So you basically disagree and explain it by saying Debian and ChromeOS is bad without any further details why exactly. Alright.

I think there are more variables to consider than package manager or closed vs open source, what makes a good Distro. iOS is also not bad, no matter if closed or not, for most people other factors are more important like usability.

Chrome OS not just for web browsing, it has a file manager, media player and more included.

Do not project your opinion on others, this will not work. Just because you think it is bad does not mean it actually is, no argument you had is a K.O. argument because why shall I install another OS and trust randoms when I already decided to trust Google with email etc. Switching each time to other products increases the risk of exposing data to platforms and people you do not know. Google has, as said, high security standards and the OS is same like Windows or other closed platforms well maintained.

Better is not an objective argument, that is why I am out here.

As of today, I do not understand why good electrical bicycles are so expensive. The govt. at least in my country, never really supported it or gave much attention to spread the idea. We have a bunch of - green people - who basically started it in our city, but it was never funded by our government.

The battery development and process to improve something only started to evolve when electrical cars got more and more accepted in our society, but the price for cars and cycles are still too high + if you want to repair something on your own you loose warranty, it is difficult or you need special tools which you cannot easily buy.

Pseudoscience article. Reality looks different.

The video is basically based on other videos and they link to articles which they refer too. Within that linked video, they refer directly to some questionable articles.

If something is meant as sarcasm, please tag it as such. This is not obvious here.

Otherwise, I report this community now for delivery spreading misinformation. This is - for me - no joke, and I do not think we should communicate this.

There is also not really a point defending this, climate related stuff got worse, not better. I am absolute no fan of such jokes, especially then when one of the rule in this Community is… link to posts should come from reputable sources.

Crypto one way or another is the future, no matter if people like it or not. There are always people who try to fight new technology, nothing new here. We had the same people fighting PayPal and other online banking system when they were introduced.

• Fighting technology is stupid, you should embrace it and then find ways to make it reliable, economical and find ways to not waste much energy, new algorithm can archive that.
• The latest study is from 2020 which analyzed CO2 and came to such a conclusion, since then lots of things have changed. That Bitcoin was never be designed to be climate neutral is clear and there exist already better solutions. I think Tesla, Mozilla etc think that this reflects - forever - the state of blockchain or crypto, which is entirely not the case. It will evolve and we learned already from the mistakes.
• You can do with one transaction thousands of business transactions in one go with newer algorithm, no bank is that efficient.
• We simply need to build better renewable energy sources in generally.

Essential problems are

• Mining. The govt should declare this world wide as illegal. It looks like this might be happen, there are some countries already banning it which is a good thing.
• Mozilla and other things that the payment system might never evolve, this is entirely not the case. So Mozilla wrongly assumes that banking is the better solution, this is not the case in terms of efficiency and privacy.
• Scammers, but they also exist with traditional banking systems. I speculate that the govt and or Mozilla fear loss of control, which might be one key factor why they dislike it.
• Mozilla got over 500 Mio Dollars last year, instead of using the money to research climate neutral systems, they do nothing with the money. They could make an example and create a green system, instead they do just nothing here and spread an oversimplification that crypto in general is bad, which is not the case. It scares people away, especially the ones not involved or not booted into tech or such blockchain systems.

Are there plans to support BAT for donations, I already asked in chat but got no answer. I would like to use BAT because the system is trusted, and I can contribute monthly very easily trough my Browser.

Right now the domain is not verified, so I am asking in the hope to see more people auto-contributing.

THX for your answer.

• The video has no sources, timestamps to explain specific science he wants to backup nor is that dude an actual expert. He stitched together what he thinks implies security ignoring the fact that in 100 years we blow up 2 nuclear power plants and had another incident back in 61, we had many - almost - incidents, last one in Ukraine when military almost cut the power from an power plant which is critical. He also swipes under the carpet that you can, with some effort build weaponized material out from it to build dirty bombs. Especially in countries with an unstable government this is highly controversial.
• You cannot store waste for million of years, this is madness and not security. No one can predict 100 or 100k or even 1 million years, absolute no one can. Politics change, govt change, funding and maintenance might change.
• Claiming you know how long a warm barrel holds shows hybris. You constantly need to maintain it over time, this is not security this is a bottomless pit in that you need to throw cash into. Besides this, we actual had incidents with the transport already.
• There is no serious scientists who backs up nuclear energy and there never will be one. Actual expert all say there is no end solution. Which is backup by actual science which is backup up by many reviewers. There is no end solution and there never will be one.
• The so-called safety in the video is often the transport, the transport is never a thing for almost anything it is about storing it for millions of years which is problematic since there are earthquakes, Vulcan’s and other things that are not predictable. Again there is no end solution, there is many stuff on this subject.
• Nuclear energy is not green and does not belong into this community.

We should not encourage or fool yourself claiming it is secure when people already suffered and died because of nuclear energy.

We have alternatives that, even when compromised are simply - off - which is a more security way how to deal with our energy problem. Fusion energy is upcoming and it looks much more green and secure than traditional power plants.

Nuclear energy is and never will be secure and the excuse people pull that we need it is wrong, we should invest and encourage green alternatives that are sustainable and not claim that nuclear energy is secure when history clearly showed it is not.

Please remember people who died in Chernobyl, Fukushima, Hiroshima and so. Humanity should get rid of potential threats and not endorse and embrace them. I do not want to give the burden the next generation when we just could use some combined alternatives and think in general how we use our home planet.