Despite all my rage I’m still a rat refreshing this page.
I use arch btw.
Credibly accused of being a fascist, liberal, commie, anarchist, child, boomer, pointlessly pedantic, a Russian psychological warfare operative, and db0’s sockpuppet.
Pronouns are she/her.
Vegan for the iron deficiency.
less theory, more examples, my personal opinion on the author is mixed but it’s a good text for people new to “wait, anarchy isn’t British empire propaganda about anarchy?” https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works
Or you opened pycharm (ಥ﹏ಥ) 5 gigs of RAM is fairly audacious for a single program :/
Across all of Europe and all of the middle ages? Sure probably. Never hear of them, see them in art? I dunno, it’s hard to say because we don’t have a lot of documentation on what normal people’s lives were like.
In the cosmopolitan cities like Prague you probably would. Also any major Mediterranean trade port. Anyone who went on pilgrimage to those places, or along them, probably would. Cutting off Jerusalem to pilgrimage being such a big political deal indicates that many people went there or wanted to, and people loved sharing stories of places.
It’s called speciesism and it’s how people justify eating cows.
Dude: ports exist, people trade, across the Mediterranean you can find lots of different skin colours and customs.
Nobility and their favoured travelled extensively, skilled tradespeople would undertake elaborate pilgramidge if they could afford it all the way to Jerusalem. Even serfs got to go on pilgrimage although usually not to Jerusalem but to other cathedrals.
Stop with this ahistorical nonsense. Maybe someone in the British isles might not have much contact of the greater world but the HRE? Spain? Italy? The eastern Roman empire? Of fucking course they did.
This is a pretty flawed understanding of history.
Humans have always travelled, in Europe even serfs would hope to go on pilgrimage and Lords generally had to allow it. Although it may only be to a nearby cathedral. Italy was a trade hub, and a relatively short trip by boat to north Africa.
European painters knew that people came in different shades. As proof, go look at the school of Athens painting.
Just follow the smell of laughing gas and bring a zodiac and some concrete.
Here is how ethics works:
Since we are in the latter case, it is not self defense. Too bad, so sad.
I don’t think many people are glad Russia invaded.
You should probably not confuse countries and people though, while invading is bad the usa and allies using this as a proxy war to weaken Russia has just resulted in more Ukrainian people dying. It’s not actually helping any of the people in the invaded regions to conscript them and send them into a meat grinder to die. Regardless of who ends up paying taxes to whom after all this shitloads of normal people on both sides are dead, while elites lose nothing either way.
Do they? I have blocked a few but mostly I see them either being sad at conscription of ukranian people to fight dumb imperial shit (conscription being bad seems uncontroversial to me), and supporting resistance to USA imperialism as necessary while acknowledging the Russian state is deeply disfunctional and exploitative.
Look I understand you’re trying to be positive but this doesn’t work. It’s not really viable for me to put more effort into explaining why each specific thing doesn’t work but take e.g. paper towels, well they rot. Unless you pack them up in an environment which they can’t rot in. Like a sealed mineshaft, which you could just pump co2 into. In either case you’re filling an empty coal mine with low density coal while using energy that could go to something with exponential payoffs like sustainable power infrastructure.
Protecting greenspace is good, reforestation is good and has all sorts of positive effects from stabilisation of local temperature to cleaning the air of pollutants. It is not however a solution to climate change. There is only one, and it is not burning fossil fuels. It is completely impractical to reverse the damage we have already done. We have added 0.02% of the atmosphere’s mass in co2, that is 1.E17 kg or a hundred million billion kilograms.
Trees don’t permently sequester carbon. A forest is a bunch of bound up stuff, but since fungi can now digest trees when they die they don’t become coal anymore.
So unless you want to make the surface of the earth rainforest somehow you would need to bury trees in a sealed sterile mine or something. Or you could just do that directly.
Carbon capture is kinda dumb though, coal and oil are what ideally captured carbon looks like. We should focus on not digging that up and burning it.
posted on social media developed for free using a standard specced out for free running on servers people are allowing you to use for free…
Whether or not current models are sustainable is beside the point. Obviously they aren’t, ad blockers weren’t developed for shits and giggles but to stop increasingly intrusive practices.
As the day goes on
fixup=fixup -fuck
fuck
bleh
some bug squashin
implement stuff
Fixes configuration issues, and improves the UI for setting it up
vegan theory club defedded world and while I miss some content the quality of commentator went up dramatically. Yeah I see some stuff I disagree with and I’m sure I bother some people too, sometimes accidentally ;) but that place is a fucking cesspit.
I downvote because I disagree.
This is why downvotes are mostly spam lmao. They have more to do with how popular something this than the substance of the post. It is also impossible to distinguish good faith criticism and reactionary suppression.
It’s worth keeping in mind though, if you want to feed people: we can just do that, we have the food and we have the infrastructure. Every person going hungry in a city with edible food in bins, produce discarded for not looking right and so on is going hungry because of policy decisions.
It is cheaper, healthier, and more successful to just distribute the food we already grow, make and transport than trying to turn everything into an orchid.
Yes I know what they are. I don’t see what this has to do with fruit.
I think people are thinking more that if you want to feed people just give them food you buy is more cost effective.
It’s kinda the foundational mutual aid text, but like you could read modern stuff if you want fresh ideas vs to learn the history of a movement.
Also lmao, you are also a little surprised at who’s asking. We can only hope :)