- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Swedish authorities say they have detected a Chinese ship moving near two telecoms cables that failed within hours of each other on the Baltic Sea bed in recent days.
Prosecutors in Stockholm have launched a preliminary investigation into suspected sabotage, hours after Germany dubbed the cable failure part of a “hybrid operation”.
On Sunday morning at about 10am, Swedish authorities registered problems with a data cable under the Baltic Sea from the Öland island to Lithuania. At 4am on Monday, telecoms operators in Finland and Germany reported problems with another cable called C-Lion-1.
Both cables were damaged in the Swedish economic zone, prompting prosecutors in Stockholm to take the investigation lead.
That’s a response to an argument I was not making. I share your non-enthusiasm about .ml.
I was talking about the social cost of locking out the creators of Lemmy. It’s reasonable to argue that that social cost is worth bearing. But it’s imo unreasonable to pretend it doesn’t exist.
However, I would caution that .ml is the standard instance that many people start out at, because that’s the site promoted from Lemmy’s GitHub and from join-lemmy:org. There are reasonable people caught among the unreasonable ones.
I’d object to [.ml] being the “only community that supports an attempted genocide” [emphasis mine], for two reasons:
[Edith: formatting]
What does that mean? The aggressor here is Russia, they started the war unprovoked. What exactly is ‘unparalleled’?
I was talking about genocide and offensive wars in general, not the context of this particular war.
So what does that mean? If .lm communities openly support Russia’s war in Ukraine, is it a ‘stance of absolute moral superiority’ to condemn this because the same happens elsewhere? (It should be a matter of course, but just to mention it: We must condemn genocide everywhere, no matter where it happens.)
I am admittedly having a hard time putting my contention with this into words in a way that makes sense. I may have chosen the wrong hill to die on. In which case, sorry for that “absolute moral stance”. I do think the remainder of that comment holds up, though.