Somebody on this forum is gonna owe me money
There's no restrictions on this, btw. Sexuality, race, divorce status, whatever
There's no restrictions on this, btw. Sexuality, race, divorce status, whatever
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Let someone refuse to marry a couple because they're Christian and watch the riots.
For anyone who wants to know how fucked we are in terms of climate change ask ChatGPT:
‘Name policies that would solve climate change quickly vs the alternative but that most Americans wouldn’t like for example high speed trains everywhere’
To address climate change quickly, certain policies can be implemented that might face resistance due to their impact on daily life, economic factors, or personal preferences. Here are some examples:
1. **High-Speed Rail Networks Everywhere**: Implementing an extensive network of high-speed trains across the U.S. would significantly reduce reliance on cars and airplanes, which are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. However, this would require immense investment, substantial changes in infrastructure, and could face opposition from industries like automobile and airlines.
2. **Carbon Tax**: Imposing a substantial carbon tax on all forms of carbon emissions would incentivize businesses and individuals to reduce their carbon footprint. However, this could lead to increased costs for consumers and resistance from industries that are heavy carbon emitters.
3. **Ban on Internal Combustion Engines**: Phasing out gasoline and diesel vehicles in favor of electric vehicles could drastically cut emissions. This policy might be unpopular due to the current prevalence of traditional vehicles, the need for a more extensive EV charging infrastructure, and the potential impact on the automotive industry.
4. **Mandatory Renewable Energy Transition**: Requiring all energy to be sourced from renewable sources (solar, wind, hydro, etc.) within a tight deadline would significantly reduce emissions. However, this transition would be costly, might not meet all energy demands immediately, and could face opposition from the fossil fuel industry.
5. **Strict Energy Efficiency Standards**: Implementing rigorous energy efficiency standards for buildings, appliances, and industries could greatly reduce energy consumption. This might be met with resistance due to the costs associated with upgrading existing structures and systems.
6. **Limiting Air Travel**: Imposing restrictions or high taxes on air travel to reduce emissions from one of the most carbon-intensive forms of transportation. This would be unpopular among both the public and the airline industry due to the convenience and necessity of air travel.
7. **Reduced Meat Consumption**: Encouraging or mandating a reduction in meat consumption, as livestock farming is a significant source of greenhouse gases. This would be controversial due to dietary preferences and the impact on the agricultural sector.
8. **Mandatory Recycling and Composting**: Enforcing strict recycling and composting laws to reduce waste and greenhouse gas emissions from landfills. This requires significant changes in public behavior and infrastructure.
These policies, while potentially effective in combating climate change, would face various levels of resistance due to their impact on lifestyle, economy, and personal freedoms. The challenge lies in balancing the urgency of addressing climate change with the social, economic, and political acceptability of these measures.
Oh look the exact policies we need that isn’t the magic pixie dust of carbon capture or return to the 1960s.
‘Name policies that would solve climate change quickly vs the alternative but that most Americans wouldn’t like for example high speed trains everywhere’
To address climate change quickly, certain policies can be implemented that might face resistance due to their impact on daily life, economic factors, or personal preferences. Here are some examples:
1. **High-Speed Rail Networks Everywhere**: Implementing an extensive network of high-speed trains across the U.S. would significantly reduce reliance on cars and airplanes, which are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. However, this would require immense investment, substantial changes in infrastructure, and could face opposition from industries like automobile and airlines.
2. **Carbon Tax**: Imposing a substantial carbon tax on all forms of carbon emissions would incentivize businesses and individuals to reduce their carbon footprint. However, this could lead to increased costs for consumers and resistance from industries that are heavy carbon emitters.
3. **Ban on Internal Combustion Engines**: Phasing out gasoline and diesel vehicles in favor of electric vehicles could drastically cut emissions. This policy might be unpopular due to the current prevalence of traditional vehicles, the need for a more extensive EV charging infrastructure, and the potential impact on the automotive industry.
4. **Mandatory Renewable Energy Transition**: Requiring all energy to be sourced from renewable sources (solar, wind, hydro, etc.) within a tight deadline would significantly reduce emissions. However, this transition would be costly, might not meet all energy demands immediately, and could face opposition from the fossil fuel industry.
5. **Strict Energy Efficiency Standards**: Implementing rigorous energy efficiency standards for buildings, appliances, and industries could greatly reduce energy consumption. This might be met with resistance due to the costs associated with upgrading existing structures and systems.
6. **Limiting Air Travel**: Imposing restrictions or high taxes on air travel to reduce emissions from one of the most carbon-intensive forms of transportation. This would be unpopular among both the public and the airline industry due to the convenience and necessity of air travel.
7. **Reduced Meat Consumption**: Encouraging or mandating a reduction in meat consumption, as livestock farming is a significant source of greenhouse gases. This would be controversial due to dietary preferences and the impact on the agricultural sector.
8. **Mandatory Recycling and Composting**: Enforcing strict recycling and composting laws to reduce waste and greenhouse gas emissions from landfills. This requires significant changes in public behavior and infrastructure.
These policies, while potentially effective in combating climate change, would face various levels of resistance due to their impact on lifestyle, economy, and personal freedoms. The challenge lies in balancing the urgency of addressing climate change with the social, economic, and political acceptability of these measures.
Oh look the exact policies we need that isn’t the magic pixie dust of carbon capture or return to the 1960s.
Don't trust chatGPT for anything other than making up bad fanfic.
I catch a train to work, 9-11 carriages which seat ~60 people on average, so capacity (without crowding) ~550-700 people. There are two per hour each direction, so in a 16h day, call it 35,000 people. In reality it's much, much lower, because in much of the day they are less than 100% capacity.
The motorway that roughly equates to the same route carries ~120,000 vehicles a day (approaching 200,000 at its busiest point). Now, whilst I think removing up to 30,000 vehicles is a notable benefit to avoid congestion, it also gives me very serious doubts about the ability of a rail system to replace road transport to a degree that might be envisioned. Especially when, chances are, it's not going to be cheaper. Nor potentially faster - because of course when you factor in all the connections to other public transport on top of the rail in terms of door-to-door journey, even high speed rail can end up slower than a car for a total journey time.
And just to clarify, I am a great believer in an effective and efficient rail system. Although I think it can provide significant benefits, I just don't think it can actually deliver in the way many might desire.
Last edited:
All for it, I want to see this happen and see if the response if for them to throw a fit or just go to the next notary public down the road and have them do it instead.
The alternative to this is what, if you are someone legally allowed to marry people you are legally required to marry anyone who asks and is legally permitted to be married?
Let's be fair, the lack of charging infrastructure, shorter range and dramatically longer time to "refuel" are what keep people from switching to EVs. 2 out of 3 of those aren't going anywhere any time soon without dramatic changes in battery design, and most alternative battery designs that can fix one make the other worse.
It's already underway. Several countries have laws that don't allow registering new combustion engine cars from e.g. 2030 on. And when the automobile industry can't sell new ones anymore and needs to make its profit from EVs, lobbying to get rid of the existent ones will only increase.
And there is really no alternative to shutting down combustion cars. Otherwise we never get the transport sector emission under control. So better start improving public transport and/or improve EV infrastructure for the day when traditional cars become a thing of the past.
Some places have been electrifying lanes of highways, so hybrid vehicles (like trucks) can charge when driving long distances over certain routes.
Yes. I am living pretty much next to one of them.
So far it is still a pilot project to test things out.
But the trucks are not actually hybrids. They are full electric and use the electrified lanes both for driving and for recharging their batteries at the same time, reducing loading times elsewhere.
Overhead lines.
In road electric would probably be too expensive to scale up later. Inductive as well.
Why in the name of everything would you want to ask ChatGPT for real world advice? Might as well consult your cat (at least your cat can tell rain is wet)
In terms of public servants, yes, that is actually how it should be.
Yeah, anyone in the government/public sector should be mandated to marry anyone (following any normal rules obviously). Outside of that, you should be able to deny anyone. Like anyone can rather easily get the certificate or whatever to marry people, I have friends that can marry people, it's not like they are forced to marry people just because they were asked to.
My cats only tell me when they can see the bottom of the food bowl. And sometimes they lie about that too.
Jerks.
Putin urges Russians to have more kids, says ethnic survival at stake
Israeli rappers appear to call for deaths of Dua Lipa, Bella Hadid in chart-topping song
The drill rap by Israeli duo, Ness and Stilla, has exploded since it was released three months ago — with the music video since racking up a whopping 18.5 million views on YouTube.
nypost.com
Sure, sure, if we're talking about someone currently holding an office for the state or county and operating within their duties in that office.
But then, in most states there are a lot of people who can perform marriages. I get jumpier about wanting to force that on religious officials, former officeholders, that sort of thing. You know, people who are not currently organs of the state.
Mine also likes to get mouthy when it's her cuddle time and I pay too much attention to my wife (which is any attention at all). If I even talk to my wife, the cat stands up, walks onto the arm of the chair so she's closer to my face and tells me how she feels. If I continue, she goes to my wife and smacks her on the nose (claws in) and then wanders off grumpy.