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/)S

sistarena

@ sistarena @lemm.ee

Posts
0
Comments
8
Joined
12 mo. ago

  • Oxford Professor: Cycling is 10 times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

    Jump

  • Yeah it’s a Bianchi Europa. I guess the downtube shifters are bearable for me if I’m not racing. Especially since if it gets stolen I only lose $200. And I guess the $200 of work I put into it for funsies lol.

  • Oxford Professor: Cycling is 10 times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

    Jump

  • I’m an avid cyclist and I would never spend 10k on a bike. For my nice favorite bike it was $2500. I commute on a vintage road bike and it works great, it was $200 on fb marketplace.

  • Oxford Professor: Cycling is 10 times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

    Jump

  • This is exactly the problem that urban planning is meant to solve. Our specific US problem may not have been solved YET but that doesn’t mean it can’t be. As an engineer, one of our sayings is “anything can be engineered, it just depends on how much money you have”. So for this problem, it’s more about our communal values: if we decide as a community to value public transit and pedestrian friendly urban planning, we put our community funds in those areas instead of centering cars.

  • Oxford Professor: Cycling is 10 times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

    Jump

  • Yeah I see this problem too. I wonder if it might be a zoning issue. I think right now in the US in these areas we have suburban “centers” with Costco’s, Lowe’s, etc. and strip malls. All which require huge large parking areas. How would it look to provide people what they need, without the detrimental effects of car centered land use?

  • The world reacts to Trump's sweeping tariffs: 'No basis in logic'

    Jump

  • Heather Cox Richardson, historian of the republican (Lincoln) party said that in her daily newsletter. She cites all her sources.

  • Donald Trump Says 'Nasty' Canada 'Meant To Be 51st State'

    Jump

  • Average Americans don’t want to fight Canada and if they were forced to they would resist every way they could. However, MAGA’s are extremely susceptible to propaganda and if Trumps administration is serious about invading Canada they would turn up the propaganda machine. This interview is propaganda, so the start of that. I don’t think a majority of Americans would ever want to fight Canada, especially since it’s so clear America is the aggressor. It’s also possible Trump and Musk will implode their administration before they can change public opinion enough for it to be feasible.

  • Donald Trump Says 'Nasty' Canada 'Meant To Be 51st State'

    Jump

  • I haven’t seen anyone talk about this and I think it needs to be considered. When considering this clip, consider how trumps supporters will see it.

    What we know about Trump supporters:

    • trumps supporters have turned off their critical thinking skills
    • Many of them have below an 8th grade reading level
    • They always have Fox News or another right wing news source turned on - they are addicted to it
    • They already like and trust Trump, and believe him to be some kind of mastermind
    • They are not a majority, but there is a concerning amount of them

    That means what they will get from this clip is:

    • Canada should have already belonged to the US
    • The US has a right to Canada
    • Because trump called Canadians “nasty”, there is a reason to invade Canada, and Canadians deserve it
    • Canada has a lot of resources that the US can use.

    To most people, Trump sounds like an imbecile, but to his supporters, he sounds like he knows what he’s talking about, I personally think he feeds them reasons to be upset without actually making any logical arguments. We all can see that but his supporters can’t. What I’m trying to get at is MAGA’s public opinions about Canada will change because of this interview. This isn’t just bumbling Trump giving a bizarre interview, it’s intentional propaganda to change his viewers’ allegiances.