Oh god, imagine the horror. To witness your orange paws behaving orangely, yet being unable to prevent them from following through.

Fine shrimpage, though the tail could be presented a little cleaner. 9/10.

That might be true in the short term, but we’ve had books and avid readers for centuries, and during this time we’ve seen positive effects. So if there are any negative effects, they must be so tiny that they’re neither noticeable nor measurable.

Shouldn’t we see negative effects pop up in studies that compare readers to non-readers? Non-readers probably do interact with a bit more text nowadays, but AFAIK reading seems to have mostly positive effects.

Yeah, I have a feeling it won’t take long before it all goes down the drain…

On the other hand, I’m not sure it’s the best idea these days to have this fact known to a government. Unless the current rightward shift reverts very soon, we’ll be properly fucked once climate change really hits - difficult times nudge people towards extremes, and the far right mostly despises autistic people.

Even as someone living in Europe, I’m honestly too scared.

God, the sweat glands one sounds horrible.

“You cook & eat me? Then I’ll cook you!”

Why should a Chinese person reduce their emissions, while each American emits so much more?

And now that I know you can’t read…

Buddy, if you spend a couple seconds thinking about my question, you might notice that “We all do need to cut our emissions” is not an answer. I’ll try to put it in more explicit terms, try not knee-jerk-reacting this time:

Why should a person in China stop increasing their emissions to make profits, while so many people in America make so much profit/save money by emitting so much more on average?

You’re acting like this question obviously has a definitive answer, but it doesn’t!

Look, it’s totally fine to criticize China’s rising emissions on their own. But it’s really, really dumb to contrast their total with total US emissions - especially when you don’t mention anything about how many emissions are caused to supply the west with stuff. It’s great that US emissions are going down, but they’re still way too high because they provide cover for other nations to save money by using fossil fuels just a bit longer. Why are other countries morally wrong in climbing towards the level of America, as long as they stay below?

I’m arguing against the assertion that “China is doing the most damage to the climate”. It’s obvious that the country with more citizens will cause more emissions, and it’s also completely useless! Or would you suddenly change your mind if China split into 5 countries, all less populous than the US?

Why should a Chinese person reduce their emissions, while each American emits so much more? You insist that arbitrary geographic divisions are somehow relevant, but they aren’t.

And because total emissions matter, we all have a bigger responsibility to reduce our per-capita output if we’re above others. The atmosphere and climate don’t care about countries, so each American still has a much higher responsibility to change their society than each Chinese does.

Wouldn’t it be more sanitary to clean them beforehand?

Fair, though I’d like to mention that you don’t need a pot to boil something. It’s enough to use sticks to move/roll hot stones into a natural bowl-shaped indentation. Sounds complex, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened at least a couple times before pots.

Yeah, throughout human existence I’d guess that no preparation method is more common than “throw it in a pot and boil it”. Can’t go wrong with that for almost any food - even if the texture isn’t amazing, you can’t really over-boil most stuff to where it’s dangerous.

And all that while they’re off the air? Oh, duh, time travel.

Oh, I had no idea! Thanks, that’s great to know!

Codeberg only targets a subset of projects. For example, I no longer want most of my self-written code to be publicly available, but Codeberg only supports public repos.

I’m sorry! I’m so sorry for what I’ve done to the ice cream machine. PLEASE nobody eat out of it until you’ve cleaned the nozzles.

The janitor knows how.

Yeah, Chromium’s implementation is IMO very elegant and genuinely improves security for most people. That’s why I’m a little miffed by comments that paint it as an obviously terrible feature, just like happens with the “read/write to a specific local folder” API.

These days, new browser features often aren’t in the users best interest, I understand and share the commonly discussed concerns on those. But compared to the alternatives, these specific APIs genuinely improve safety for most users AND make things more accessible for newbies and pros alike. Blocking them on principle (& without specific technical concerns) will not protect users when their remaining option gives malicious actors far more access without any exploits!

I’m guessing they meant sonar instead. AFAIK active sonar does work really well, but is rarely used since it reveals your location twice as far as you’re able to detect others. Not to mention the horrible effects on wildlife - the sound waves carry so much energy that a point-blank hit is somewhere between “lethal & untreatable” and “turned into red mist”.

I don’t think it’s realistically possible to do that totally undetected. Since the earth’s magnetic field is so weak and field strength goes down rapidly as distance increases, malicious actors probably couldn’t spoof patterns well enough to make the data look real, at least not without coming very close and staying near their target.