It's frustrating because this government didn't make up the name. This is a well understood system. By calling it by the typical name it should be easier for people to look into it understand it.
But so many people lack the ability to look into things and instead just listen to what politicians say.
But of course none of that matters these days. ๐
I certainly don't think I can tell the difference in every case.
But the most basic validation (is this a creditable source, does it reference creditable sources) is really a good starting point.
This post doesn't pass either of those.
There are more advanced techniques that can be used to fact check after that. But as a general rule (unless you really enjoy fact checking), if you're not reading an official source and what you're reading isn't referencing an official source, it's likely not worth giving any weight to.
Where there's smoke, there's a good chance there's a fire!
The trouble is, it's often just fog. And at somepoint you need to start recognizing the difference ๐
What on earth even is this. A whole lot of words, not a single source.
The site it is posted to is blogging site that anyone can post to.
Why would anyone try to pass this post off as official?
Sounds like a good incentive for them to implement the carbon capture they are so obsessed with.
I also hate every part of this and will turn it off as soon as it shows up.
But in terms of who actually wants this. If an AI assistant were to exist, and if it was actually going to be useful to someone, it would need to know just about everything in your life. At least in theory... In order for an assistant to be useful you would want to be able to ask it "what was Italian restaurant I was thinking of trying" and you would want a response.
I'm not sure this privacy nightmare of an implementation is the correct path to that, but that's roughly what I suspect the desired outcome is.
There already aren't gas stations in these remote locations. Why would there need to be EV chargers??
The thought of having rail service small campsites is comical.
If we did move to a world where cities are dense enough that public transit did replace cars for most people, cars would still be a viable rental for when leaving the city.
It's wild seeing you talk about dogma, then show how far down the rabbit hole you are. You talk about data, but never have anything to back it up. You ignore any data anyhow shares to you and retort with your own opinions. It's so tiring.
Like I said originaly I only commented to help other people not fall down the same missinfomation spiral you have.
I hesitate asking you for a source on what Russias new revenue streams are.
GDP isn't the same as revenue maybe that's what you're thinking?
Russian oil production is down since 2019.
It also feels like a stretch to assume you're being downvoted for dogma related things when at this point that's are multiple comments explaining how this post is misleading, this graph could be used as part of a larger argument, but as is it can't be used as a conclusion.
Whoa there. You can't be applying context to these images, it changes the message they were trying push.
The post in this case isn't even creded let alone creditable.
Things like the NYT and Washington Post are only creditable in the sense they link to their sources when they can, and when they can't they can stand behind their reputation because they do share sources when they can.
But a single source isn't enough to suggest that something is true. You as a reader need to be reading multiple sources and angles onbthebsake topic to get a healthy view on it, but those sources can't be mostly opinion pieces (which is all you post).
An opinion piece in the NYT or Washington Post is just as useless as the majority of what you're posting.