Here's his justification, so he doesn't have to make one up out of thin air:
On 22 April 1808, during the Finnish War between Sweden and Russia, a Russian army landed on the southeastern shores of Gotland near Grötlingbo. Under command of Nikolai Andreevich Bodisko 1,800 Russians took the city of Visby without any combat or engagement, and occupied the island. A Swedish naval force rescue expedition was sent from Karlskrona under the command of admiral Rudolf Cederström with 2,000 men; the island was liberated and the Russians capitulated. Russian forces left the island on 18 May 1808.
So, you see, it was Russian territory for almost a month.
Its position in the middle of the Baltic Sea and more or less off the coast of Kaliningrad would make it an excellent military outpost from which to control shipping and spy on their neighbors.
More specifically: he is furious with Zelensky and Ukraine for not letting him use them as a bargaining chip. Trump cannot fucking fathom how someone he sees as less powerful than himself can defy him on anything.
I'm sincerely appreciative of everything they do for consumers as a whole. Not everything makes it across the pond but at the very least it sets precedent and a lot of the groundwork is done if our politicians ever decide to get their shit together and give us a ground to stand on against corporations and lobbyists.
except of course for the blatant racism against non-western people, the current shift towards neofash politics (meloni etc), the militarization and the impeding economic collapse.
how do liberals manage to ignore problems so efficiently?
im living in central europe but am of eastern european descent. due to looking "white" i usually get less discrimination than my turkish and arab friends, but its still way harder to get a job or higher education for non-native people, as higher pay positions are almost exclusively reserved for westerners. it is also harder to get a decent apartment with a foreign sounding name and in case of legal matters you can bet that the cops will rather believe the word of a native than yours.
except of course for the blatant racism against non-western people, the current shift towards neofash politics (meloni etc), the militarization and the impeding economic collapse.
All of which already happen in the US, but worse.
The entire world sucks, can’t we be happy of living in a place that sucks a bit less?
i do acknowledge that that things are worse in the us, but that doesnt make the deficiencies in europe any better. one shouldnt just accept that the world sucks, but start fighting for a better one. just look at cubas success
We are fighting for a better one. All those recent EU regulations are doing exactly that.
I’d love if we could address those issues you’ve listed too, since they’re obviously more important, but it seems really hard until the european left actually wakes up and starts promoting actual candidates.
to mandate that five of a car's primary controls — its horn, windshield wipers, turn signals, hazard warning lights and SOS features — will need physical buttons or switches.
Good, but would be great if climate control, volume/mute, and other things that need frequent adjustment while driving were also part of the mandate.
I have Tesla and their old design I could do easily while driving. They did a UI update and not everything takes several clicks.
Anything that is critical to running the car should have a manual control. If touch screen isn’t available, you need to be able to operate the car, if nothing else to get to a repair center.
Gear selector? No of course not, mine doesn’t have gears (or so I’ve been told so). I was told that the idea is that the driver shouldn’t need to touch the touch screen mid drive, and honestly, imo it’s mostly like that. Having said that, I would like further improvement like temperature buttons/knobs.
Yea I honestly hated when they made automatics go from a physical shifter that shifted actual gear linkage to electric selection dials. It's insanely stupid, and a fucking nightmare to repair, but now going to a touchscreen is asking to get people injured.
Tesla has mechanical door pulls on the interior but they are supposed to be for emergency use only. Otherwise there are buttons on the interior door handles.
Eh, I think this strikes the perfect balance where it ensures safety while not stifling innovation. Touchscreens are bad, and the consensus around that is growing. But the solution might not be a return to physical buttons, there are many possibilities and some might turn out easier and safer.
Then we agree. Anything driving related shouldn’t be in the touchscreen. Both my cars have touch screens my Tesla you have to use it for almost everything.
The Audi just for non-driving functions.
The Tesla use to be better but they changed it. It’s harder to do anything on it now.
No I'm just against closing doors. This is a great example of the bare minimum being regulated due to safety and it's regulated to be something tried and tested, like anything safety related should be. While letting the market, i.e. us consumers decide on the other stuff. It's not the right solution to have politicians decide how a cars auxiliary functions should be operated.
Car seat adjustment, above seat vehicle interior lights, steering wheel adjustment, door handles, door locks, main rear view mirror, climate controls for vents and seats, car starting, and trunk and seat releases should all have controls that can be operated either directly or with physical buttons.
If there is ALSO a screen driven element, that’s fine, but this stuff needs to work without a screen.
This stuff is not being done for the sake of UX. It is for saving money at the expense of consumer safety.
I can see the case for some of them after you’ve been in a crash (although if the pyro fuse has blown, not much requiring switches will work anymore, regardless of the type of controls), but if you want physical controls for the rear view mirror for safety, you should probably start adjusting that before you start driving.
Same for cabin lights, whatever you’re doing that needs the lights on should probably be done stationary, if you care about safety.
You shouldn't be adjusting your seats, steering wheel, and mirrors while driving. Interior lights neither, they should be off if you need them you're not looking at the road. Climate control is also non-critical all that might be annoying but you don't need to do it while driving. "car starting" isn't really a thing with many cars any more, even gasoline ones, they switch the motor off automatically when you're standing for a while and start once you select a gear, hit the throttle, whatever.
Door handles though I absolutely agree, it's a safety thing: You can make them fancy schmancy electric all you want but they also have to open the lock mechanically, e.g. by pulling the lever with some force none of that Tesla "open the maintenance hatch and find a steel cable to pull on".
Ok most climate controls are non-critical. If you live in climates where fogging and frosting while already driving might be an issue (which are conceivable but rather extreme conditions) you should probably get into the habit of setting the controls to a sensible value as soon as you get in.
It's also a design thing, it really doesn't take much for a car to be smart enough to throw warm air at the inside of the wind shield (no AC required) if the temperature is low.
It is for saving money at the expense of consumer safety.
People keep saying this but I don't buy it. Like, how much does some fucking buttons cost? Hell the cheap cars still have buttons and mechanical controls with cables and shit.
And at the cost of consumer dissatisfaction. I think this is just more "change for the sake of change" so that someone can justify their job at the company that we've all come to know from the tech world.
Enough. One screen may cost $5, but if it replaces 10 - 20 15¢ buttons, that's still worthwhile.
Especially since there would be labour cost savings installing buttons, and not having to spend time installing spacers replacing those buttons for different trims, when they can just do it all in one screen, and fold it into the infotainment system install cost.
It's also a country that was on the wrong side of 2 world wars. Not the senior power, and as part of a larger country one of the times, but still in the wrong side.
Relevant wikipedia article for those who are unaware:
Public opinion in Britain throughout the 1930s was frightened by the prospect of German terror bombing of British cities, which had started during the First World War. The media emphasised the dangers, and the general consensus was that defence was impossible and, as Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin had said in 1932, "The bomber will always get through". However, the Royal Air Force had two major weapons systems in the works: better interceptors (Hurricanes and Spitfires) and especially radar. They promised to counter the German bombing offensive but were not yet ready and so appeasement was necessary to cause a delay. Specifically, regarding the fighters, the RAF warned the government in October 1938 that the German Luftwaffe bombers would probably get through: "the situation... will be definitely unsatisfactory throughout the next twelve months"
Might be worth remembering that while Tories like Chamberlain were busy appeasing Hitler's Germany, they were significantly less dovish towards Lenin's Russia.
British Tories endorsed the White Army in its war to reclaim Moscow, following the 1917 revolution. Brits participated in the blockade of Russian ports and harassment of their officials through the collapse of the Tory government in 1921. And the Brits, with Churchill as their Chancellor of the Exchequer, conducted a kind of Cold War with the Soviets well into the 1930s. The Munich Agreement was, at least in part, an effort to contain the Communists of Czechoslovak Sudetenland.
So much of the Western treatment towards the Germans during the 30s was, at its heart, a response to the failures of the Romanov Government at the end of WW1. And there was significant speculation - particularly with the Soviet economic boom of pre-WW2 era - that they'd be the Big Bad all the western powers were going to have to rally against. So Germany was - both directly by US business and indirectly by British appeasement - propped up as a regional counterweight.
Comparing Hitler to Napoleon is absurd. Get better comparisons. Not every war is a threat to global peace, and acting like it is minimalizes the things that actually are. Just because you dislike that he is trying to take a small sliver of Czechoslovakia which voted to secede from Czechoslovakia, doesn't make him after global domination.
Those people were wrong, but I'm right. Most people who say what I did are right. You're leaving out the many, many times in history a country did not try to take over the world after winning a war.
You can say what you like about my views, but I do believe them. Y'all are way too quick to deflecting. Why do you need to reflect if I'm so obviously wrong?
Please move your account to hexbear (which most of us have already blocked) so we don’t have to listen to Russian propaganda talking points on the civilised side of Lemmy. I find it straining to block individual users.
You're saying that a primarily American community, centered around a podcast run by 3-4 Americans, is Russian propaganda? C'mon bro, listen to yourself.
"Why won't you debate me about why the earth is flat?! Why do you need to deflect if I'm so obviously wrong?"
The answer, by the way? Because it's obvious trying to have a reasonable discussion with you is a waste of time and energy. Consider this reply a freebie.
Oh, and I highly suggest you don't conflate "we shouldn't let Putin invade even a little bit of land" with "being a lib". Not exactly a great look for liberal opposition if you do that.
Comparing it to a flat earth theory is ridiculous, it is entirely possible that the popular opinion, especially among Americans, is wrong. American media has historically been quite unreliable about foreign affairs, often intentionally.
Exhibited by all the black, Jewish, openly queer, etc, people walking about town safely all day? "But muh talking points on my troll farm faq pdf from corporate!"
It's anti Nazi to murder Nazis. Russia did that the most, and this they are the most anti Nazi country. Are you trying to read it as that stupid "antifa are fascists" BS that used to get spewed by morons?
I don't know why I'm engaging your bad faith bullshit but here goes. Russia was allied with Nazi Germany the majority of the invasion and conquering of the West. Only after Germany betrayed Russia did they start killing Nazis, out of necessity.. most of which did the work themselves by freezing half to death. And that was 80 years ago. Today, they're committing genocide, kidnapping children, leveling civilian cities, threatening nuclear war. Cut. The. Shit.
You're going to accuse ME of bad faith bullshit and then try to tell me a fake version of history? Russia was literally at war with Germany before America was. And no, they're not committing genocide, or any of that shit. I highly suggest you get your news from places less biased than USA, historically they have produced a fuck ton of fake news, especially about Russia.
That's not what he's fighting a war over. Has he taken any land that wasn't part of the initial declaration? I see zero reason to think that what he has said and which he is currently doing are lies.
Putin has said repeatedly that Ukrainians and Russians are "one people" and a separate Ukraine doesn't really exist. It seems you haven't been paying attention.
The Kremlin posted propaganda piece, written by Putin, doesn't seem to be loading for me, but there's a Wiki on it here:
"Putin openly questions the legitimacy of Ukraine's contemporary borders.[9] According to Putin, the modern-day Ukraine occupies historically Russian lands,[9] and is an "anti-Russia project" created by external forces since the seventeenth century, and of administrative and political decisions made during the Soviet Union[5] (a BBC article traced the term "anti-Russia project" to some Russian conspiratorial writing of 2011–13).[10] He also discusses the Russo-Ukrainian War, maintaining that "Kiev simply does not need Donbas".[11]"
Worth remembering that a healthy chunk of the American business elite was more than ready to support a United Nazi Europe against the scourge of Stalin's Soviet Union. Luminaries from Henry Ford to George Prescott Bush were nakedly advocating a US alliance with the Germans in an attempt to reassert western dominion over the globe, as the colonial settlement system was cracking up in the wake of WW1.
Guys like Trump and Orban aren't anything new. A business-friendly globe-spanning conglomerate has been the end game for the PNAC crowd for a very long time.
Bush exponentially grew the family fortune, making broker fees, by funneling Americans' investments in these great mining opportunities in Dachau and Auschwitz, where the labor was free!
It's important to remember that Hitler many times in speeches advocated invading Europe, I don't watch many Putin speeches, but I don't think he has done that with the US.
That it's not the same situation. Everyone agrees warmongering is bad, but appeasement was mocked not because it led to the annexation of the Czech Republic, but because it didn't actually keep the UK and France out of a war. Hitler always wanted to invade France. This isn't the same situation, because Putin isn't repeatedly saying he wants to invade NATO, which Hitler did do referring to Poland and the USSR. Putin would likely continue to conquest, almost definitely into Georgia if it doesn't fall in line, but there's no reason to believe he would attack NATO
What on Earth are you on about? His propaganda stooges in the Russian media which he 100% controls says Russia will either nuke or invade NATO countries on a daily basis.
"We too have weapons that can hit targets on their territory. This really threatens a conflict with nuclear weapons, and thus the destruction of civilization," he added.
That's messed up, I didn't know he threatened nuking directly, but I knew state tv had talked about it. But I see that as more a horrific threat than an actual goal- he might be way more crazy than I'm giving him credit for, but I just don't see how he can actually see a nuclear war with NATO working out for him.
And then what? Will the trains be made cheaper? Will there be more trains on the tracks? Will there be more tracks built? Will they be building an airport in a less densely populated area and improving public transport there?
Cross Border Rail in the EU is surprisingly bad, IMHO. If you stay within one country, prices are lower, frequency and capacity are higher and usually the speed is higher as well. Eurostar has decreased in capacity over time and is by far the most expensive option, Thalys hasn’t increased capacity in decades (bought no new trains) and is also very expensive, ICE services to Netherlands and Belgium aren’t cheap and suffer from bad rolling stock (often half of the trains are cancelled), all border connections to spain suck in some form (Madrid-Lissabon is especially bad), there are (almost) no trains through switzerland (to connect to italy) and trains in switzerland are in general pretty slow, making trains to Italy very unattractive. Connections to Denmark suffer from bad rolling stock and are often booked out, there is no way to cross the Baltikum in any reasonable amount of time by train, there are very few train connections left in the balkans after Covid (e.g. greece has no single passenger train crossing the border). For people trying to cross over from Sweden to Finnland over Land, there are trains running to the border towns, but a walk of several kms is required between them (or there may be some form of bus connections, but I can’t figure them out). And everything train-wise is very slow in eastern europe anyways. Night trains are very often sold out far in advance and have historic rolling stock with lots of issues.
Worse than that, international tickets are often much more expensive than national ones (compare e.g. Frankfurt-Paris to Munich-Berlin), the border crossing is often the slowest part of the journey and if you want to get the cheap prices on both sides you have to book separate tickets, with all the ensuing fun of figuring out what to do if something goes wrong. Sometimes you just can’t book a single ticket anyway. There isn’t a great europe wide journey planner (good luck with Lisbon-Madrid or the Euskotren border crossing) with real-time information.
Cross border trains often aren’t the priority of a single country (for obvious reasons) and the entity that is supposed to have an eye on eu border travel by rail (the EU) frankly just doesn’t care a lot and it shows. The passport controls at internal shengen borders leading to 30+ min delays are just the cherry on top.
Still: A lot of intra-EU flights can be reasonably done by train/long-distance bus and a lot of (especially holiday travel) destinations substituted. It could always be much worse.
Hard disagree. This video sums up my experiences pretty well. Prices are shit, ticket conditions are shit, refund policies are shit, itinerary notifications are shit, speed is meh, search interfaces are meh.
Also, RIP if you have to travel through Germany and have to catch a train with 5-10 minute layover.
Yet, even though it's not good, at least it's not USA levels of shit. Of any developed nation, that takes the cake.
Germany: Alright, who will join us in helping Ukraine's air defense? :D
Rest of the West: *crickets*
If it weren't so serious, it would be almost comical. Especially after such a long time of shitting on Germany, often through disinformation or overblown shit. Now almost everyone else falls flat in their assistance. Whole bunch of hypocrites.
Putin needs to speed up. He's 72 years old, Stalin was 74 when he died. And Putins idol Stalin was left alone after his last meeting, he had a stroke and no1 dared to disturb him fearing deportation or getting killed. History rhymes, right?
Democraties after ww2 really should have had added a paragraph like "Playing the system is grounds to be excluded from current and future elections" becazse that's what they do: seeking out minorities to stoke hate, only for them to gain power.
politico.eu
Hot