I’ll give you an upvote just for knowing what type of gem it was. So many South African diamond mine comments smh.

o7

Slight correction. The 170 refers to how many more seats they have compared to everyone else.

410 - (650 - 410) = 170

So 84 of their members could vote against a bill and it would still pass, which is significant. I think? I’m not sure how contentious votes are within party in the UK.

It’s okay buddy, your definition of exodus was wrong. Just let it go.

As for the rest, I made a sarcastic comment based entirely on fact, they asked for proof of my statement, I gave them everything they needed to verify it. I’m sorry if my comment was too harsh for your sensibilities, but if that’s the worst you’ve heard on Lemmy, them I’m glad for you.

No definition I’ve ever heard requires an exodus to be initiated by the people leaving. Also, if you read the comment that started all this, I was explicit that I didn’t mean employee-led. So thanks for stopping by weeks later to display your ignorance and/or lack of reading comprehension.

Lmao they laid off 1900 from Activision Blizzard last year and shuttered multiple XBox game studios this month! Sure, I suppose they could all just hang around and work as volunteers, but I suspect they’ll be doing that exodus thing.

Been plenty of exoduses from MS lately. Oh! You mean ones led by the employees…

To paraphrase one of society’s less brilliant thinkers, “Who would have thought heathcare advanced materials science could be so hard?”

I had a little discussion with a guy complaining about sodium batteries and how you keep hearing these wild claims and then nothing. I did a quick search and saw an article about a $2 billion partnership agreement to work on a pilot plant for sodium batteries. He claimed it was yet another sensational headline and doubted anything would happen from it. Less than a week later I saw an article about a plant in America being announced.

This stuff is hard. It’s not like Master of Orion where you throw money at a specific research and get access upon completion. Different groups around the world are researching a multitude of different ideas, some related, and after a while a bunch of these ideas are combined and associated and researched, and all of a sudden you have a new product that’s significantly different from what was available before. And then you see incremental improvements for decades, not unlike the internal combustion engine or rechargeable lithium batteries.

I think it would make more sense to replace cost-effective with cheap. It may be cheaper to use a process that makes it likely 80% of the population dies in 35 years, but that’s a huge (non-monetary) cost. The overarching issue is our current economic system ignores those costs that take a generation or more to come due.