It's a common estimate that by 2030 we'll probably have the first blue ocean event, but at the rate we've accelerated fossil fuels use along with the military build up and use promised by Trump it's increasingly likely we'll see it before then, during Trump's term.
So, the entire collapse of the food chain.
That definitely seems more important than fixing your cost of living crisis or dealing with the two provinces now that are actively rolling back human rights advances.
Starting a war with China when you're losing the one you started against Russia seems stupid. Go for it. It's time westerners understand what it's like to be the victims for once.
Yes, it's more likely it's an accident than someone coming up with an idea to cut one of many undersea cables using an off the shelf anchor -- something undersea cables are hardened against depending on the company that produced them. We've had undersea communication lines for more than a hundred and fifty years now, we've had anchors for longer than that. The former was designed to withstand the latter.
Also the attack serves no purpose as many have pointed out. There are literally hundreds of routes, dozens of other cables under water. At most this costs a random company
not country, company a few hundred thousand euros worth of replacement cabling for such a short distance... What's the literal point? It's not particularly expensive venture, it's not going to cripple anything, it doesnt affect the countries involved just entities within them... What is the motive?
That's nice, but there is no excuse for higher overhead than the amount of money actually spent on the problem, when the problem objectively can be solved by direct expenditure.
We know how to eliminate homelessness and the causes behind it even in a capitalist society. It doesn't cost a billion per 100 transitional housing units.
Yes.
Yes, they might use it for drugs or alcohol, that's fine, it's as important as food sometimes.
Non profits and charities are great in theory, but most redirect less than 10% of what they receive towards the homeless look at LA's projects as the most glaring example, it "takes" 10 million+ per single housing unit for temporary housing. Not due to cost, but simply corruption at every level. From the non profits involved to the government itself.
Giving directly to the homeless skips all that.
Or to put it another way, you can't fix the problem or treat symptoms by continuing to give money to the cause of the problem. Giving directly at least treats the symptom.
Outside of tasting it, no.
To not be homeless anymore.
The alternative is developers leaving Linux contribution leaving just corporate contributors, which appears to be the Linux Foundation's plan.
Expeditions are what you're looking for, for the most part. There's also at least two main story lines now. But yeah there needs to be more