that sounds like you were part of a case study in your childhood

xD I need to remember this. Funny way of seeing this.

Interesting glimpses into a fucked up childhood via presents. Good for you that these times are over.

Gendered colours are stupid anyway.

At least it was thoughtful.

Eat. That’s what you usually do with pudding. /j

This again?

Today on the internet: Fun with spherical geometry.

“It was very stupid”, haha love how that starts.

There is a lot more to it than rise of sea levels on the one hand and some places being too hot.

TL;DR: Climate change causes mass extinctions, ecosystem collapse, extreme weather, and life-threatening heat. Technology alone won’t save us; prevention is crucial. Ignoring climate action risks severe economic damage, comparable to a permanent Great Depression.

(Prepare for a great wall of fuck.)

In short (list is not exhaustive, there’s surely more which I also don’t know of or don’t think of right now):

• Mass extinction of several species, which can’t keep up with the pace of climate change. You might have heard already how insect popluations dramatically declined in the past decades.
• Extinction or even significant deaths and lack of offspring in various species leads to imbalance and collapse of entire eco systems.
• Humans are part of and relying on functioning and healthy eco systems. Without them our very basis of life starts collapsing, leading to numerous human deaths and a lot of misery.
• The occurence of extreme weather conditions as well as catastophes in consequence of climate change increases. The occasional summer storm might become less occasional, which is less of a problem. But so do floodings, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts or forest fires increase. And those cost lives and do a lot of damage. We experience weather conditions in places today, which most common people would’ve deemed impossible or extremely unlikely at least. (Not every extreme weather condition is the result of climate change though. But a lot are. An entire field of attribution science has emerged to elaborate which catastrophe has been a direct cause of climate change.)
• Increased temperatures, but especially heatwaves, are already now costing more and more lives and that’s not just some particular places with extremely hot temperatures, but it’s also occuring in entire nations known for more temperate conditions. For example in the EU.
• Being “too hot” is only one side. You can survive 40°C or higher, if the air humidity is low. But due to global warming we can also observe time frames in regions where the air humidity plus temperature reaches such levels that people are exposed to life-threatening health risks already at 31°C. (See also “wet bulb temperature” in general.) Higher humidity makes it harder to cool ourselves by sweating, i.e., evaporative cooling. This is being observed more and more often in south-east asia and the middle east but also started to affect the USA in some regions (Texas, last year in 2023).

You might now understand a bit better why even a few degrees more around the globe incur existential threats.

Human beings are remarkably creative when they need to be. […] if the need arose […] some smart ones […] plan it all, and the rest […] build it

(Sorry for quoting you a bit more freely here.)
Technology can do much, but it is not magic. (I’m an engineering scientist, because I realised at some point that I can’t become a magician.) Entropy is a bitch and current solutions or attempts I know of regarding carbon capture are a nice idea at best, but in practise currently not feasibe and therefore a money-pit at worst. “Building higher and cooler” seems a naive approach given the scale and complexity of human lives and disregards the problems we’re facing due to climate change. I don’t mean that condescendingly, rather to highlight how massively impractical that approach would be on the one hand and no solution for most problems caused by climate change on the other hand.
I absolutely think that it’s necessary to continue research in that area, but until we have developed solutions which can tackle the problems we’ve caused in a significant way (which can still take decades until we’ve got large-scale applicable solutions), I think it’s best to practise prevention. Avoid contributing factors to climate change at allmost all costs.
Don’t put all your money on the “technology will save us”-horse.

By the way:
The people who think that climate and environmental protection are damaging the economy are short-sighted, as climate change is projected to cause a tremendous amount financial damage world-wide in the long-term. One of many many sources on this puts it like this:

when the researchers added in the possibility of a moderate 2 degrees of warming before the end of the century, this led to a decline in future GDP of between 30 and 50 percent by 210 […] In the U.S. alone […] A 50 percent decline in 2100 GDP relative to baseline means a loss of $56 trillion each year, which exceeds the current GDP. Such declines would leave individuals with “a 31 percent drop in purchasing power relative to a world without climate change,” Bilal adds. Such losses are “comparable to living in the 1929 Great Depression, forever,” he says.

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2024/09/harvard-economic-impact-climate-change

Environmental protection is economical protection. They go hand-in-hand.

Uranium is extremely common on Earth.

I wouldn’t be so uncritical about this. Depending on rate of consumption (and data source) the world’s Uranium supplies will last for about 50 to 200 years. (The latter a low demand scenario based on current consumption rates.)

Technological advancements may push these limits. Possibly even into 10.000 to 60.000 years, when filtering active substances from seawater, which is currently quite a timeframe to consider it long-term sustainable even for a limited resource. However, we’re not there yet.

Aren’t climate scientists also measuring atmospheric composition levels around the world to track this, usivg satellites and whatnot? I.e., do they really rely that much on self reported data?

And thereby eliminating a whole bunch of other species than just humans as well.

Although I’m totally in for the occasional misanthropy, I don’t like seeing it as “just a fever” anymore as too many species will go down. Life will probably persevere in the end, but so will probably a bunch of rich shitpieces, who are significantly responsible for this fever in the first place.

There is a neat Firefox addon which makes visits to yubbtub more tolerable by getting rid of unrelated suggestions:
RYS — Remove YouTube Suggestions

It has a lot of options to tailor it to your needs.

Have you considered to get yourself checked for ADHD?

Attack is the best defense?

50 miles = 80.47 km (rounded)

Is it?

Israel just improved on the things the nazis did to them in ww2.

Not quite yet. Nazis did extremely worse. But they are surely on their way getting there. >.<

I’m with you on the opt-out vs. opt-in part. That’s not a nice move. Regardless of that, Firefox is still the best choice. I hope they will continue to improve.

I’ve read the announcement. Sounds reasonable and sufficiently private to me. So saying “Mozilla wants your data” sounds misleading and like an overreaction to me. Also might help to mitigate the arms race in privacy protection versus tracking for ads and worse stuff.

Mozilla is definitely going to try more scummy crap like this in the future.

How do you know that?

Even if, there will still be alternatives. But right now, Firefox is the best browser with regards to privacy and security. It even passed minmum ratings by the german IT security authority, contrary to other widely used browsers.