Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)N
Posts
0
Comments
276
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • In reality only a small part of crypto could be the classified as scams. I know that's the main crypto narrative on lemmy, but there is nowhere near much of scams as talked about here.

  • I'm surprised you didn't get downvoted for this kind of post.

  • You are making things up, attacking a straw man . Why?

  • In on the part of the curve where im saving time because I'm using it.

  • As it is right now I agree. Except for the crypto part. Crypto I think is even more specific - as the solution in search of the problem. Ai already is capable to replace some existing problems. Cramming it into everything is more like . com than crypto I think. There is potential there. There is. It just seems stupid at this point.

  • I can tell you as a Web designer, that even now it's crazy useful. It will only take a bit to take it over the edge to be revolutionary. And no one will be able to ignore it. Not even the brands that are riding the Anti wave now.

  • I mostly played 2. It was simpler and had a lot of action. Later games became more tedious, I didn't think the advancements in diplomacy and other stuff were good enough to displace that.

    On the other hand I never really wanted the games to end. Whenever I would get close to the end I would start playing in a way to delay the end.

  • Just until it get a bit better, then everybody will be on the train again.

  • I'm so excited! Will it not suck completely? Maybe!

  • Yes, well phrased. All though I think there was hope. There is always hope, but none of the deciders care or have cared.

  • Absolutely, but if you ask climate scientists, in private, what they think the numbers are saying, they will tell you a very different story.

  • I don't want to go into specific predictions because there are too many. But generally, scientists are very conservative with their predictions, because they don't want to lose grants. It's safe to hide behind numbers and give low estimates.

  • Well, that's not entirely true is it. This territory is not known to have been a place missiles. Plus, Ukraine will not be able to take enough land to even make it a buffer zone for artillery, let alone missiles.

    This land is a liability. You need many troops to defend it that could be somewhere else. That's a fact. The is only a question Wether the pros outweigh the cons.

    Of course we don't know more than Ukrainian commands. We are speculating and talking. But they make mistakes as well. In war there is a game of probabilities and risks.

  • Maybe it's because climate scientists have been underestimating effects for decades so they didn't lose grants for looking alarmist.

  • In this case it's just words. Russians know they are invading foreign lands.

  • Nato would completely overwhelm Russia, but not before nukes would fly from various places and hit major cities in the western world. In the retaliation, all of Russia would be destroyed, world in turmoil...

  • 99%? Source?

    My point was that it's usually not malicious, definitely not to warrant walking over someones car.

  • I didn't know that. Can you recommend an article or something about that?

  • You can frame it like that or you could frame it that life saving weapons are provided while wrapping financing into something the countries can digest.