• 0 Posts
  • 132 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle

  • I agree with you and I think she was taken somewhat out of context, though it’s not exactly fake or making things up either. My interpretation is that she is agreeing with specific parts of Sec. Burgum’s statements. The headline of the article (calls Trump admin’s climate denialism “fantastic”) is sensationalization. They do link to the source video though and to Google’s whitepaper.

    Her remarks are at around 9hr 5m. She says “fantastic” and then talks specifically about nuclear, grid permitting & modernization. She focuses on the “AI arms race” and the need to act quickly on energy policy. She does not make any statement on Burgum’s climate denialism.

    Most of what she is saying is in line with what’s in the whitepaper (of which she is an author). And in my view, the whitepaper outlines an energy policy that both achievable in the current administration and reduces emissions. It is certainly not perfect, and I wish the conversation was different, but there’s some good stuff in there.

    I have been a volunteer advocating for climate policies at the federal level for the past few years, and we have had a lot of conversations around nuclear, geothermal, clean energy tax credits, permitting reform (NEPA exemptions, transmission). I was happy to see mention of the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 in Google’s whitepaper – we lobbied pretty hard for that. It definitely would have reduced emissions.

    I don’t personally like that Google is advocating for natural gas, even if they talk about carbon sequestration and satellite based emissions monitoring in the same breath. Natural gas is definitely part of the current state of climate / energy policy conversation, and we’d rather have natural gas than coal. In my advocacy work, I don’t demonize natural gas, but I try to shift towards talking more about geothermal and nuclear to cover base load power needs.

    Burgum’s comments are around 47m and there is definitely a lot of denialism in there. But he also talks about decarbonization, sequestration, cleaner sources of base load power (hydro). A few years ago, Republicans were not using any of this sort of language, and we’ve been part of helping to change that. Our strategy has included a strong focus on common ground around energy, and side-stepping the climate change debate entirely.

    If the end result is a reduction in emissions then personally I don’t really care as much about ideological purity. The article to me seems more focused on purity and less on the full context.



  • I agree that Gamboa’s actions were at the very least inadvisable.

    Pointing out: he starts running after the peacekeeper fires upon him, not before.

    I don’t think we know what happened before that video started. Peacekeepers said they shouted at him to drop the weapon. Was he aware of their presence before they shot? What exactly was said?

    The eyewitness accounts I’ve seen so far in the news seem perhaps one-sided and I’ve been speculating that the police could have put some trust into the statements of the peacekeepers that they interviewed.

    Regarding his ski mask, SLC is a ski town. Many people own balaclavas, and I saw many people at the protest wearing them. I saw pictures of people at the Thursday protest wearing them as well. The organizers pointed out to be careful about taking pictures as some people might not want their identities revealed. Personally, I wore a mask.

    A guy in a mask with a gun looks scary, and I don’t think what happened is surprising. However, many of the right wing militias open carry while wearing masks. They do so because it is legal and is in fact their right. What I’m ultimately saying is, given the evidence available, if I were on some (fantasy) jury, I would so far be thinking “reasonable doubt”.





  • Thank you for this. My wife left about a week ago. It blindsided me, but I’m hindsight I could have seen it. She’s been throwing herself into her work for the last 4 years. I felt the lack of love, but never had the tools to express my needs. Whenever we talked about it, we ended up fighting.

    In hindsight, if someone is not feeling love in a marriage, why would they stay?

    Like you, we also always thought we had the tools to work things out.

    I’ve learned now that in our relationship she has been anxiously attached – it makes sense now why I could never have the “rational” kind of conversation I wanted with her.

    Meanwhile I have been avoidant or possibly fearful-avoidant. What I thought of as “taking a break in an argument when things get heated” to go independently deal with my emotions must have been painful for her, and she would then chase me. End result: neither of us was able to regulate our emotions.

    I’ve was open to ENM in our relationship, but she was against it, so we never persued it. So it stings even more seeing signs that she’s been cheating on me. Though I guess, even in ENM, why would you keep seeing a partner whom you feel no love for anymore?

    In the last week I have been cramming attachment theory, Gottman, NVC, trying to have some idea of what the hell happened. Now I realize that if I don’t work on myself, I will bring all of my problems to any future relationship. I’m only at the very start of the journey, and every day is still painful – our relationship lasted 15 years, and that can’t be unwound quickly.












  • Dempf@lemmy.ziptoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    DV is difficult to get working properly on PC, and last time I tried to set up an HTPC I ran into tons of remote control issues and it wasn’t simple enough that I could just hand the remote over to a guest (or my spouse).

    2019 Shield has plenty of issues sure, but it still seems like the best option for me, personally.

    Agree about disable network on the TV itself.