leicsmac

It is - especially considering the global climate science corps have stated things panning out in this way for the last few decades to the crossed T.

You and a lot of people share that same sentiment about the speed of progress. I just hope that you and they are right and I'm wrong, because that will mean in a few decades this discussion will be able to be revisited without the backdrop of a truly horrific humanitarian crisis and a rather intolerant mob looking to hold people accountable for it.

Fair comment. TBH though I reckon the single answer that will please the most people in time will be the one that actually allows them to continue to live as they are in the future. Even if they don't think that option is correct and/or necessary right now.

Just to be certain then, because I'm curious... what is the best way forward to avoid problems is to you? Not looking to ask a trick question, I'm thoughtful about it because while I know the current drawdown looks OK, the simple numbers show that more needs to be done - I'm just stumped for a method as to how that carries enough people in a democratic system.

My own take on that is reasonably simple; they tell people what they want to hear. And people believe what they want to hear.

He's a GB News talking head. All of the above is a prerequisite for that role.

I was thinking more in terms of the major print and TV outlets rather than something that's pretty much Web-only, but fair point.

I think it's fair to have that position and it's possible work needs to be done. However, I would contend that the BBC remains more impartial than any other outlet beyond press release agencies. If anyone has an example of a better in that regard, I'd be happy to hear it.

Fair enough. I think the UK (and everyone else) can and should be doing both.

I think that we do have a choice, it's just not one that a lot of people would like and so wouldn't be accepted in a democratic society. Again, speaking personally, while it's obvious there are some nations lagging behind on this matter, this is still a global issue with global responsibility. If the shit does hit the fan, those who are looking around at the world afterwards and looking for someone to blame likely aren't going to be choosy about who they hold accountable. The UK can't just sit and say that they're doing their bit, even if they are - that won't fly.

Yep. Time it's not guaranteed that we as a species have.

This one's a bastard either way it's sliced IMO. On the one hand this does make it easier for all kinds of nasty sorts to hide what horrific stuff they're doing. On the other, it (in principle) also makes it easier for those under the heel of brutal regimes to communicate and collaborate and work to make their societies freer. I think folks in the UK perhaps take such freedoms for granted sometimes. But either way there's going to be both good and bad.

A sane person would define such as the actual legislative, executive and judicial mechanics of government based in their capital city, rather than a small piece of one's territory... but as you say, who knows with this situation?

And to add to this, what we know about the Russian nuclear release authority is little but one thing that is explicitly stated (and has been mentioned on this thread before is) "use [...] when under attack by conventional weaponry and the survival of the state is threatened".

... and that is where such natural consequences might be perversely democratic, too. They won't differentiate between any social, financial or psychological differences. Of course, one might say that the rich, the smart and the ruthless might last longer, and that's likely true...but only for so long. No one will be insured from the consequences in the end if it gets as bad as it might.

Agree that we'll be fine...just so long as Putin doesn't end up with a situation where there's no possibility of reclaiming "their" land and the choice is a straight dichotomy between death and humiliation or the big red button. Which could happen if Russian and NATO forces begin a barney. So better for that not to begin.

Hmmm...then I reckon you still want to have the Jellyfish Shield when you get to it (easy to get it as well), but make sure you focus on building INT and Mind when you level up - those are the key stats for Astrologers - DPS and mana pool boosts respectively. Also, from what I can see early game is tricky for mage/hybrid builds but once you get past Stormveil Castle there's lots of places pretty much right away in Liurnia that do great weapons and armour for such builds.

It's a damn good game. As for hints - are you going for a melee or ranged (magic/arrows) build? If you're melee and you're in Limgrave, I'd recommend heading south to the Forlorn Hound Evergaol (near the bridge that leads to the southern island) and taking on the boss there. He's quite a tough bastard but you get the Bloodhound Fang for beating him which is a great sword for going through the Stormveil Castle and for much of the rest of the game if you level it up. Once you've gotten through Stormveil you can access a place where you can get both the Sword of Night and Flame and the Jellyfish Shield, which are absolutely superb outfittings for pretty much the entire game. Beyond that, early game if you're a melee build, learn the art of critical hits - either by sneaking up behind enemies or blocking with your shield and attacking back (riposte). Saves a lot of time and effort and makes things much smoother.

Also just finished this myself. 95 hours, finished one playthrough as classic SONAF/Jellyfish shield melee build, did most stuff except beating Malenia - intend to come back for her when I'm not thinking of throwing my controller across the room. Had to respec to use the Godslayer Greatsword specifically for the final two bosses though. Can see why it's won the plaudits, so much to see and do and executed so well. Combat and bosses in particular are classic Souls-tough mostly but they don't seem unfair (again, mostly). Wondering about a mage build for NG+.

Yep. Welcome to Soulslike gaming.

Freedom of choice is of course damned important, but in this case it really doesn't address the issue of the human propensity to want to be told what they want to hear, not necessarily what is. Which isn't always a good thing.

Well, hopefully that is not a straight dichotomy and more than those two options exist. Oil really should have no place in terms of energy generation ASAP - sooner than a few decades, anyway. Producing plastics and other such things? Fine, no alternative. Burning the stuff? No. Better options ASAP. So it would seem. The moral implications of leaving hundreds of millions of people to their fate due to a problem that all of the industrialised world (the UK included) have a hand in is evidently flexible.

@MPH to address your thoughts in this thread... While the UK is making great strides in terms of developing renewable solutions, what's happening now isn't enough to prevent real problems, and that's clear. Of course, one may say that's out of the UK's hands, but at the very least might it be possible for the UK to exert more diplomatic pressure for other nations to follow its lead and avert those problems, as well as looking to do things perhaps even faster at home? This is a global issue, after all.

And a lot of people are asking that question. But I'll be honest, outside of the press release agencies like Reuters and Associated Press, the Beeb is as close to impartial as exists right now. Every other outlet has a bigger overall bias in their reportage one way or another IMO. If not the licence fee, there should be some other direct ring-fenced taxable income for such a news source.

Obviously one's mileage may vary, but I think that there should be one public broadcastable source of information and news that is sourced from obligatory taxed public payments in the same way other public services are and available for all to watch and listen to, for the reason that truthful information should be available whether people agree with it or not. In this day and age, people tend not to fund news outlets that don't satisfy their confirmation bias, after all - truth or falsehoods be damned. Oh, and the Planet Earth series too.