dillekant

This is the first I've heard of it. Fingers crossed he has a Linux video in the works.

My guess is this is the underlying reason. Basically these companies set up the infrastructure for when governments would start to mandate this stuff, and they'd get a bit of nice press out of it. However, the fossil companies have found that you can basically confound all progress by the private sector just via the threat of rolling back climate legislation. This happened when the LNP government even just mentioned a nuclear plan which is just plain stupid.

I'm guessing by even stating it, Air NZ has gone one better than a lot of companies, which have conveniently "forgotten" about their goals. They'll get 20% of the way and declare that a success, but basically one company can't move until all of them move. We need to get the crazies out of government and out of opposition too.

Food is so deep, culturally speaking. Many people have deep memories and positive associations with making meat dishes, and "forcing" plant based meats looks like the government intruding on that. It feels overbearing for a government to try and reduce eating of meat through any monetary means, even if it just means reducing / removing subsidies already in place.

It's doubly worse because splitting meat eating through money means the rich can still afford and eat meat in plentiful ways, where the poor won't be able to. This makes meat a wealth signifier (more than it already is), which can backfire pretty spectacularly.

In a policy sense, I actually have no idea how to limit meat eating. Even Carbon Taxes tend to have exceptions for beef.

Boo. This is the left version of the attack helicopter meme.

Practical answer here: Overall, the aim is to not prevent someone from doing something, so you're actually checking with everyone if it's OK to use a space for Purpose X. If a subset want to use it for Purpose Y, they have a meeting with a facilitator. The facilitator does the hard work (there are guides) but overall people just talk about their interests and what they want to achieve. Basically everyone talks until there's an agreement in place, and this must be unanimous (otherwise people keep talking).

Here's an example video of a meeting in action, though the aim is there not to make decisions.

It's important to recognise the mechanism is more important than the intent. If people cannot blow the whistle safely, then the "government" can freely keep secrets. "Government" is in air quotes here because often it's the spooks or the military who get to keep secrets, often from the elected officials. This means that MPs are often kept in the dark (and sometimes on purpose, in a Berejiklian-style "I don't need to know about that" sense) and this means that a bunch of people who we pay taxes for can do what they like with impunity.

If the secrets are kept, then the people keeping the secrets are not accountable to anyone. This is a serious problem if they start to violate the rights of people on Australian soil. You might feel like it's not going to be you, but it well could be. There is no safety on that gun. The only way around it is to make whistleblowing safe.

Horses for courses. Every area is different. Some places have geothermal but also need constant heating, so a geothermal town heating system with high density makes sense. Other places are near the equator, and actually need to sink as much heat as possible year round, so separate housing with a lot of greenery to keep everything cool works better. In other places heat and cold is mild so good passive thermal design works well.

Where I live for example, it's good to prioritise air flow and thermal management, something which is significantly harder in an apartment. Having said that, during particularly cold nights, an apartment actually works better (but this is for a month in the year).

In Australia, houses just have eaves.

So, I'm lucky enough to have built a house, and earthworks are expensive. A hobbit hole would cost as much as the house we live in, without the actual building, just the hole.

10 deadliest animals to humans

Was watching a YT video against this idea. Basically the occupancy is quite low per dollar, and generally there's not much expertise in building them. This means the city/state is tied to one company which can ream them price-wise. If you need the occupancy, get a train.

"we just grind that shit up till it's microscopic and inject it straight into your balls. Bingo Bango! No more plastic waste...o"