The gallery still has to be closed, has to dedicate cleaners, invest into security measures etc. Vandalism can be as simple as spitting on the street. But that’s not my point, in general.

My point is why mess with a place what has nothing to do with climate change, and not mess with places that absolutely do have something to do with it?

Why do you assume it’s less shock value? I would argue the opposite

Well I agree with the problem, but I don’t believe attacking art galleries is a solut. Why not spray paint a real estate firm?

You created your own argument here though, right? I can be an advocate for any of one million serious problems that our societies have. Should everyone go destroy art galleries? Housing crisis = art destruction? Unliveable minimal wage = art destruction? Car centric societies = art destruction? Local store increased prices = art destruction? You have to agree that at a certain point this becomes indistinguishable from vandalism.

At what level then is this threshold? Or do you propose a hierarchy of ideas, which are suitable to protest in an art gallery, versus those that aren’t?

Why are people suddenly defending a Qatari-slaver owned news outlet? Weren’t people like 2 years ago boycotting a Qatar football cup? But now, suddenly, Qatar is reputable?

Well luckily they didn’t win this time, narrowly but SPD won.

Don’t even try. These people are deluded. There’s no way for Israel to do anything. Israel could probably be invaded, its inhabitants massacred and they would still chant bullshit about that somehow being okay. How has so much of the left turned to unconditionally support the nazi-inspired muslim brotherhood is beyond me.

Yep. I used to share my account with my family before Netflix’s password sharing crackdown. When they did it, I deleted my account day 1.

My dad and my sister just resubscribed separately. Unfortunately, a net win for them. Efectively +1 user. Just one example, but I’m betting this worked for many more of their users.

That is not a very productive generalisation, and I am sure you understand it

Look,I agree with everything you say in principle, but how are russian empire glorifiers = tankies? What you refer to as “tankies” quite literally killed the entire russian royal family.

Why would the sample size negate it?

If you assume that people with stronger immune system and less preconditions are less likely to catch COVID, or notice having caught it, surely the sample size does nothing to prevent this bias?

I wonder how is this measured, because I think by now we all have been exposed to COVID, one way or another. Sometimes without knowing. What they could be looking is simply people with a weaker immune system vs stronger immune system/ less preconditions vs more preconditions. I didn’t have time to analyse the article/paper right now but with a quick read I don’t think I noticed explanation how they control against that.

Unfortunately the French have lost their touch. If the protests against the pension reform achieved nothing , what can we hope this will achieve :(

Whether they consider themselves Russian is a slippery slope of an argument --and not only because I doubt you have trustworthy sources to back this claim. There are many regions in the world where minorities or even significant local majorities consider themselves separate nations.

If your argument that political power grows from the barrel of the gun is to be followed, then there’s no problem with Ukraine using said power to take over Crimea, should they have that capability. That kind of follows from your own logic.

100% by what metric? Unironically curious, lol