I don't know.
I still think there's at least some value, even if the only thing it accomplishes is getting people to talk about it. Many people have never even heard of The Internet Archive.
Either way, there isn't really a reason not to.
cybersin
joined 1 year ago
Sure, but it is still better than doing nothing.
Relevant username?
I expected a bit more competency from pew research, but it seems that this quiz misses the mark quite badly.
destroying as much fossil fuel infrastructure as possible is a good thing
Maybe not when doing so would release as much methane as a small country.
This is great! Now you can compare prices for the 10 services you require and calculate the extent of your of financial ruin, all from the back of the ambulance!
I jest. Also, good luck opening a SQL database or parsing a massive minified JSON file. Many facilities do not provide the data in an easily accessible or standardized form, making it inaccessible for most people.
Something, something... The USA, the 13th amendment, and for-profit prisons.
At least they won't take your organs though. Right?
EDIT: I'll update my previous comment for clarity
"But, that would cost money!" - Zucc
Sure, but "effectiveness" is usually not a binary and is often difficult to measure. Small, but persistent changes should still add up. Eventually.
So long as people recognize that these things are in fact quite toothless, I'm not sure they are entirely detrimental. There's no reason this couldn't be used as a starting point for more effective action, now that signatories are in greater contact with the campaign.