Chris

Your Vacuum Cleaner Became an EU Matter I talked to my mother yesterday. She is 84 and told me she had bought a new vacuum cleaner. She wanted one with at least 1600 watts, like her old one. The man in the store told her those don’t exist anymore. In 2017, the EU decided that no vacuum cleaner may have a motor above 900 watts. Everything above 1600 was already banned in 2014. My mother never asked the EU for permission. Neither did you. But the decision was made for both of you. The justification was the climate. The EU wanted to save energy, and millions of vacuum cleaners times many watts sounds like a lot. So they banned the powerful models. They didn’t inform. They didn’t label. They banned. And then we were told we wouldn’t notice the difference. That 900 watts cleans just as well as 1600. That is not my experience. I have used both, and there is a world of difference. But you don’t have to take my word for it. The claim was based on laboratory tests where vacuum cleaners were measured with an empty bag - a showroom illusion no one experiences at home, because suction drops as the bag fills up. Dyson sued the EU on exactly this point. And in 2018, the EU Court ruled in their favor: the testing method was misleading, and the energy label was annulled. The EU’s own proof that you lost nothing didn’t hold up in the EU’s own court. So what did we get out of it? The EU’s own figures say the rule saved around 11.7 TWh of electricity in 2020. That sounds massive, but it amounts to less than half a percent of the EU’s electricity consumption. And mind you, that is the EU’s own calculation, measured against the EU’s own guess at how big vacuum cleaners would have been without the rule. There is no independent measurement. And CO2? The EU accounts for 6-7 percent of the world’s total emissions. That share shrinks year by year, while China and India build new coal plants. Even if the entire EU hit zero emissions tomorrow, it would barely register on the global curve. A vacuum cleaner rule that moves fractions of those 6-7 percent means nothing for the climate in the big picture. But it means something for you. You pay with your freedom of choice. My mother cannot buy the vacuum cleaner she wants. You pay with bureaucracy, control, and testing regimes. And you pay with the principle: that Brussels can regulate what you keep in your utility closet. Here comes the objection, every time: “But if all the small players say they don’t matter, nothing ever happens.” Fine. Then show me that it works. The EU has pursued this policy for over a decade. Global emissions have risen anyway - because the growth happens in China and India, far beyond Brussels’ reach. We bought the symbol. Not the result. And that is the mechanism you need to see. Each individual intervention is “small”. The sum is called “necessary”. By that logic, you can justify regulating almost anything in your home. The problem is not that people care about the climate. The problem is that the concern has become a blank check to regulate citizens’ lives with no measurable effect. The power grows. The freedom shrinks. The climate doesn’t change because of it.

We are going to TOUCH you 🖐️

😩

In case you ever think you are unlucky.

This pisses me off so badly because every single comment is “they look like grown men with wigs” no the fuck they dont??? have you ever seen a woman irl?

The counterpoint to the male loneliness epidemic is the female grief epidemic. You see it EVERYWHERE in the haunted eyes of women and girls, nearly all of us in mourning for the male friends, relatives, and sometimes romantic partners we’ve lost not to death, but to themselves.

The Amazing Offscreen Circus

its so crazy like. goat just came out a few months ago and that had very nice character designs, even the background characters have very appealing designs only reason it didnt hit the core of the community is because there are no canine characters

Why is incest even a tag on ao3 like who tf actually reads that willingly anyone who writes that get them banned

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has called Valve’s AI disclosure policy on Steam “irresponsible,” arguing that forcing developers to label games using AI could unfairly target smaller studios. Sweeney believes AI will soon be a normal part of game development, so requiring developers to label games that use AI “makes no sense.” "I think it's really irresponsible of Valve. They shouldn't do it, because it makes it much, much, much harder for a game developer to have a chance of success. You have to choose from either not using tools that can make you way more productive, and probably failing due to competition that does." He also warned that these labels could make it easier for people to review-bomb games, especially those made by smaller studios.