Re-publishing this, because I rewrote the post a bit.
Target audience is people who like to talk about "negative externalities" and the need to "internalize" them.
Although at this point, it might make strategic sense to use the language of neoclassical economists to push for (e.g.) a carbon tax, we should recognize the fundamental flaws in the underlying world view.
https://mishathings.org/posts/internalize-this-environmental-economics/
Ok. I would say the main question should be "are there sufficiently accessible alternatives to the usage of Twitter in the communication between companies and customers?"
I guess in practice, at least in Europe, there are often multiple ways to reach out to companies? (Twitter, contact form etc.) So in that sense it makes sense?
But the fact that Twitter is also used (much more) to share memes should not matter?
(Disclaimer: I haven't looked into this case in too much detail).
@abff08f4813c @OpenTech_AUC Just curious: what do you mean "not its primary purpose"?
Carbon is the work of the devil.
Last Friday, during a class about the short and long term organic #carbon cycle, a student raised his hand:
"So, 6 protons, 6 neutrons, and 6 electrons...", 666....carbon must be the work of the devil."
Maybe this can help us sell carbon neutrality to religious conservatives.
From the perspective of plants we are all rich and in the long run they will eat us all. @plants
@HexesofVexes Last year students were blocking that very bridge to protest the university's response to Israel's violence in Palestine. They should have know that they were being accompanied by this paleo-force of resistance.
This little plant, identified as Equisetum arvense by a colleague, appears to have grown right through one of the metal posts of the bridge of Amsterdam University College (#AUC #UvA #VU).
I think it should be the mascotte of all students at Science Park:
"Those who persevere against all odds find the light at the end of the tunnel."