this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
615 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

59672 readers
2920 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 another!
  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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I'll only eat you if you're rich.

The person in question didn't argue against green energy, they argued for local European solar industry. While one of the consequences in this case could be Europe being able to install less solar, this is something to introduce in your counterargument, highlighting the consequences.

Being hostile drives people away, and this particular commenter is probably not a decision-maker in European solar, so you're not missing anything if you kindly introduce an alternative point of view. It is politicians in office that we should pressure, as they have something real to lose when we don't support them. Shitting on regular people, on the other hand, will simply get your opinion ignored.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Language policing is a common tactic by bad faith actors, especially when their argument is falling apart.

Fuck local industry. China is churning out record numbers of solar panels, eating most of the costs themselves, and we’re going to try to ban the imports and pretend we have the time to build up local manufacturing?!

The building is on fire, and you people are too busy worrying about the language of people urgently pleading to bring in the water from outside, and concerned about how it’ll affect the profits of the local water source.

Absolutely psychotic.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I outline the very same arguments as you in the same thread - and on the substance, I 100% agree. The question is to form, and it is more important than what you make it out to be.

The reason I talk about the way you express your concern is because the more we yell at each other and try to "expose" each other acting in bad faith, the more division grows between people and the harder it gets to actually convince anybody of anything. Anger and unfounded blame game repels, not convinces.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I’m not trying to convince anyone. If the climate science hasn’t convinced you yet, nothing will, and I want to repel you to tell you to get out of the fucking way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This never was about climate science, no one denies it here. And it's sad to see you take a stance that puts your emotions above any actual productivity. But alas.