3·
21 hours agoits best to find cooking ideas that match your most local affordable grocery markets, no matter what those be. if you ask enough strangers while shopping, someone will tell you what to do.
none [none/use name]
- 4 Posts
- 22 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
Cake day: November 3rd, 2025
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
You can always rinse a can of chickpeas and eat it just like that with a spoon. Or add some or all: olive oil, yogurt, chopped tomatoes, pumpkin/sunflower seeds, roasted garlic, fine sliced onions, parsley, tahini, lemon. That’s just one possible flavor group.
If you want to cook from scratch, don’t skim on salt.
Here is a post of mine from a while ago: https://hexbear.net/post/9257096 with a lot of cookbooks
2 or 3 paper cookbooks are better than 200 ebooks though. The Joy of Cooking is the classic that covers many foods and techniques. It is an omnivorous publication but I’m sure you can find some books claiming to be veg JOC.
nobody’s arguments are inflamed? I really don’t think I can be held responsible because 2 years ago someone else made a thread that also had the words “what*” and “happened” of which there are many.
I’m still watching the video. how did you get the transcript?
Thing is that kicking israelis out of israel doesn’t solve the problem, they will go to the western places that have supported them all these years. If integration is done well then I think the resentment propaganda could become less powerful. But also it’s not fair to treat this group of refugees so much nicer than any other group because you are afraid of them.
The nicest way to stop people forming homogeneous communities is to strongly welcome and integrate into an anti-fascist plurality in country of destination. Does the west have the capacity?
scary!
I agree that a lot of israelis may choose to leave once they no longer enjoy supremacy. But then they will go somewhere else and that’s sort of where my questions really starts.
I think there will be a lot of emigration pressure on the Israelis after liberation.
Yes and they will be returning to the western nations where they originally came from, which is why it makes sense to consider their destinies because I don’t think it would be good for a bunch of "Little Tel Aviv"s to be struck up as nests of festering zionist resentment. Unmanaged, they could become the 21st century cuban expats. This isn’t a problem for billions of non-westerners to solve, it’s a problem for us.
If there are Israeli citizens living there who feel like they can make peace, then they dont have to leave, it’s up to them to explain themselves to their neighbors.
Palestinians would have normal voting rights, no matter their age. Genocide is a mass crime, and needs to be prosecuted on a mass scale. It does bring up an interesting question. Is it possible for former Israelis to have their voting rights restored? What would be the criteria? I don’t think that question needs an answer on day 0, though. It can be worked through over the following couple of years.
I think what you are describing is basically making them non-citizens and then they have to re-apply as citizens of the new state through an internal immigration procedure. Possibly with a test, pledge, conditions similar to how citizenship works in other places. And you can have different levels such as residence, permits and such.
Practically speaking, I don’t see a way around the creation of refugees, so they would be subject to all the pertinent international laws and customs. I don’t have a good background in that so can’t think of what would fit in place. Maybe the US would be making a special way for them to come in like for Afrikkkaaners, who constituted something like 98% of refugees admitted to Amerikkkaa in 2025.
didn’t have to commit an Italian genocide after independence
has there ever been such a case of that happening?
(unless the land is claimed by a Palestinian family who can reasonably prove the home belonged to them)
that is by no means straight forward. you will end up with competing claims. For one thing there are deeds which exist but were declared invalid because they were issued by the ottoman empire, or jordan, or some other pre-israel state. then the property is seized and distributed to Jewish people by some mechanism.
and what of the properties which were sold because the former owners were subject to terrorism and didn’t have the stomach to live that way? Is it really a legitimate sale?
probably many other complexities exist, especially considering large diaspora families, properties being divided/combined, structures being demolished and constructed.
you just need to give them a Palestinian landlord and charge them rent
Can landlords ever be the answer…? The anything? Even zionists.
There’s a second 2025 volume of Our Narrative: Al-Aqsa Flood… Two years of steadfastness and the will to liberate not sure if publication date of Dec 24 was intentional or not, but hardly any western media attention to it because all journos had the week off.
I read them both prior to posting. They are eloquently composed and making good points. I was interested to know especially how things were considered before implementation because they are both “in conversation” with enemy propaganda as it emerged.
why did they do the paragliders?
At least 30% because it was cool, right?
But where did they practice?
First paragraph is completely inscrutable to me. I’ll check out the link in the 2nd.
It’s like calling food liberal because of middle class, hipster farmers markets and organic grocery stores.
1·13 days agoThank you I fixed it
I would try searching the web for the exact phrases used in the document, especially the title and legend. with or without filetype:PDF, site:.cn or a more specific domain if you can think of one like a ministry of transportation.
Also try reverse image search.
11·28 days agochamber of commerce. corporate lobbyists. religious advocacy.
just think of anything that’s doing fine, there is a group for that.
but even if you pick something you don’t find evil, like say you have a great park near you, there is probably some group or another that keeps it that way. so even though it looks like a do-nothing job, they are doing something.
you havne’t even grasped the scale of the things you don’t know
makes me feel like a fraud
cut that shit out. a fraud of being a 1 year linux user? get over yourself. it’s like a fraud of a thing you can be a fraud of.
https://sfconservancy.org/llm-gen-ai/llm-backed-generative-ai-recommendations.html
Recommendations
When Using LLM-backed Generative AI
Systems for FOSS ContributionsPreamble
The entire community of computer users, which quickly approaches every human, faces the growing conundrum of generative artificial intelligence systems backed by Large Language Models (“LLM-gen-AI”)1. Software freedom activists face particularly difficult challenges in this regard; these LLM-gen-AI systems have been applied in earnest to the endeavors of software creation and modification.
We cannot sufficiently mitigate this tricky problem with merely one statement or a few blog posts. In 2022, Software Freedom Conservancy began our journey on this particular issue when our policy fellow, Bradley M. Kühn, published If Software is My Copilot, Who Programmed My Software?. In the last year, that journey grew in complexity and urgency when some of SFC’s member projects and supporters began to regularly request moral and ethical guidance on these matters. SFC spent these months in almost-daily internal discussions about the plethora of dilemmas presented by LLM-gen-AI systems.
In 2024, SFC published an aspirational statement, a thought experiment rather than a definition. We now make urgent recommendations to those ordered by their employers to use LLM-gen-AI code assistants to contribute to Free and Open Source Software (“FOSS”).
Some FOSS project leaders have taken a zero-tolerance approach to any LLM-gen-AI contributions to their projects. We support leaders who make such decisions. FOSS project leaders deserve our sympathy and understanding regarding the voluminous onslaught of new contributions. Patch evaluation has always required careful analysis (after all, humans write bad code too). Now, that analysis demand (reasonably) feels daunting to maintainers. Everyone should respect their decisions.
Nevertheless, we cannot and must not ignore the many FOSS contributors who decide to explore these tools for the betterment of FOSS. Software freedom activism only succeeds when we admit that we are at least decades away from universal software freedom. Proprietary systems will continue to exist; there is a real danger they will continue to leapfrog FOSS. We should resist the use of proprietary systems, which include the most popular LLM-gen-AI systems, but we should also remain willing (as we always have) to utilize such systems when they can advance software freedom.
After much study, consideration, collaboration, and consultation with many FOSS leaders, SFC formulated the following recommendations for FOSS contributors who have decided to use LLM-gen-AI systems to augment their FOSS work. We expect to update these recommendations periodically. These are not mandates, demands, conclusions, nor definitions; rather, they are best practices that we have formulated after careful study of the undeniable reality that some FOSS contributors do want to use these LLM-gen-AI systems.
In the months following the announcement of these recommendations, SFC plans an ongoing engagement campaign, including documents, online tutorials, public Q&As, and other community engagement, on these matters. SFC does not make these recommendations in isolation; rather, we offer sustained assistance to the community, particularly to FOSS projects working with proprietary LLM-gen-AI systems.
The long term goal of software freedom is to eliminate the harm of proprietary technology. While we work toward that greater goal, we should seek to mitigate the harms that we cannot immediately eliminate. These recommendations aim to abate the damage of these systems, and also consider how these tools might counter-intuitively help us advance FOSS.
Recommendations
These recommendations are listed in order of our view of their relative importance (most important first).
-
The FOSS community should support, not just tolerate, those who outright reject LLM-gen-AI systems. There are many intersecting ethical and moral issues regarding these systems, many of which are not currently fully understood. Anyone who chooses to avoid them deserves our support and assistance.
-
Every FOSS contributor deserves self-determination regarding LLM-gen-AI. No one should be required to use these systems under duress. We make special note here of the increasing reports from technology workers who have been ordered by their management (often under penalty of termination) to use these systems for all their work: FOSS and proprietary. Such mandates are unconscionable and we call on the industry to make use of LLM-gen-AI fully optional, and adopt non-discrimination policies regarding those who opt out.
-
FOSS projects should not shun contributors who choose to use LLM-gen-AI systems. Even FOSS projects that have chosen a zero-tolerance policy should make an effort to welcome contributors who submit a contribution that includes content or who received assistance from an LLM-gen-AI system. Such contributions should be treated no differently than a technically inadequate “first patch”: such submitters should be welcomed to the community and receive a gentle (albeit perhaps form language) response thanking them for their interest and explaining gently why the project will not accept their contribution.
-
Before submission, FOSS Contributors must invest substantial time reviewing LLM-gen-AI -assisted and/or -generated contributions. Such contributions need curation. Contributors should acquire an in-depth understanding of their contribution. FOSS processes yield software systems that are resilient, highly maintainable, and contributor-friendly. Human contributors engage with FOSS projects (even as volunteers) because of the enjoyment and satisfaction available in FOSS projects. LLM-gen-AI contributions could erode the best aspects of FOSS if an unsolicited onslaught of unvetted, prompt-generated contributions become commonplace.
-
Full disclosure of how and when an LLM-gen-AI system was utilized to assist in creation of a contribution is a moral imperative. FOSS project leaders cannot make good decisions about LLM-gen-AI policy if they cannot survey which contributions were assisted, and how much they are assisted. Part of the contribution process should (at least) include a disclosure of what LLM-gen-AI system was used, its version (as these system change over time), and a brief description of how the system assisted the contributor. This information should be included in a machine-readable format in commit logs.
-
Contributors should only submit “unattended”2 LLM-gen-AI contributions in an area explicitly designated for such. If none exists, such contributions should be assumed unwelcome. FOSS maintainers are often volunteers, or permitted to work only a limited amount of time on their upstream projects. Maintainers’ time is precious, and is best used in human-to-human interactions with new and existing human contributors. New contributors should respect existing decisions about “unattended” LLM-gen-AI. Maintainers should think carefully about the types of unattended LLM-gen-AI contributions that may be useful. We encourage project leaders to flexibly and regularly (but also slowly and deliberately) consider policy changes on unattended contributions when new contributors present new ideas.
-
LLM-gen-AI users should keep detailed and accurate records of their interaction and save those meta-artifacts for posterity. LLM-gen-AI systems excel at automation of users’ logs of prompts, notes, and other written details of the interaction that led to the creation of an artifact. FOSS contributors should keep such meta-artifacts, and regardless of license they should be archived as if they are part of the Corresponding Source for the contribution. (In the coming weeks, SFC will publish tutorials and templates to assist in automating this important process.)
-
Avoid jumping to conclusions about the legal significance of generated contributions and whether they are “copyright-washing-machines that ruin copyleft”. There remain many unanswered legal questions, and experts are actively working on solutions. SFC will publish more on this issue in the coming months.
-
Inputs impact the licensing of the artifacts. The question of licensing obligations for material passed through the process called “training” remains undecided. Nevertheless, most LLM-gen-AI sessions don’t begin only with a prompt. By contrast, most commonly, the user points the LLM-gen-AI at a codebase and receives its assistance to generate a patch for that codebase. If that codebase is under a copyleft license, your changes must be licensed under the project’s license, due to both copyright and contractual terms of that license.
-
“Copyleft Everything” remains the best viable and safest approach Certainly those who want to release FOSS under non-copyleft licenses have more to worry about when using these tools. It’s apparent that every widely used LLM-gen-AI was trained on much well-known copylefted code. Courts need years to deliver guidance on many relevant legal questions. In the meantime, nothing stops you from using a copyleft license for the work you generate, particularly a license that is widely compatible with other copyleft licenses. SFC will make its staff time available to the [copyleft-next](https://next.copyl/
-
a tool, just like other tools we use
So keep your ethics where they belong - in your personal life. Don’t try to enforce your ethics on others.
at last someone brave enough to say it
jk lololol
15·2 months agoBlaming their problems of shit infrastructure on RUSSIA.
while there is clearly a genocide, and the attacks on the flotilla were probably illegal, I don’t easily see how the flotilla attacks were genocidal.