[–] 7 points 1 month ago*

Those airports should not provide flight spots they cannot attend instead of asking the whole continent to renounce to security, I am OK to subsidise the transition of new legislations but prioritising profit over security sounds BS to me...

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Information and entropy changed, if you melt ice figures to refrozen the water again you go the other way around, but you have introduced/extracted things during the process, so I stop seeing the philosophical wonder.

    To begin with "how many things are in the room?" an in-depth list should include all the energy in all their forms, including matter and organisation, and when you perform processes that change this you logically vary the full list of things in the room.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Infrastructures are expensive. Startegic ones must be owend and maintained by all the people for the people, regardless individual usage, since being strategic have impact in every individual.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    The theoretical minimum would be sharing any instant of their lives, during which they could not sustain an unfettered access to anything, not like I would consider it a decent minimum in any case (I was revolving around the "unfettered access" concept of the previous comment), but I cannot imagine how it would exists any threshold of supervision above which you can exclude any unfettered access at any given moment of their existence, risk of harmful exposition never drops to zero, so argue an Orwellian measure for the indiscriminate shake of their safety has no sense to me...

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›