No, I don’t hate anyone.

I don’t understand why some accounts react so uneasy sometimes It likely shows that the linked reports are correct I guess.

@Jason Kraus

has flat lined their CO2 emissions for the last 18 months

This is misleading and incomplete information that makes it outright false.

China is set to miss its target to cut carbon intensity – the CO2 emissions per unit of GDP – from 2020 to 2025. The country would need steeper reductions to hit the it’s 2030 goal.

Emissions from the production of cement and other building materials indeed fell by 7% in the third quarter of 2025, while emissions from the metals industry fell 1%. This is due, however, not to environmental policy in Beijing, but rather to the ongoing real-estate crisis, as the construction sector uses most of the country’s steel and cement output.

Power-sector emissions were also flat year-on-year in Q3/2025, with emissions from transport fell by 5%, but oil consumption in other sectors grew by 10%, driven by chemical industry expansion. This resulted in a 2% rise in oil consumption overall. Gas demand and emissions grew by 3% overall in Q3, with consumption in the power sector up by 9% and by 2% in other sectors.

@[email protected]

I wrote that recently in another thread, and it’s true also here.

Your view is oversimplified to a degree that it is outright false.

However, it is not necessary to engage in such a discussion as it is not relevant here when we look at the data and how it is calculated.

According to the scientists at the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) cited in the linked report, China is behind by any metric, including by what the CAT scientists call a country’s “fair share.” This reflects the “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances”, as stated in the Paris agreement (Article 4.3),

Here you can find China’s CAT rating. As you can see, China’s ‘policy and actions against fair share’ is rated as insufficient, with its overall rating highly insufficient.

As you can also see in the CAT rating, no country is on track, but China is among those countries most behind by any comparative standards.

Yeah, the EU and other Western regions and states have only slowly begun to do the same, namely banning Chinese and other foreign. It’s late and not enough, but at least it gains traction also in the West.

This makes no economic sense.

It’s clearly an overcapacity issue.

This is the first part, as the article says.

But the leaders of China, the United States and India will be notably absent

Are you trying to make China look less irresponsible?

Yeah, it may ‘reshape markets and politics’ but there is no reason to celebrate as China’s climate actions are far behind according to scientists.

Yeah, doesn’t help the climate as China’s climate actions are far behind according to scientists.

Just posted a quick overview, here again: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries

The world cannot dump all their high volume manufacturing on China and then turn around and blame them for the pollution.

I could elaborate a lot on that. This view is oversimplified to a degree that it is outright false.

However, it is not necessary to engage in such a discussion as it is not relevant here when we look at the data and how it is calculated.

According to the scientists at the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) cited in the linked report, China is behind by any metric, including by what the CAT scientists call a country’s “fair share.” This reflects the “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances”, as stated in the Paris agreement (Article 4.3),

Here you can find China’s CAT rating. As you can see, China’s ‘policy and actions against fair share’ is rated as insufficient, with its overall rating highly insufficient.

As you can also see in the CAT rating, no country is on track, but China is among those countries most behind by any comparative standards.

[Edit typo.]

If you self-host, you pay nothing (except for your sever, of course). Nextcloud has always been self-hostable as we know, and you can do that in the future.

Ich bin kein Experte für sowas, aber Hetzner gilt als günstig, aber nicht sehr sicher. Vielleicht irre ich mich auch. Andere wissen da sicher mehr.

Gut is auf jeden Fall, das es mehr Anbieter und Alternativen zu MS gibt.

Die Preise sind sehr unterschiedlich, das stimmt. Aber wie gesagt, die haben noch keine Daten und wissen nicht, was ihre Kunden kaufen. Das kann sich in den kommenden Monaten schnell ändern.

Ich wusste nicht, dass Hetzner auch so etwas hat (aber Hetzner ist nicht sehr sicher, oder?).

Von den Preisen und genauen Angeboten kann man hier meiner Ansicht nach noch nicht wirklich viel ableiten, weil die noch nicht viele Kunden haben. Das kann sich bei neuen Produkten wie diesen hier schnell ändern, sobald erste Daten da sind.

Wahrscheinlich ist das wohl so. Aber diese Produkte sind giftig und daher verboten. Jeder Shop in Europe, der so etwas verkauft, wird sofort geschlossen. Ich verstehe nicht, warum Temu oder Shein noch online sind. Diese Billigmode vergiftet Menschen und Umwelt im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes.

Für DE habe ich nichts gefunden, aber es gibt eine EU-weite Petition: https://action.wemove.eu/sign/2025-04-score-fast-fashion-petition-EN

Manche Expertinnen meinen, dass es besser ist, wenn man gleich eine Petition direkt beim Europäischen Parlament macht: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/de/be-heard/petitions

@[email protected]

No, we are not talking about technology. The humanitarian situation in Chinese supply chains is devastating. Brazil sued China carmaker BYD over ‘slave-like’ conditions in a Brazilian plant this year.

It is noteworthy that Chinese companies operate across integrated supply chains, meaning there are almost no relevant local or non-Chinese workers along the value chain. When expanding abroad, Chinese companies bring their own Chinese workforce. It is noteworthy that China is among the countries that heavily oppose laws for transparent supply chains.

In the mentioned case in Brazil, the authorities found that the Chinese migrant] workers could not leave their dormitories without permission, were forced to work long hours without weekly breaks, and were deprived of wages and passports. Their living quarters were overcrowded and lacked basic amenities, including sufficient toilets and refrigeration for food. Brazilian labour authorities stated that the workers are victims of human trafficking.

Such conditions are typical for China. There is ample evidence for forced labour in China’s Xinjiang region and across the country as well as in Chinese companies operating abroad.

I posted the picture in another thread. Just have a look and then think again (you’ll find more on the web).

If such ‘dolls’ are sold in a shop around the corner, what would you say?

@[email protected]