For anyone wondering whether to click: yes, the article is very critical of this and gives a lot of space to experts who think that this is an absolutely terrible idea. I think the value here is in knowing what the oil industry tries to do and how they try to lie to justify their crimes.

The tweet that seemed to be bootlicking Trump was worrying and troubling in my opinion as well. However, reading this deeper analysis alleviated at least some of my fears https://medium.com/...

Also the foundation model decisively limits the influence of the founder. There seems to be no other European email service that's quite on par with Proton. Therefore I still think they are the top alternative.

This article begins from commendable principles of self-determination and anti-imperialism, but it reads strange omitting all the context of the long-ongoing polling and talk about Greenlandish independence from Denmark. It doesn't say a thing about what the people of Greenland, and the indigenous population want.

I agree on the point of not ignoring these feelings. It's a tough question, how to change the culture to be more welcoming to immigration in the time of looming climate refugee crises. Just wanted to point out that Sweden has a lower population density (26 ppl/km2) than the US (38 ppl/km2). Density is probably not the issue, although how all that land is put to use might be one of them.

I love to cheer for linux (Fedora user here 😎) but the math and logic in the blog post is off. Firstly, the linux desktop-share for US government websites is much higher, because to calculate it, you have to exclude iOS and Android. But then again, the data may be skewed and linux-users may just be much more prominent visitors of US government websites. I think this sounds credible as many linux users are technically apt and active citizens.

Nevertheless, if the trend is true it is encouraging! Cannot verify because analytics.usa.gov only provides data a calendar year into the past by default and I can't be bothered to get an api key to see if more can be fetched.

The real desktop linux share for the last 30 days can be calculated:

windows = 33.2

macos = 11.6

linux = 6.9

linux / (windows + macos + linux) = 0.13346228

That was amazingly witty, ingeniously highlighted the euro-anglocentricity of western media

Sincerely, great work there! Let's all become leftists that do something.

Thanks for sharing! A great, informative and concise piece, with a lot of learning points for co-operatives.

While a tempting logic, in my understanding of the dairy market this is not correct. To my knowledge, here in Finland the big retail chains initiate auctions for the milk contracts, which are highly competed. If a producer tries to raise the price, they will likely not sell any milk at all. On top of that, milk is an important loss leader for the retail chains. The price is kept as low as possible, and it might even be sold at a loss, to tempt customers who will then compensate for this loss with the rest of their shopping basket. Against this, it would be very incorrect to assume that nobody bats an eye if the price of milk increases ten cents.

"Shell" in this case is somewhat misleading, since in Finland the local St1 energy company has bought the license to use the Shell brand for fuel stations ages ago, but there are no actual Shell stations. Thankfully, as Shell are some of the worst climate criminals, and in comparison St1 are not quite as bad. I would even change the headline, not to give Shell any undue credit.

I am also concerned of AI-slop, so thanks for sharing. However, I do not think the headline here does justice to the article. There is a more interesting message in there. First of all, the study concerned new content, not all of the internet. Second, and more important, the researchers seemed to have found some kind of a saturation point for AI slop, where it's share of new content was not rising anymore. I think it would be crucial to understand the mechanisms behind this current limitation of AI slop, and whether they could be utilized to combat AI slop in the future.

I hope so. Although I'm not sure whether it is solarpunk or some other term under which the ideas will be popularized (eg. degrowth, eco-socialism, minor paradise, doughnut economy, ecological civilization). But I find it likely that solarpunk will be packaged together with communism, as communism, by the right. And demonized.

It has some interesting stuff in it, even though it's of course very USA-focused. I remember Ajay Singh Chaudhary destroying Matt Huber for the productivist ideas in his book, which do not respect the material reality of the ecocrisis. The above piece takes no position on questions of reducing consumption and production either. But this bit I'll try to memorize:

One of the most frustrating aspects of climate politics today is that it is arguably the Right that mobilizes class politics most effectively on this issue. Right-wing politicians consistently argue climate action is a plot of the liberal elite to harm the lives of average working-class families with rising energy costs and lost jobs. On the other hand, liberal activists often make climate change about everything but class — “Believe Science” — and sometimes advocating policies like carbon taxes that would raise the price of energy (affirming precisely what the Right warns against).

Same. I've used Gnome, KDE and XFCE (and OS X and Windows) and Gnome is my clear favourite. Claiming that their decisions don't make sense is clearly false if it works so well for so many.

Based on the text I would not consider it a functional degrowth economy. What they have so far is the payment system, and some promising emerging use for it. But a great initiative and a great read anyway.

This is great news. I'm deeply ashamed for the government of my country for opposing it, but super relieved that it passed! Thank you Austrian campaigners! Even though it got substantially weakened during the negotiation process:( I doubt it's enough to combat biodiversity loss in Europe, but it's a big and direly needed step.

Important discussion! Not sure whether the writer assumes too many degrees of freedom for American Imperialism, but in general this was a refreshing and balancing read in the leftist discussion. I do think American Empire needs to decline/disperse/break down for the world to have a chance at a less catastrophic future, but I nevertheless liked his providing an alternative view to "nothing can change unless everything changes".

Clarence Kennedy

I think that the everyday material concerns are indeed key, and there might be some fairly "easy" victories in the fields of affordable energy, housing and public transport. However, I think there is a real clash between the current desire of the working classes to accelerate their consumerist lifestyles, and the ecological boundaries. For all their sins, the predicament is not just the fossil fuel industry being evil, it's bigger than that. Getting the obvious things sorted out is a beginning in the right direction, but actual sustainability requires a deeper change of orientation.

I don't believe we'll get very far in this transition in the next decades unless we begin to break capital's control on all the essential aspects of our lives. The accumulation of capital would continue to drive the resource allocation, the political system and the meaning we grant our own existence, to the detriment of life upholding earth systems and the majorities of the world. And there will be no political consciousness to break the control of capital in a consumerist society where people are estranged from how life is recreated and upheld, where democracy means just voting in an election and where work is done just in exchange for a paycheck.

How can this begin to change? Heron, Millburn and Russel have one pretty convincing proposal and example in their book Radical Abundance. An intentionally designed institution that brings workers, local communities and the public sector together to deliberate on and control matters of production and consumption that are directly relevant to the participants.

The best part? It does not require prior legislative or electoral victories to start building these kind of institutions. It would directly counter some growth dependencies. Ideological motivations are not assumed to be the driver of participation. The hardest part? To get people involved and organized of course. But it starts from seeing the promise in this kind of action.

While there are so many different tracks of action required, this is one with great promise, that I've seen too little discussion and action on.

https://fojournal.org/interview/radical-abundance/

Good comment. I think one potential audience would be people who (like myself) want to work in the intersections of activism, research and politics. It's not a huge demographic, but I think it's a demographic that should take it up as one of their tasks to create more popularized narratives based on this kind of research. Also a demographic that is likely overrepresented here. The abstraction is there, but I still think it's one of the most motivating research papers I've read in a while.