SpaceCowboy

There's http response code 402 (payment required) which comes before even 404 (page not found). Indicates to me that people were thinking about using the web for commerce even before they thought about people putting in a wrong URL.

There’s also a pretty… sane… subgroup that proposes ‘corrective breeding’; a process wherein we undo the destructive changes humans introduced to the species and return them to what would be found in their ‘natural’ state

Yeah I feel like that is just forcing animals to live in the way humans want them to live under a weird assumption that we know what they want.

I could live out in the wild if I really wanted to, but I don't because living in a heated home, having access to healthcare, and having a grocery store nearby is way better than starving to death, getting frostbite, dying of a disease, or getting eaten by wolves. I don't know how an animal wants to live their lives, so who knows, maybe they'd rather die of disease over being poked by a few needles by a veterinarian, starving because there's no mangers filled by humans, or getting eaten alive by a pack of wolves. Maybe animals want that, but there's no way of knowing and it's a really weird thing to assume given humans don't want to live that way. We live happy an fulfilling lives without having to constantly worry about being eaten by wolves, why would that be a requirement for an animal to be happy?

I think people see nature from a Disney cartoon perspective where the only danger is a human hunter. But the reality is nature is extremely brutal.

I don't think a perfect ethical solution to domesticated animals really exists. Best we can do is just treat animals better. If they seem like they're happy enough, then that's probably alright.

trying to please everyone has never been a seriously effective Democratic strategy, especially in the long term.

Do you think it would be more effective to piss off people? Maybe she could start telling us which voters she thinks are "deplorable"? Is that more effective than trying to please as many voters as possible?

The Dems have won three out of the last four elections. Not sure why you're saying this strategy is not effective given the one they lost was the one where their candidate called some voters deplorable.

Waltz was a great addition, but the campaign hid him away the second Harris took on most of Hillary’s campaign advisors.

The VP candidate is not supposed to overshadow the Presidential candidate. Walz has been on the campaign trail basically non-stop, and doing local interviews which may actually be more important than national interviews. The national media doesn't pick up on things Walz is doing all the time, but don't confuse that with the campaign hiding him away. Harris' debate performance and national interviews are much stronger than Walz's debate performance on the national stage. So why would they be trying to push a guy to do national interviews that he's not great at instead of doing rallies and local interviews which he is good at?

The CEO of Zoom explictily stated that he felt in zoom meetings people were being too "friendly" and not willing to have "debate".

Why would it be bad for employees to be friendly? What employees want to have unfriendly debates in meetings? I think it's just managers that want that. What kind of "debate" do managers want? Why do they not want meetings to be "friendly"? Methinks they just want to yell at employees and don't feel comfortable doing it in zoom meetings for some reason...

The point isn't to get the trans vote. Like you say it's kinda a no brainer for trans people to vote for anyone running against a transphobic guy.

The point is to put out a rational response to what Trump is doing. Explain to people that might be worried about trans people that it's just a tactic meant to distract people from the real issues.

So get people to be less scared of trans people so they'll focus on actual issues and vote Dem.

I did in the past. But now my internet connection involves co-ax cable. So please send all replies in an analog video form, since that's what that cable was designed for.

I feel like a lot of stuff from ancient times wouldn't be all that useful. A lot of stuff back then was optimized for a society that didn't know anything about electricity.

We know how electricity exists, we know that with some magnets and copper wire we can turn mechanical energy into electricity. It seems like making a wind turbine is something they could've made in ancient times, but they didn't do that simply because they didn't really know anything about electricity. Some more copper wire and some more magnets and you could drive a pump. Some chemistry and you have a battery, maybe not Li-ion but something that'll work well enough. Resistors and you can have an electric stove and a heater.

It always strikes me as odd that preparers aren't all-in on green technology. If you had some wind turbines and/or solar panels and electric vehicles almost nothing other than communications would really change much. Dependency on complex oil refineries is the biggest weakness of our society. If you live in a rural area that has some farming and has green energy and electric vehicles you're dependent on very little that's not produced in your community.

Actually, I'll be keeping the gun and giving you the bullet back... at a really high velocity.

Yeah I fill up some whisky bottles with tap water and keep them in the cupboard. I guess in an insane scenario I might need to use it as drinking water, though I'd probably want to figure out how to boil that water first since it's been sitting there for awhile.

I have actually used that water... but just to wash my hands when they turn off the water in the building when they're doing some maintenance.

Sometimes some disaster preparedness is just useful for relatively banal circumstances.

It would cool to name one after the second guy to walk on the moon. Aldrin would be a great name for a bee don't you think?

I think that's the distinction between vegan and vegetarian. Milk is vegetarian since it's not eating a cow, but it's not vegan because an animal was used to produce it.

So honey not being vegan is the same kind of thing.

Seems like a weird thing though. A lot of domesticated animals can't survive in the wild. And even the ones that can, it would only be in certain parts of the world, and they'd be an invasive species.

So do we want all of those animals to go extinct? If you eliminate all farm related activities with these animals, give them a place to live out the rest of their lives, but then what? But do you not allow them to breed? Or just let them all die off so they go extinct?

Or do you keep some of them in zoos? Given they've been bred to live on a farm, does that mean you have zoos that are identical to farms? And if you can get milk, eggs and honey from these animals if they're technically living in zoo (which is exactly like a farm in every way) what's been accomplished?