Yeah, they should lock them both, just to be on the safe side.

but likely just a useful idiot for the people in charge

that’s little bit too harsh. the authors of the article write general news, they do not specialize in technology, and it is pretty clear none of them is gamer (i suspect that telegraph correspondent to united states doesn’t have much free time to waste on gaming 😂).

so while that paragraph is stupid to the degree where it is bordering on funny, i am not looking for malicious intent behind it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor

This is how modern propaganda works.

maybe it is modern propaganda, maybe the author is just incompetent moron trying to get as much clicks as possible 😔

Discord servers are restricted ring-fenced sections of the internet. They are often used by gaming groups and communities as secure chat rooms but are also used by fringe organisations to push their ideologies and discuss wild conspiracy theories and plots.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/07/14/matthew-crooks-shooting-assasination-attempt-suspect/

first of all, admin of some random discord server is something else than discord admin, but that wouldn’t give such nice tabloid headline…

i see an issue with technical manuals as well. i am not native english speaker and whenever some android app decides to machine translate itself to my native language, it is a fucking disaster. some words can be translated in multiple ways depending on context and guess what is missing when translating stuff like app menus? that’s right.

it is not “replace human professional” cool.

try to bury it in some rice first

Yes if China was like 2 billion Americans you’d have a point I guess.

if chinese were significantly different from any other people anywhere in history of the world, you might have a point. it is about as likely as kamala winning the race now.

A big portion of every country is rural

no, big portion of every country is not rural.

also note we are not talking about rural in a sense of geography. we are talking about rural in a sense of what we in europe or us would call living in a medieval conditions.

for example, there is 231 registered cars in china compared to 850 in us.

in 2000, 57% of chinese had access to clean drinking water and toilet. by 2020 that number rose to respectable 92%.

now when these people finally have access to toilet, they will want a car and maybe a roof over their head that is made out of concrete instead of bamboo.

lets see how it will affect their emissions per capita.

China is still largely a manufacturing economy

and will be for some time, before their citizens will get to western living standard, by which time their emissions will be somewhere else than they are today.

They’ve built more rail transit in recent years than the United States has even attempted.

well, united states have 1 km of railways per 1522 people, compared to chinese 8865, so it is easy to see why one of them may be in bigger rush to build more.

here is kinda interesting and unfortunate that according to table historical peek for us was 400k km of tracks in 1917, which is about 100% more than they have now, so, probably thanks to the car culture, they let lot of them rot.

Their EV market share is significantly higher.

yes, they do better here. it is the nature of the beast, if country has almost no cars and is getting richer, it is only logical that some of the new cars will be electrical, compared to country where people already have a car and often not so much disposable income to buy new car when the old one is still working, plus there is of course some inertia.

it is 38% / 23% / 9.5% market share of newly bought cars for china/eu/us.

that also means that 62% of cars sold in china is not electric. and 72% of electricity for these ev cars comes from non-renewable sources.

they are missing about 900 million cars to get to same car penetration as us. so lets wait until they get there and see what it does with their emissions 😂

Seems the only thing you learned in school is blind nationalism

of course. because why else would someone disagree with your genius? i am not an american, as you probably think, you clown.

True I should thank you for teaching me that per capita statistics are useless for comparing nations.

any single piece of statistic presented without context can be used to manipulate, as you did in this case, knowingly or not.

when you have big part of country that is rural and don’t participate in generating the emissions and profiting from them, then including them in the total count to artificially decrease final per capita number is just manipulation.

these people living in rural areas will ultimately also want to participate in the booming economy, it is just a matter of time. so it is better to look at trends rather than some number fixed in time. and how does the trend look like?

You should go public with this information

oh don’t worry, it is public information, they teach it in schools.

dude you’re such a huge asshole.

the other party is such an asshole! they presented facts! how dare they?!?!?!?

you should take deep breath, this mental breakdown can’t be good for you.

i know. when facts are against you, all you can do is shout loudly while you are leaving. bon voyage.

can you even read?

How is it appropriate to make comparisons between nations without normalizing for the population?

when you have big part of country that is rural and don’t participate in generating the emissions and profiting from them, then including them in the total count to artificially decrease final per capita number is just manipulation.

but my point here was you carefully selected one graph and presented it without context to support incorrect conclusion. but you know that, right?

Frankly, accusing me of manipulation makes me no longer care what you have to say. You can fuck off.

so you have no rebuttal to graphs i showed you, so you are suddenly not talking to me. that’s understandable, whatever exit strategy works for you, clown…

well hello there, chinese intelligence officer.

we in the western civilization are usually getting paid for our work and don’t consider that as discreditation of said work. also, the author of the book, is, among others, researcher at Harvard, so he is the literal scientist.

Michael Pillsbury is the director of the Center on Chinese Strategy at the Hudson Institute and has served in presidential administrations from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama. Educated at Stanford and Columbia Universities, he is a former analyst at the RAND Corporation and research fellow at Harvard and has served in senior positions in the Defense Department and on the staff of four U.S. Senate committees. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He lives in Washington, D.C.

oh, cool. manipulation by carefully selecting statistisc that will support my theory 😂

first, there is a lot more to “being good/better for the world” than co2 emissions per capita.

with that out of hand, lets look at few others, shall we?

https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/china

ok educate me

here, educate yourself: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20696000-the-hundred-year-marathon

Does the argument extend beyond China bad?

when your argument is “china good”, then “china bad” absolutely is valid rebuttal.

China is objectively better for the world right now.

lol

Anyone who cared about climate and voted for him

i think that intersection is very small.