I enjoy destroying the environment for future generations so they don't have it too easy?

The rich will not save us from themselves. But they will put a nice rainbow flag up with the wages they stole from us.

One only has to look at what the Murdoch paper monopolies did to any politician who dared stand against him: https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/cancer-eating-the-he...

Here's hoping that Trump in his second term hits the digital monopolies with the anti-trust legislation they have been flaunting for the last 10 years.

Just because they are somewhat closer to me socially doesn't mean I want to sell out my freedoms to them.

Pay for play is a huge issue in journalism, that he was mocking poor white guys with an interest in gaming is very dickish. Gaming is by far the largest cultural industry [1], more important than Hollywood.

I'm more worried about the billionaires buying failing old newspapers and using them to spout whatever ideology gives them the lowest taxes, but that doesn't mean I can't see why someone might care about their hobby being sold out.

[0] https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/842413-gamergate

[1] https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-01-31-games-indu...

Mastodon seems to be headed in the same direction.

Tone down the rhetoric of protecting peoples feelings and have actual human conversations instead. You will only attract the worst people from both sides of that debate if you keep it up.

You just made me orders of magnitude less likely to use it because all I heard there was "prepare for lots of drama".

Should Canada take it as a declaration of war if Australia starts a program to reduce CO2 to 150 ppm?

You have increased variability between generations by reducing the variability in the second generation.

It's like having a bag 1 filled with equal quantities of capsicums, cherries, and apples, then selecting the top reddest 25% of bag 1 and moving them to bag 2.

You will have much less variability of fruit type in bag 2 because you used color selection to fill it (apples and capsicums come in three colors at will be selected 1/3rd the rate of cherries).

That's the whole point of sexual vs natural selection.

Social science is particularly bad at this, to the point I doubt any research done since the 1950s isn't ideologically tainted, at that time due to the cold war and the need to discredit anything "communist".

In hindsight it seems like a way to keep the government away by trying to bribe people in it.

A captain for proper sanitation and waste disposal in China and Africa would greatly reduce this problem.

Doing that in the first world makes about as much sense as a tax on bowel movements because people in India don't use toilets and we need to pay for the increase in communicable diseases.

At least the British left the India to the Indians when they were done stealing all that wasn't nailed down.

The Americans on the other hand gave the Indians the bad parts of Idaho * .

* As long as no oil is discovered there.

No problems there either.

What shroud do you keep Manhattan hidden under?

The economy has been a zero sum game for the majority for a very long time, so zero sum game strategies is what they employ.