I’ve been around these arguments enough times to see the discussion inevitably get to this point. We dance around the idea of “is it worth it to go vegan or not?” long enough, until eventually someone concedes that “yes it is better to do, but it’s not practical to ask everyone to do it/you can’t get everyone to go vegan/it won’t solve the problem if we go vegan and do nothing else/etc.”

Convenient that any time an environmental initiative requires even tiny changes to our day to day lives, suddenly we need to look for the solutions vaguely “elsewhere.” I guess let’s ignore the fact that emissions from food alone are enough to push the planet over the 1.5C degree warming threshold for the planet, and that the average US consumer eats an order of magnitude more red meat than could ever be sustainable.

If you truly think that it’s worth doing, either do it, or admit that you selfishly don’t want to. Don’t try and pretend the climate science backs up your opinions though.

As an aside, this is basically my goodbye letter to Lemmy, so so probably not going to follow up on this thread. The platform is so small that people can’t help but creep into communities that show up in the overall feed. Say what you will about Reddit, but at least there, spaces created specifically for in-groups (like a space called “vegancirclejerk”) didn’t constantly get commenters from the wider world knocking on the door and starting flame wars in the comments. Like, can there be no space for vegans to just fuck around and post memes in peace?

Maybe finally I’ll get some peace by logging off and touching some grass. And then eating the grass, bc I’m vegan btw

Literally the next day:

Biden on Tuesday reiterated his “ironclad” commitment to Israel

Very cool for the Biden admin to just make shit up to try and court “the youth”

Not OP. I think it’s funny how you’re accusing them of “bullying” when their comments aren’t aggressive at all, just pointing out a practice they disagree with. But somehow your multi-paragraph, raging, sorry, uh… “laughing” comment filled with direct insults and patronizing dismissal, should NOT be considered “bullying.”

Like, I don’t buy into the idea that anyone can bully someone else in an anonymous Internet forum, outside of doxxing or repeated harassment. But looking at this, one of you is clearly much more aggressive and bothered than the other here.

deleted by creator

Jewish Federation Los Angeles meanwhile blamed the university’s chancellor for allowing “an environment to be created over many months that has made students feel unsafe”.

The group demanded that the encampment be cleared and that UCLA meet leaders of the Jewish community.

Fucking hell, this is such a callous response. In any other situation, the group representing the side that just had masked vigilantes attack peaceful demonstrators would make amends. “These people don’t represent our movement. We disavow them and what they stand for.” And so on.

I see they’re taking a page from Israel’s book: refuse to apologize, defend unprovoked violence, and blame the victims on top of everything else.

Not sure which post you’re referring to, but from Our World in Data, pig farming generates more emissions than farming chickens. They are lower than beef, but that’s not saying much, since beef is an order of magnitude worse than most other foods. Pig farming also generates four times more emissions than soy.

This new report is the same story all over again. From the linked report:

Applying this factor to the standardized production results in the emissions from the combustion of marketed products, comprising nearly 90% of total emissions tracked by the database. These are scope three category 11 emissions, corresponding to “use of sold products”

The vast majority of emissions attributed to these companies, nearly 90%, are those emitted by the consumers who buy the crude oil/natural gas/etc. But news outlets are obscuring that fact in their headlines, which makes it seem like the gas companies themselves are wholly responsible.

In my fundamentalist upbringing, people would bring up the “divine mystery” of the Trinity as a kind of proof of the truth of Christianity. As in, the fact that the Trinity cannot be explained must mean that it is beyond our human comprehension, and if it’s beyond our comprehension, it must be divine.

But like, it’s very easy to see how humans could create the idea of the Trinity, since it’s simply asserting that multiple contradictory things are all true at the same time. Is God the Father separate from Jesus His son, or one and the same? Both, actually!

Plus, zealots in the church loved "uhm akshully"ing anyone who tried to use a metaphor to explain the Trinity. “The Trinity is like… water, and how you can find water as ice, water, and water vapor in different places.” “UMM actually that’s Modalism, and that’s heresy!”

Basically the church just assigns an “-ism” for every conventional way to understand or know the Trinity, then insists that it is Unknowable.

I’ve seen past discussions on this question, but no definitive answers. We can only guess, as I’m sure Fidelity themselves wants to say as little as possible.

I’m going to assume that Fidelity is storing a T9 string of your password as a kind of default “security question” prompt for phone calls. So Fidelity would be storing your password hash, and alongside it, storing your T9 string hash. If that is the case, I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad practice.

Given that it’s handled by the automated system, and not by a live service agent, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are hashing your keypad entry and comparing it against a properly salted+hashed T9 string of your password. This is unlikely to expose your credentials during transmission, since this isn’t any worse than entering your password in a form field on the web.

But what about if Fidelity gets breached, and attackers get the hashes of not only your password, but also the T9 hash? Then, attackers could start trying to crack everyone’s T9 hashes, and using the T9, figure out the length and likely characters of your password. This would make cracking individual passwords faster.

But if Fidelity had a large scale breach tomorrow, and put out a statement that all of their password hashes were leaked, wouldn’t they already be fucked? Like, they would force a password reset on every account anyways. It’s not like the fact that attackers can crack passwords faster or slower than normal would change how they should respond to a breach where password hashes are stolen. The cat’s already out of the bag at that point.

TL;DR: As long as they are storing this T9 string separately from your actual password hash, it’s not likely IMO to make or break the security of your account

Many beekeepers want to lessen the chance of “swarming,” where the bees decide to move their hive somewhere else, by clipping the queen bee’s wings. So instead of protection money, it’s more like the bees got their kneecaps busted in after a visit from Big Tony.

The paper states that they studied the HTML form element interactions but “not the keystrokes or content.”

There’s a big difference. Both are more invasive than we would like, but grabbing everything you type while in the app’s browser is much worse than measuring a true or false “did this person submit their comment or did they give up and leave it unsubmitted.”

Tiktok is getting the content of the text, which could be sensitive info, and it grabs from every site you visit, not just the social platform itself.

But I think the main issue is using the data for allegedly targeting of protestors and Chinese political opponents, more than the depth of the data collection itself.

TikTok has always been on the extreme end of tracking and surveilling its users. For example, research found that the app had the ability to record all keystrokes made by users in the in-app browser (i.e. keylogging). This kind of tracking is way beyond what other social media companies do and borders on malware.That’s one reason why the US, Canada, and others banned the use of TikTok on government devices.

A former TikTok employee also alleges in a sworn statement that TikTok stores its user data in China, that the CCP has full access to this data, and that the CCP used this data to spy on protestors in Hong Kong.

So their tracking goes way beyond what other companies do, and China uses that data for expressly political goals rather than simply selling ads to users.

Hard agree with all of this. I’ve never been good at shooters, especially PvP, but the invasions always felt like more of a chess match than a true gun duel. Outsmarting some human player who’s a better shot than me made for super memorable and satisfying moments.

I’ll also add that the voice acting and dialogue were great. Dishonored is infamous for having limited voice lines (“shall we meet for whiskey and cigars tonight?”), and in a game with a time loop mechanic and limited maps, I thought for sure it would be even worse. But I was pleasantly surprised. It’s still annoying for scripted events that repeat, but the Colt and Julianna banter kind of made up for it imo

I love leaving my standing desk and ergonomic equipment behind so that I can use objectively worse equipment with the promise that “renovations are coming to your team in the next few years.” My boss hunts for open seating in the neighboring office building so that they can actually use a standing desk on the days we have to come in, which is antithetical to the “spirit of collaboration” RTO is supposed to foster.

Like either let us use our own setup or invest in an office setup that is tolerable for people to use. We all know that they don’t give a shit about employees, but they could at least pretend they’re considering our experience when forcing these decisions on us.

That’s a common misconception that’s been passed around the Internet so long that it’s become common knowledge. There’s a great (now deleted, but archived) writeup showing that the Wachowskis always intended humans to be batteries. The actual source of the “processors” idea came from a Neil Gaiman short story written to promote the movie at its release

It’s always crazy to come into threads like these and see people say “I would murder as many elites as possible” without batting an eye, and in the same comment say “I could never give up hamburgers.” It’s some kind of insane self-soothing to throw all of the responsibility for a global issue onto a few scapegoats. It also shows that people have no intention of doing fuck all about climate change beyond typing up snarky comments on the internet.

People can misquote all kinds of studies they half remember to pretend that they have no responsibility for making changes, but that doesn’t make it true. Just as one example, first world countries’ per-capita rate of meat consumption alone is enough to push the world over our 1.5C warming target. But because it’s an inconvenience to make any changes to my life, I’m going to pretend I would personally kill scores of people rather than make a new recipe for dinner. We’re fucked

PRR PRR PRR

Ok but remember this part?

We have a number of options – some fall on the shoulders of consumers; some on producers.

Maybe we can’t convince everyone to quit eating meat, but I would hope that we could appeal to self-described environmentalists, who have a stated interest in making sustainable changes.

That’s the OP’s point, after all. That the science unambiguously states that we need to stop eating meat if we care about meeting our climate goals. Any environmentalist who learns that this needs to happen and still chooses to eat meat is acting against their own ethics.

It has to be both. Our World in Data puts it one way:

We have a number of options – some fall on the shoulders of consumers; some on producers.

Or to cut through the flowery language - farms need to stop producing meat, and people need to stop eating it.

The biggest reduction would come from the adoption of plant-rich diets. Emissions would be halved compared to business-as-usual.