>Second, if you live in a cold country, improve your house heating efficiency and/or switch to heat pumps.

Almost everything is inconsequential compared to living in a (detached) house. The detached house increases consumption of all kinds by orders of magnitude due to greatly increasing the distance everything moves to and around the house.

Ironically I live in a model of suburban bliss with tons of green space and it works because the houses are mostly row houses (terrace houses, tussenwoning, etc). It’s even easy to be car free here. Houten, NL

They want a bad guy to implicate that isn’t them and their detached single family home in a suburb with their large cars and vacations involving flights and foreign made toys and out of season fruits and vegetables.

Good luck selling degrowth to westerners - especially Americans.

Also, the passenger does not have to worry about the driver doing anything to them (and vice versa).

I thought reduced fossil fuel usage benefits the world.

“In 2025, the global fleet of EVs avoided the consumption of around 1.7 million barrels of oil per day” https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2026/executive...

Maybe they used an LLM powered bot to make the favorable comment here in order to guarantee the results.

And LLM powered bot also downloads our app and produces reviews?

It's an app on playstore which anyone can see including reviews.

Why would streaming be the best option for you to watch a movie once? You have long been able to rent movies with just a few clicks from many sellers. Maybe Netflix is the only one where you have to subscribe for a month to watch a movie.

I picked a random film, Titanic, and supposedly it's $4 to rent on Amazon or Apple TV.

A Netflix account costs $9 with ads or $20 without, so I guess it depends on whether you watch more or fewer films than that per month?

JFC, it didn't even cost $4 to rent titanic when it was new.

The average household cable tv subscription didn't get you access to all the music, enormous amount of youtube content, shipping benefits, and ad-break free watching. And it wasn't on demand viewing. And it required using a special device in a specific room in a specific house.

And, back in the day, you also had contract terms of 1 or 2 years, so you were locked in. Now, you can turn these services on and off at your whim

Exactly, what we have now is vastly better than whatever existed before (in terms of convenience and price). Watch when I want, what I want, how I want, and never pay for anything I don't want and never see ads and never have to go somewhere to get it.

I especially like not paying for sports to watch the few shows/movies I like.

Some people who like to (legally) own media might be disappointed, though.

As someone who loves buying music - yeah, I hear that.

I just never really felt like the incentives were quite the same to purchase movies. They've always been constrained by their formats/vendors in a way that was never as true for music, they've always cost more, I don't rewatch movies as much as I'll re-listen to albums, and I think the...I dunno...nature, telos of movies lends itself better to ephemeral access.

>It's not enough to have data, you also have to have societal buy-in.

The lower auto liability and umbrella insurance premiums alone would drive buy-in.

It’s literally the riskiest thing people do with the costliest consequences.

I wonder if that stat is true if removing the kids in gangs from the data. One cause of death is relatively undiscerning and applicable to all, but the other cause of death might only apply to a few. But I don’t know, I’d like to see the actual stat.