What does it mean to sustain magnetic activity without being magnetic? What defines magnetic activity?

Yeah, kids focusing too much on their robot instead of other people is one of my concerns.

A robot can teach the kid all the right things, but it will never give a kid the real social experience, which can get rough if a kid is not sufficiently exposed to it right from the start. Even now, as real human communication moves online in a large part, children grow up increasingly socially anxious and maladapted. From that position, I’m quite uncomfortable with “study from home” trends as well, as school is one of the key venues for IRL child-child interactions.

On the other hand, I wonder what would happen if all kids first developed with perfect robots and then started interacting with one another. But that’s a subject for yet another unethical experiment.

I see!

What are the genuine use cases for such a robot? For when the kid has issues communicating with other people?

Easily Ptyxis if you work with containers or immutable distros. Makes managing containers a breeze, has tabs for each container in which you can work as normal and is full of visual clues so you won’t be able to mess anything up.

Unfortunately, there’s no easy way around it. Fediverse is small, and while we should always encourage people’s migration, it will probably remain small for the time being.

And freedom to express everything combined with people learning their behavior on algorithmic content will be an issue until a strong Fediverse culture is established. The times of pioneers are over, the times of “truly a place for everyone” are not yet there, and in between, we have a very weird mixture, sometimes bringing out the worst of many people.

I hope Fediverse will survive through this phase, and if yes, bright times will be ahead. But it will take a lot of work. Many non-political communities have already started blocking political content, and for the time being, I believe that’s for the better. People need a place to chill and have a corner of their own, not face what they ran away from in the first place.

Those are unrelated, unfortunately.

An orphan, economically speaking, is still a productive member of society.

Of course, from the position of empathy, it is extremely sad people don’t commonly adopt children, and I would welcome everyone to do so - along with having their own. Adoption is important to give everyone a family and save them from the horrors of orphan life. New births are important to keep human population stable and the world continuously running.

As much as I want to only come from the empathetic “adopt first” (and I consider doing so myself in a not-so-distant future), we have to have other considerations as well if we don’t want to live in a dying world where everyone - from kids to seniors - faces insane, never-before-seen economic crisis, destroying life for everyone. It already gets worse, and we only dropped fertility a little. There are objective economic factors to this, not only capitalist greed (which, however, is also present).

And their opinion is that this is unacceptable and outrageous.

Demographics is mostly booming in underdeveloped countries, with some exceptions. It is likely many of them will follow the same path going forward, and UN predictions expect just that, as far as I remember. For developed countries, the fertility rate typically sits somewhere around 1,5-1,7, significantly below 2,1 required to have a stable population. I could of course cite something like South Korea with 0,8, but that’s an obvious outlier. It’s bad enough as it is.

As the world remains divided, this will likely exacerbate the issue for particular countries with lower birth rate. Immigration is one answer, but it doesn’t always cover the population loss, and immigrants are likely to send a lot of their income back home anyway (again, this is absolutely not a case against immigrants, I for one welcome them).

Evening out population growth over time would go a long way to maintain a healthy future.

Nah, JD is just fine with banning abortions and counts the issue solved

One issue (and hear me out, I do support abortions, birth control and bodily autonomy!) is that, once given a choice when and how to reproduce, people don’t do it as much.

Having pleasure of sex without consequences is screwing the natural incentives for reproduction.

Whether we like it or not, there should be something to support fertility if we don’t want to end up in a population crisis, with a few young folks supporting the ever growing army of the elderly.

Now, this should NOT be laws prohibiting abortions, or banning any sort of contraception, but there should be some incentives for people to go, and, well, make babies. This part Republicans got right (wow), they screwed with the suggested methods.

Fixing the financial clusterfuck and letting people live in a bright and predictable world where they know their tomorrow will be good is certainly one way, but I’m afraid it’s not enough. What could be the other options? I’m interested in people’s opinions.

Uh-huh, and plenty of NAS devices had 2,5Gbe even those 6 years ago.

I see! :)

The ports on most Synology devices are the weak spot indeed.

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.

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.

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.

Never would have thought about racism, honestly :D

But such a care is something to admire

Sure, that’s what I threw in the “politically advantageous” bucket to not expand on it too much

Though I do not expect China to blackmail Europe with solar, but I see the concern.

So, in your mind this is a hidden lobbyist who tries to abuse “we destroyed local production” argument to make sure Europe slows down solar rollout and remains dependent on fossil for longer?

Not only is this too much of an effort to come from this angle, it’s also not a large platform to speak to.

Seeing an astroturfer in every person that has another angle on the issue is just plain paranoid, and at the same time makes you behave like an asshole towards others. This sort of behavior is what ruined many other platforms, with everyone yelling out of their echo chambers - angry, violent and utterly unproductive.

Algorithms have raised a generation of people doing what best engages them - shitting on each other. And when an alternative like Lemmy appears, where no algorithm is pushing anyone, people make the same mistakes. I urge you to break this chain, with compassion and care.

Do not assume bad faith over anything you disagree with.

While I disagree with the original statement, hostility never changed anyone’s mind.