China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990 • Hacker News Board

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#621

Post by steve_adams_86 » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 5:34 AM UTC

msl wrote: post #409

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Propaganda is deceptive or misleading by definition.

What definition is that? Merriam-Webster: "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person" and "ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause" [1] Cambridge Dictionary: "information, ideas, opinions, or images, often only giving one part of an argument, that are broadcast, published, or…

I stand corrected. I should have checked the definition before making that claim. Thanks for elucidating that for me. I've understood propaganda to be one thing for nearly 30 years somehow.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#622

Post by ivan_gammel » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 6:53 AM UTC

trhway wrote: post #589

ivan_gammel wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. The fact is, nothing did happen, there’s no export of fresh water and there’s no such plans.

>One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. It isn't article itself that counts here. The official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture is the fact here. Whereis you so far stated only your personal opinion. >there’s no such plans You contradict the above mentioned official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture.

Russian government officials said many bizarre things in the past which never materialized. This is one of them. This guy lost his government job in 2018 after drinking champagne on a private jet and making toast to agricultural lobby. If you still insist this thing is real, you should prove it with specific parameters of this project. Construction start, volume, length of pipe etc.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#623

Post by yanhangyhy » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 8:15 AM UTC

Phelinofist wrote: post #607

yanhangyhy wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For our mindset, we love AFD. Not saying we have interests connected to them, but they seems at least have an action plan , not like Merz and the president of Franchise. The industry decline of German is a hot topic on Chinese internet these days I really like a book by Foucault that discusses the origins of the modern state. He argued that the modern state could only originate in the West because only there did a ba…

I agree that the EU needs to reform into something stronger, because the different nations of the EU are not really acting in union. However, while I sympathize with some stances of the AfD they are generally pretty anti EU. So I'm not sure I agree that they have a real action plan.

It’s possible that East Asian ways of thinking appear right-wing and conservative to Europeans. So we tend to understand European right-wing parties better — not just the AfD, but those in every country. For example, Belarus and Hungary are friendly toward China, yet most EU countries might want to kick Hungary out.

As for the AFD, it may simply be that we think the other parties are being ridiculous. The most important things for an industrial country—power and energy—are not being fixed, while liberals just talk empty talk about values. I recently read that quite a few sausage factories in Germany have already gone out of business, and some have been bought by Chinese companies (Wolf Essgenuss GmbH). If something like that happened in China, most Chinese people would probably feel that China should perish.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#624

Post by M95D » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 8:44 AM UTC

wahnfrieden wrote: post #561

M95D wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems more reasonable than most other countries where LGBT advocacy / propaganda / public exposure and circus draws negative opinions and more discrimination and aggression.

He is saying that LGBT advocacy/public exposure (what LGBT "propaganda" have you seen?) results in caging. Isn't that worse? How is caging better than negative opinions?

What caging? He didn't say anything about any caging. Did you reply to the correct comment?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#625

Post by Arainach » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 9:15 AM UTC

yonaguska wrote: post #614

Arainach wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sprung up from capitalist propaganda and intentional sabotage of the government by conservatives. > I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub. Grover Norquist said the quiet part out loud in 2001, but conservatives have been running that playbook since the New Deal.

For me it happened when I was growing up and I watched my family bankrupted and pushed to near homelessness with zero legal recourse due to a corrupt local government. There are countless others that have found themselves at the mercy of a large government, with unlimited money and resources.

....so you prefer a "small" government, which history has shown time and time again leads to corporations doing evil en masse, ruining all sorts of lives around them?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#626

Post by coldtea » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 10:31 AM UTC

tossandthrow wrote: post #500

coldtea wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "the young people have to work more" argument is only valid as they are working for the older generation. Nope, that's just a tiny part of the problem. An economy has a certain size, which depends on how many people support it (work) and how many people buy stuff (consume). Fewer young people means (everything else being equal) less productivity. That's regardless if the old people are kept around or euthanized…

I see what the issue is - you see a contracting economy as being a problem in itself. It is not, as another commenter pointed out.

Ah, ok, if another commenter pointed it out it's not a problem, I guess it's fine then!

Let's check back in 20 years.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#627

Post by tossandthrow » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 11:39 AM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #626

tossandthrow wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see what the issue is - you see a contracting economy as being a problem in itself. It is not, as another commenter pointed out.

Ah, ok, if another commenter pointed it out it's not a problem, I guess it's fine then! Let's check back in 20 years.

Well, there is not reason to rewrite what another commenter wrote.

But I agree, let's check back in 20 years

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#628

Post by seethedeaduu » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 11:42 AM UTC

ainti wrote: post #596

seethedeaduu wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is horrible and only seems to show that voidUpdate was in fact right. > I think this is necessary Are you trans?

Keeping it strictly medical and requiring a surgical procedure that only the most dedicated would choose seems a lot more reasonable than the western idea of basing it off identity and having basically no gatekeeping.

Sounds like a gross violation of human rights, along with eugenics. https://tgeu.org/human-rights-victory-european-court-of-huma...

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#629

Post by seethedeaduu » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 11:45 AM UTC

yanhangyhy wrote: post #617

seethedeaduu wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is horrible and only seems to show that voidUpdate was in fact right. > I think this is necessary Are you trans?

I’m not, but I know quite a few people who are. I’ve seen too many people regret it after surgery. Sometimes I even think the evaluation requirements aren’t strict enough.

People that you know personally or propaganda that you saw online? And what perventage of these cases was due to bad surgical outcomes? (Potentially due to surgeon incompetence)

Because I really doubt that you personally know many trans people in this category.

> Sometimes I even think the evaluation requirements aren’t strict enough.

Leave it to trans people to judge that.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#630

Post by ainti » Fri, Oct 31, 2025, 12:37 PM UTC

seethedeaduu wrote: post #628

ainti wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping it strictly medical and requiring a surgical procedure that only the most dedicated would choose seems a lot more reasonable than the western idea of basing it off identity and having basically no gatekeeping.

Sounds like a gross violation of human rights, along with eugenics. https://tgeu.org/human-rights-victory-european-court-of-huma...

Depends on if one agrees with that ECtHR judgment.

Considering that Article 8 of the ECHR is framed as a negative right (as in freedom from coercion and interference):

> Right to respect for private and family life

> 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

> 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Then it seems odd that the ECtHR decided, at some point, to start interpreting it as a positive right (as in obliging specific actions to be taken), in this case the argument that anyone should be free to instruct the state to change their sex marker on state-issued identity documentation, with minimal restrictions attached.

Also they seem to have disregarded that permitting this may have significant repercussions on the rights and freedoms of others, depending on what exactly this sex marker permits an individual to do in any particular jurisdiction, i.e. accessing services and facilities restricted to those of that sex.