World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
That ... is wonderfully placed. I can see the prosecutor saying it, stopping to check notes, and then continuing.
Allowed her to wear? Does he control her wardrobe?
He was considerably more experienced as a climber. And even I could tell you not to go mountain climbing in snowboarding boots.
If I were to take someone mountain climbing I wouldn't allow them to wear life threatening clothing.
'Her social media feed suggests she was a keen mountaineer and her mother has told German media that she loved mountain hiking at night.'
He cannot force her to wear anything, but as the experienced climber he can deny the tour/guidance. If you have the skill, but neglect to use them in human fashion, that makes it more than an accident.
Formalizing an outing with a social/romantic partner to the same degree as a professional guide/tour giver is a disastrous precedent to set
Yeah I was wondering about that too, it only makes sense in a context where he's much much more knowledgeable about mountaineering than her.
If you climb on the back of my motorcycle with a paper hat instead of a helmet, I will not allow you to ride with me
no, but its extremely negligent to not suggest proper boots and gear for the hike. him being an experience hiker/climber should know that. since his intention is likely malicious its more than likely he allowed that.
You can't charge someone for lack of advice. The woman has responsibility for her own stupid decisions.
Kind of a grey area, though.
If you see someone out picking mushrooms and they pick a poisonous one and you don't say anything, sure, its not your responsibility.
If you take someone out to pick mushrooms and they pick a poisonous one and you know its poisonous and you let them eat it anyway, that's criminal.
You can't argue that someone that hosts free mushrooms hunting tours into dangerous territory and allows a bunch of amatuers to pick and eat deadly mushrooms isn't liable.
Agreed, but it appears to me that they were equally experienced. He indeed was at risk as well. It appears like a case of unconsciousness and inability to evaluate risk. I brought people picking mushrooms on several occasions and indeed I'd monitor what they're picking. But if I go with a friend who knows as much as I do it is unlikely I will ask regarding them picking a mushroom I don't know. I had friends picking mushrooms which are known poisonous and they had their reasons for doing that which were completely valid and did not endanger anyone.
From the article it does not appear that the boy was much more experienced than the girl, it may be incorrectly described in the article as I have not read more information about this. If that is the case I would not see the reason to consider this a crime, as he was not in the conditions to understand the repercussions of those decisions. The fact that he didn't call for help could indeed be criminal conduct, but it also be that he was under shock and couldn't handle the situation or that there was no coverage. While this being a crime is understandable, it is probably hard to prove this was a crime.
That's like driving around with someone that doesn't use their seatbelt. Yes, it's stupid not to wear one, but you as the experienced person (the driver) are required to inform and check that everyone is wearing a seatbelt. So yes, you absolutely can charge someone for lack of advice. It's called negligence.
"Are you really going to wear THAT?" is a question that men learn to never ask.
"Are you sure you don't want to bring a jacket?" almost never succeeds.
Always keep an extra in the car.
Damn, why did i never think of that. Brilliant.
That tidbit right there takes in a darker direction.
Otherwise, I'd say just leaving someone when you're both freezing to death is scummy, but understandable.
Fun fact: … is called an ellipsis.
Never understood that name. What's so elliptical about it?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ellipsis
Oh!
Well that makes sense. Thank you.
So an elliptical trajectory is also called that because it "falls short" of a circular one?
https://www.etymonline.com/word/ellipse
Edit: yes