A keyboard and terminal based text editor, similar in some ways to neovim, vim, and vi
Agree on all counts. I didn't like finding and comparing plugins for neovim, and then wrestling with environment stuff to get them to work, and having to change a bunch of options to get nvim to work how I want. With helix, my config of things I've changed from default is very small, and there's no wrestling with plugins.
And yeah, "select then act" feels a lot smoother and more intuitive to me. If you like that and like plugins tho, check out kakuone
Idk depends on the swingers
I remember being confused about how I was supposed to distinguish between my own thoughts and god trying to tell me something 🙃
I used neovim but recently switched to helix and highly recommend it. If you haven't tried nvim yet, give helix a try before deciding. A good way to compare is do the tutorial of each and see which you like more nvim +Tutor and hx --tutor (orhelix --tutor).
If you're a current vim user the helix keybindings are only a small learning curve after the tutorial, and feel a lot smoother imo
The replacement rate isn't static. It depends on both how many people exist and how many people are having babies and how many babies they're having. If the total number of babies per year stays constant, then whether it's below or above the replacement rate depends on the size of the population. So for a hyper simplified example, if 100 babies are born per yer, that's below replacement for a population of 110, but above replacement for a population of 90, but overall the population size will trend towards 100. Obviously real life is way more complicated, but even if the birth rate is low now, it's far more likely we're just moving towards a different population size, not a population of zero
Eating animals is super inefficient. ~90% of the energy is lost https://awellfedworld.org/issues/hunger/feed-vs-food
I know their lives are cut way short, but do you happen to have a source on this?
I wasn't demanding they educate me, I was curious if they had a source to back up their claim.
The ones being negative are the zoos keeping animals captive for entertainment. The good of conservation and rehabilitation work doesn't justify that
Edit: I educated myself, turns out my hunch was right and the point I was trying to make stands. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7380022/ "The 40 species of animals bred for release by zoos represented only 14% of all animal species for which conservation translocations were published and only 25% of all animal species that were bred for releases occurring in North America"
We don't even need zoos to do the conservation work.
Here's a more general overview https://sentientmedia.org/pros-and-cons-of-zoos/
You're welcome for the education 😊
I don't think hunters would be all that concerned
Did you read the study I linked? Do you have a source for your claims? "Just asking questions" is very different to asking for a source, especially when I've looked into it and found a study counter to your claim. For the record, I also ask for sources from people who I think are correct or mostly correct: https://slrpnk.net/comment/10039992
Edit: more info on zoos https://faunalytics.org/does-zoo-accreditation-really-mean-happier-animals/