And lots, and lots, of painstakingly collected data to measure against

Not even but like literally this country. There’s less justification for the Australian government to claim sovereignty here. When you look at how aboriginal Aussies are treated, by the legal system and the health system for example, it’s hard to argue it isn’t genocide of a minority who have a claim to this land.

I get so frustrated at how, meaningful issues about the dubious actions of nation states are justified under international law become political theatre for power struggles.

Basically all large nations have peoples that want to split, but because international law requires nations to recognise a people before they get the protection of the law nobody properly does it as everyone could say “ok, you first”. International law is important, it lets us resolve conflicts without war and somewhat check superpowers. Reducing it to farce is a tragedy.

Is mass spec hard to explain? Zapy deflecty binny county correlatey.

I sincerely hope that this wave of anti assimilation centered around China manifests as a universal view that peoples have the right to break away from states.

Like holy shit to I hope for a future where states crumble and fragment, where indigenous Aussies can claim the red center (at least), the Catalonians and Basque people can break away etc.

International law is so strongly biased in states favour (because they make it) I would absolutely fucking love for anti Chinese sentiment to manifest as actual fucking consistent viewpoints.

Was in a cab after getting car in for service. Old mate was listening to 2gb and holy fucking shit were they beating up on the protests and saying vile racist shit.

Yep. They have just as much right to live as you. Find other options, I’m sure you can.

And yet almost everyone I’ve ever shown slaughterhouse footage to did not change at all.

I think that has more to do with being seen to do a thing or not. Nobody is actually stupid enough to just forget what is involved from one moment to the next.

There’s a difference between wanting to feel pleasure at the result of killing someone and wanting to feel pleasure over the result of killing them?

How is a meal different to a trophy or a photograph? Or even just the memory of the killing.

Why not? It’s not necessary, right, healthy, or environmentally friendly. What reason is left but pleasure? you eat steak instead of tofu to pass the time more pleasantly, no different from someone whaling or shooting rhinos

My mistake, I forgot that paying hitmen absolved you of moral responsibility.

I will never understand how something like 96% of the population kills for pleasure but thinks hunting for pleasure is wrong.

yeah I figured you were, but it seemed like some people were actually engaging with it. As if make-work somehow made the line go up.

There’s a fun joke:

2 economists are out walking. The first economist sees a pile of dog shit and says to the other, “I’ll pay you $50 to eat that dog shit.” So he does and gets paid $50. Later on, the second economist sees a pile of dog shit and says to the first, “I’ll pay you $50 to eat that pile of dog shit.” So he does and gets paid $50.

The first economist says, “I can’t help but feel we just ate dog shit for nothing.” “Nonsense,” says the second economist, “We just contributed $100 to the economy.”

Of course actual economists aren’t this terrible, but the popular perception of economics/monetary theory is about this braindead.

something something glaziers fallacy.

Obviously this is a joke, but if it even sounded remotely plausible to anyone reading fix yourself.

Well, they have to resist it if they first create the circumstances for it to be made, then decide to do the evil thing. Humans are in fact capable of making moral choices. Their response could be, for example, publishing it themselves or like shutting down.

It’s only inevitable if you assume enough people involved don’t actually care about what is going on and instead choose to make the line go up.

And yet people make laws protecting it, people elect people who make those laws, when given a choice between supporting the industry and not they support the industry. When activists show the horrors people insult and ridicule them.

you just want to feel justified in not going vegan till someone else solved the problem for you.

<3

idk how to tell you this but if you aren’t vegan this is the shit you enthusiastically support. Like you work hours of your life to pay for, you vote to tax people to subsidise it and you support censoring what actually happens.

A humane process is one you would submit yourself to.

Good to know we’re doing better than terf island.

100% read it. I think most things aren’t “must reads” even my favourite stories, but some have such unique ideas or skillful execution that if you enjoy literature you owe it to yourself to read them.

There’s obviously a very large list, I suggested some I didn’t think would be represented here. The dispossessed is a short read and uncomplex in its construction and pros so it’s easy to squeeze in a chapter here and there or before bed.

Idk if you will agree it’s a must read, that’s obviously quite subjective, but I highly doubt you’ll find the time you spent with it unsatisfying.

Unlike tissue paper yaml is actually fit for purpose. I actually don’t know of any lang that literally can’t run a program. The most you could stretch what you’re saying to is that some esolangs are akin to making bricks of packed tissues to build with. They are art projects not serious submissions though.

I don’t like js as much as anyone else but as evidenced by reality it works. Programmers need to stop sniffing their own farts, you have such strong opinions about the most insane shit when at most you should be talking about narrower scopes for use and trade offs.