Could you quote the articles? I read them and couldn’t find the data that backs your claim. But maybe I missed it. As the person making the claim, it is your job to demonstrate it.

Ok, I got time to read it. Drones are only mentioned in one paragraph of the conclusion. Here it is:

‘Eco-friendly’ fireworks, which do not use perchlorate and have lower levels of heavy metals, do exist (Fan et al. 2021); the problem lies in their higher cost of manufac- turing (Palaneeswari and Muthulakshmi 2012). The future of ‘firework’ displays may lie in the use of drones or unmanned aerial vehicles. Drones and visible-wavelength lasers for light shows have the benefit of being reusable, have no emissions, and are quiet (Daukantas 2010; Zerlenga et al. 2021). Drones come with their own issues for wildlife, however, usually flying at low altitudes where there are most likely to come into contact with wildlife; a review indicated that many taxa react negatively to the presence of a drone (Rebolo-Ifrán et al. 2019). Even so, drone light shows are less likely to disturb animals, wild or domestic, with noise, nor do they deposit large amounts of pollutants.

The use of drones is an opening hypothesis, not the subject of the study. Impact of drones is not quantified, it is hypothesized to be lower. The linked papers that I have also checked also don’t quantify the impact but similarly mention it as a potential eco-friendly alternative.

Would you have a different reading of this article?

My mistake, I read the abstract too fast and too late, let me read it and get back to you.

No you don’t, that’s for fireworks, now we need the impact of drone shows to answer the problem. Would you have it?

Edit: I was wrong, it does mention drones.
Edit2: After proper reading. It only mentions it as an opening hypothesis in its conclusion. It does not quantify the impact of drones, which is what we need to understand if they are actually more eco-friendly.

Absolutely, fireworks also have emission in their while life cycle, so let’s get the data and compare. EVs are not zero emission and offsetting is not zeroing emission, it’s just compensation, pollution is still being produced and if everyone does that we will not reduce it. In fact EVs sometimes have higher emissions than thermic card at fabrication, but it has been demonstrated that they emit less during their full lifecycle.

I am not saying they are better. I am questioning if they are. Please don’t mistake my question as veiled disagreement, I am not a Xitter user. Someone claimed an objective opinion, and that supposed to have data and a study to back it, but there likely isn’t any yet. I am open to the possibility, I just want to make sure it is actually more ecological. It is objectively demonstrated for electric cars vs thermic cars, for fireworks vs drone show, it probably isn’t yet.

Zero emission at use, not at fabrication, probably not when recharging and not as electronic waste at the end. Yes, I am being serious, considering only emission during usage is a very limited view of what carbon footprint is. A view that is often used by companies for green washing. Do you also believe electric cars are zero emissions? Considering full life, knowing which one emits more is not trivial.

Objectively, so you have some data to back it up? Do you have the comparative carbon footprint of those shows?

Parent comment claims it would, so my questions refers to that.

Are drones really less pollution than fireworks?

I feel like it means: we are not like Nintendo, we make video games for adults (and children who want to play like adults).

ISO8601 🙌

Communism didn’t invent empathy, humanism, solidarity, freedom or free sharing; it probably grew from there, and other things like FOSS can grow from there without being communist.

Do you find lemmy.world defending the USA wrongdoing to be of a comparable extent as lemmy.ml defending the authoritarian left regimes wrongdoing?
I feel like lemmy.world is still pretty left compared to reddit and very commonly criticizing all the stupid wars the USA have been into as well as its support for Israel in its current war.

Read what Dessalines wrote on his reddit or essays, there’s no doubt that he supports authoritarian communism.

Because it’s not just any political view, tankism is part of the ideologies that support regimes which unmistakably restrict the freedom of speech. This could be an issue for an internet forum.
It’s actually not different from having a right wing billionaire buying a social media. It’s very much the same thing, and most people on the fediverse are there to avoid this kind of political influences on the platform.

So you confirm you used the original meaning? Then yes, that’s pretty average Western. You wrote it as if it was some extremist position, but it’s not, hence my question.

They should consider going back.

There’s probably some western countries or political groups that will judge this as being antisemitism because they follow the logic that the existence of Israel is essential to the survival of the Jewish people. This idea was obviously much more consensual after WW2 than today.

And if I wanted to participate, I’d probably be welcome so long as I follow the rules.

Not only the rules, you also have to avoid critizing the dominant ideology, otherwise you will get at best dog pilled, at worse harassed and censored by moderation.

Lemmy.world is ran by Zionists.

Do you mean people in favor of the existence of a state of Israel (original meaning) which is most of the Western world, so unsurprising, or in favor of the colonization after the 1993 “two states solution” agreement?
If it’s the later, do you have proof?

FYI, the second main dev, Nutomic, although he doesn’t write as much, is in the same ideology, his avatar is Fidel Castro, the Cuban dictator.

During their AMA, 10 months ago, I directly asked them:

Since you’re very upfront with your political preferences, how much did it play a role in motivating you to create Lemmy? Was it a tech experiment first and a political project second?
Do you have some kind of core principle to not let your political preferences excessively interfere with your role as founders, main developers and moderators of Lemmy?

Thanks for your work, it’s projects like that keep the ideal of the open internets alive. https://lemmy.ml/post/2920188/2385128

They intentionally ignored my questions and answered to other later questions with fewer points.

Eventually, 10 months later, my personal observation is that it seems that they keep their ideology tendencies to their home instance, which is fair enough since people are free to leave and block. And they don’t seem to be developing some centralized International political oppression feature into Lemmy, like their role models may have, so far.

Don’t forget that you can block an instance personally now.