A joke candidate with a bincan head has about 15-20% odds of winning this election. A serious candidate from a real party could have a real chance of defeating Farage but seems noone was brave enough. Better play it safe, take no risks and run away from fights. Thats the way forward for UK.
This is simply not true, in time of severe distress and survival pressure humans are clearly capable of mass killings. It happened so many times throughout history. For example a famine forces a human group to take over rivals resources or when defending own group against agressive rivals.
Funny how many people presume collective conflicts and violence are uniquely a human thing. Chimpanzees, lions, and wolves are some of the species where this kind of behavior is best known and documented.
They were never boring for me at all and there was lot of strategy and planning involved in troop composition of such stacks. Civ4 was a game about research, development and relationships between civilizations and not an turn based strategy game like latter iterations try to be.
Why do people hate 'doomstacks' I dont get it. It is a 4X game about civilizations after all not a turn based military strategy. There is also startegy involved in doom stack composition and you can beat a much larger doomstack with better troop composition. But like in real life of course, with all things being equal bigger doomstack will defeat smaller one. How realistic are armies of a few thousands man spread across half a continent like in latter Civ series.
I understand why you feel this way, but saying it is impossible is too defeatist. People arent horses and their beliefs can change. Isn't it worth the sacrifice to acknowledge the concerns and political views of the opposing side if it means a chance of saving planet earth? We should find common grounds and start a fresh dialogue about climate change. I'm sure there are opportunities to do so.
Then science and education must adapt to the times and do better to educate and convey their message to a wider audience, everyone must do their part, including scientists and educators. If you exclude half the population from your plans before you even start, you will very probably fail.
I am very concerned about global warming, but we need to find solutions and plans that can include everyone from all political spectrums, and that do not disproportionately affect the poorer sections of society. And if the poor people have to make sacrifices, then other sections of society have to bear the burden too. The rich, but also the state bureaucracies that are only using the crisis to increase their size and spending.
I am sure it could easily rephrase the articles to tell them without quoting any real or verifiable sources. Many human news companies often do it too.
Under existing condition an AI news site seems like a good investment idea. Its AI could read all relevant news sources and retell them and republish them in its own articles. It could even have its own AI editors and contributors. Cannot see how human news companies could compete.
It does not help that those philosophies are also very closedminded and very agressive towards any new ideas or any changes to their worldview and lifestyle.
As AIs can only be trained on datasets of colected human experiences if/when one day a superintelligent AI comes about I am sure it will only percieve us as inferior, unrational and dangerous beigns.
Not caring about animals leads to not caring about nature in general and that is leading towards us destroying earth ecosystem and making our planet not be able to sustain human civilization.
Less meat consumption should lead to more production and decrease in price of of other types food. Also despite all the suffering in the world people still care very much about the wellbeign of dogs and cats. If anything with inflation and more and more wars around the globe the world needs cheaper food now more than ever.