Okay but Americans are numerically illiterate.

Many of the developers who worked on your favorite and most critical FOSS projects got paid. PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR OPEN SOURCE DEVELOPMENT! It is a fantastic model that is fair to everyone and enriches humanity.

False dichotomy. You can get paid for writing open source software. That was my entire career. It’s a choice; a matter of values and priorities. Not every byte I wrote was open source, especially in the beginning, but it’s not hard to go that way, and thrive.

I am less concerned with the long term traces we leave. Social interactions are ephemeral (or were, prior to moving them to the Internet) and we are here trying to meet our social needs, not necessarily to Build A Better World. I am all for the things we say naturally expiring and falling out of the record.

What bothers me is how a living conversation can be killed. And in such a way as to make it difficult even to find the people you were just interacting with again, if you don’t happen to remember their account ID.

Probably WAS using the sidewalk, maybe rode through the crosswalk, and the driver didn’t expect someone there so quickly. Cyclists are injured and die on the sidewalk more frequently than on the road.

broken archive.org link

didn’t work

deleted by creator

Awwww, missed you this last two years

We’re in for a long arc.

First of all, the goal here is simply to meet the Chinese governments “Sustainable Development Goals.” That’s what “could help protect ground water” means. It’s a meaningless goal from the perspective of veganism or even global conservation.

But it’s also a meaningless solution. The rate of consumption increases each year. In that context, the goal isn’t just, “eat 10% less meat”, it’s, “establish a hard limit on the amount of meat consumed, which is 10% less than our current rate of production.” Maintaining that hard limit becomes a larger and larger commitment each year, with a growing population sharing a fixed amount of meat. There might be a mechanism for accomplishing that IN CHINA, but globally that is an utterly unimplementable solution to any problem that animal ag is currently causing.

I think it’s the only fair compromise. I think we should respect a right to delete. But I don’t think that right to delete should be powerful enough to smother discussion. The person who started the communal thread should not have the power to silence everyone who participates.

I don’t give a shit about eating meat, I care about murdering individuals I love. You can’t trick people into not committing atrocity. It will never work. They’ve already been thoroughly tricked by someone much more clever and devious than we. That’s not a contest we can win. The only thing we have are our principles. It worked on us, it has worked on others, and it will continue to work.

Yeah. Right. How long would a 10% reduction last before we were right back where we were.

this is a cartoon understanding of partriarchy

It’s a rigged game. It’s like you’re at a casino. It doesn’t matter HOW you play the game, the casino wins. The way to beat them is not to engage with them at all. Established capital exploits the artist and the audience alike. You have to work outside the system of coercive control to have a meaningful effect that doesn’t just get turned back against you. Giving the artist more incentive to stay in an abusive situation ultimately helps the platform more than the artist, as compared to spending the same money through a direct channel.

Irrelevant but thanks

I’m so sorry, so deeply grieved to tell you, yes, it is. Please educate yourself. It’s life and death for hundreds of millions of vulnerable individuals.

your brain has been fucked by capitalism.

Says the guy who wants to die fighting for some corporation’s stable diffusion AI

I’m not going to unfold the thread to see what other benighted things you are saying

fucking children

says the guy having an actual temper tantrum over “Good use of AI, but put a sign on it next time!”

It’s also horrific animal abuse. Actual atrocity.