I see you implying everyone arguing against you is either a dumb moron, a child or russians in your other comments, so it’s worthless arguing against your, ironically, authoritarianism-fueled idea.

Bye.

Sorry, but this comment left me completely stunlocked. Why am I supposed to solve the problems to a problem you’ve created? Since when is trying to prove your point not how an argument works? What even is an argument anymore?

So what happens when a platform grows and that threshold is reached one day? Force everyone to de-anonymize and potentially reveal sensitive information about themselves or abandon their account?

There’s just no good way to force only some to de-anonymize without running into problems.

While I believe in the right to online anonymity, I also don’t think that de-anonymization would even work, when I see the same garbage being posted in places that enforce real names. It just doesn’t seem like a detractor to those types of people.

Instead, I’d rather want to see harsher punishments for big sites failing to moderate their content. I’d also take a look at these personalized “recommendation” engine and maybe ban them altogether. (Bonus points if it also affects personalized ads.)

So how exactly would you decide which platforms are allowed to be anonymous then?

Ok, I think I’m starting to see the issue now. One thing I’ve missed is that the “tiny” amount Germany is importing yearly is actually half of the consumption South Sweden. That sure puts a bit of stress on the system.

I’ll say that I’m still not fully convinced due to the lack of concrete numbers, but it’s something I’ll keep in mind in the future.

I can’t find a way to dodge the paywall to that article, but the short blurb I was able to translate, makes it sound like my guess is at least part of the problem:

As long as the sun shines the most, Skåne benefits from cheap solar energy from our neighboring countries. As soon as solar energy declines, the price of electricity rises throughout Southern Sweden. The poor Swedish transmission capacity means that we cannot benefit from cheap northern hydropower.

That said, I do agree that Germany should’ve long been split into two zones, at least until transmission capacity catches up. But alas, most people in Germany don’t even recognize that the lack of transmission capacities as the source of the problem and rather blame it on us importing expensive electricity from France.

It’s actually those parallels why I’m so distrustful: I’m far from an expert on the topic, quite the opposite if anything, but given how many people, even politicians, put out even dumber claims much more confidently, I’m always wary about such statements.

Based on the article, it seems more like that’s more of a problem of south Sweden just having a big energy deficit in general, not as a result of imports/exports or the actions of Germany particular.

The way I understand it, it’s more that a new connection just wouldn’t make sense because Germany already has a problem from moving energy from its own offshore wind parks in the north to the south.

I couldn’t find a good article explaining the current energy situation in south Sweden, but looking at ElectrityMaps, I’d guess that part of the problem is that there’s a huge amount of nuclear energy being produced in South Central Sweden, saturating the grid and making the transfer of cheap hydro and wind energy from the northern Zones difficult.

I’m not sure I follow? According to this chart the import from Sweden to Germany is almost negligible.

Sweden, Finland, Lithuania and Poland all seem to be bigger net importers.