this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
608 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

61227 readers
4363 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] glimse@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

[edit] don't upvote me, read their reply. They clarified their argument and I was wrong

I feel like you agree with the person you're replying to but don't see it.

You hate when people/media describes it as a winnable scenario. They are saying that the chart misrepresenting energy gives people the impression that the "fight" is almost "won" and the government has it covered - no need to keep it part of the conversation.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Kinda, but I'm frustrated with both sides of the argument. There is a cohort of very online people at the ready to clarify how whatever initiative or proposal is "not it" or "greenwashing" and will not "fix" things.

The activist argument is not so much that this is an ongoing thing we're going to be considering forever, it's that this or that solution is a corporate trap or a fake solution or whatever else. Often there isn't even an agreement on what the "real" answer is supposed to be, just a willingness to be the savvy, jaded one that calls out the latest snake oil handwavy solution.

So yeah, we probably don't disagree on the first part, but that post really tickled my sensitivity to the second part.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Fair enough! Thanks for elaborating.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 1 points 3 weeks ago

For the record, see the guy's response below for exactly what I'm talking about.

[–] nexusband@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

t’s that this or that solution is a corporate trap or a fake solution or whatever else.

Or on the other hand "the ultimate solution to all problems". There are a number of solutions to cut emissions, giving people options is what makes the difference. Also, simply cutting emissions isn't enough in many cases but get's painted as "the solution".