/develop every possible tech at the same time, I find it quite delusional to still push for nuclear when we can use those resources to expand on wind/solar even more aggressively.
In the case of France, the corporation running nuclear power is almost 70 BILLION Euros in debt, while expecting costs upward of additional 50 BILLION Euros for 6 more reactors…numbers that you know will skyrocket once construction begins. That nuclear plant that will be finished next year will produce the most expensive kwh in Frances history. Great outlook! Much convince.
Pretty much everything OP said is backed up by mountains of evidence, especially in the case of France. Looking it up is trivial. Without proving anything to the contrary, your own comment is lazy and useless to this conversation.
So if you’re Russian, sure, go for it!
What a very intelligent take.
That’s kidnapping!
Shitty opinions are not facts.
Grammar*
such as not trying to conquer the world
Imagine being so deluded as to try to frame the largest country on earth, Russia, as the victim here. How, according to your world view, have they become so big? Did the now-Russian ethnic minorities simply surrender their lands to be taken over by some Slavs in Moscow?
Honestly, you need to have a 10 minute conversation with a Russian to understand how utterly brainwashed they are. The majority of the Russians are rooting for an imperialist fashist.
Okay, that escalated quickly…
Why would it get shut down?
False (and stupid) dichotomy.
I’m German of Russian descent and I’ve been hearing this slur since I was a child, but I only understood the meaning once the Russians invaded. It’s very commonly used among Russians, unfortunately. Fuck em.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
Another one of those Schrödinger’s jokes.