• lemmydividebyzero@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    You hate to see it when thinking about the environment.

    You love to see it when thinking about Putin getting briefed what’s on fire this time.

    • Tetragrade@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nah its good for the environment, they were going to burn that anyway. Now it’s still burnt, but the infrastructure is trashed.

      • DiaDeLosMuertos@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Lol. That’s quite a take, I kinda like it. ( I mean they’ll build it again using more materials and energy, but I don’t want to be a pooper of the party )

        • Tetragrade@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Probably :( My basis is that in game theory if you want to disincetivise a behaviour you need to keep harming agents that take that action (negative reinforcement), but I suppose that doesn’t apply here bc the Ukrainian signalling is about invading Ukraine, not the environment.

          There is the additional factor that this reduces the output of oil power plants, creating more demand for electricity, so there’s now a better opportunity for someone to build renewables to get more profits. I suppose you could also build something else, switch back to coal? Lmao