There are people who find XML hard to read?
racemaniac
joined 8 months ago
Yeah, try that one in court. No your honor, i didn't pay for the murder, i paid for someone who paid for someone to commit the murder. I'm obviously innocent!
It's a plain stupid argument to try and make, and it makes no sense. And i'm not even vegan, i just recognize that yes, a part of the money i pay for meat goes to who kills it, so i pay for someone to kill animals for me so i can eat them. That's how the world works, and denying that is just ridiculous.
What do you mean by forcing being the wrong word? Do you give the cat a bowl of meat and a bowl of vegan alternative for a month, and then see what the cat chooses? That would not be forcing imo. But i doubt that's happening anywhere.
Ok, i get it, it's fun to hate on the vegan, but he's right and you're not.
If you buy meat somewhere part of the price is you paying for the person that killed it. That's obvious right?
Of course in relation to the cat, even if there's a healthy vegan diet possible, he's wrong imo. Why force our choices onto pets?
Let's just say you're right, it's perfectly possible and healthy for the cat.
Does that make it ethical to force a carnivorous hunter animal on a vegan diet? Are you going to force it to stay inside to limit the possibility for it to catch mice & birds just to be sure?
Just beyond the physical possibility, how ethical is it to force our choices onto our pets?
I kind of hate this kind of narrative here.
Yeah, capitalism is shit etc... but let's get to the real root cause: we're all still animals, and want our pack to be the best. The root issue isn't money, it's power. Many societies wouldn't mind degrowth if it didn't mean all the others would bury them & dance on their grave.
If one single country would actually degrow, all the others would dominate it financially, loot it for all its worth, and unless it can completely 100% sustain itself without outside trade (pretty much impossible in our globalized society), it would mostly collapse. And even if it could sustain itself, the power imbalance would be so huge we'd run in all other kinds of issues soon (hey, why not just conquer that country that is pretty much powerless now?)
Imo we're all just animals knowing we're headed for extinction, but at the same time it's a big game of chicken on the road, the first to stray from this path will get fucked in so many ways by all the others who see their chance to improve their situation... And imo capitalism isn't the cause of that, but one of the results of this. It's just another way for us to compete and try to fuck eachother over like the animals we still are.
So either we get to some near global agreement on how to get out of this situation, or we just keep doing far too little since... what's the point of trying to improve things if it just means you get annihilated by those that don't, and things will remain the same despite your best efforts...
This is a completely meaningless figure...
I really hate when articles come out with this kind of data. Huge numbers like this without any context just mean nothing. Ok, 42 trillion$, how much money did they already have? How much percent did their fortunes increase? Is that more or less than inflation?
It's just a meaningless huge number that has no intention other than to shock, certainly not to inform or they would have given actually useful numbers that would actually let you have an idea whether it's that bad or not...
I hate that people keep falling for nonsens like this.... Just post a huge number without any context or any other numbers needed to be able to make sense of it, and everyone is like "omfgwtfbbq, this is SOOOO bad"! Is it? It's perfectly possible that this isn't even enough to keep up with inflation, and they're technically poorer, probably not, but we'll never know from this useless article...
I'm not assuming any of the people discussing here are doing the voting, but also in the discussion his points were being ignored. And i love me a good technology connections video too, but someone from the industry dotting some of the i's that technology connections missed was interesting :)
Btw, thanks for also discussing in good faith :). And your example of awnings in Mexico (and how the most modern technologies are indeed not available/practical everywhere) is also a great contribution :).
I'm no expert on this subject at all, i'm not pro or contra awnings, i just felt bad for someone going into deeper detail on modern techologies getting downvoted for not agreeing with the video because he works in the industry, while making good points (and having his points ignored)
If you have a situation were awnings worked really well, and are cheaper than modern alternatives, awesome, well done :)
No problem :)
Keep posting useful info on topics like this, we need more factcheckers on clickbait videos about how centuries old technology would still be the best.
Yeah, and on a discussion space it's probably also best that you actually read the comments you're replying to. He felt that the video wouldn't teach him anything since he's considers himself already knowing a lot about the subject.
I just pointed out the irony of you being bothered about him not watching a clickbait video about a topic he believes he already knows more about that such a video can teach. And you then tell him the video makes points he already dismissed.
He might be a bit abrasive how he entered the discussion, but if he works in the industry and knows why awnings are no longer a thing, and already dismisses the points the video made against more modern technologies since he seems to know what modern technologies are actually like.. that does seem actually useful to this discussion. I get him not wanting to waste 20 minutes...
But is that the fault of XML, or is the data itself just complex, or did they structure the data badly?
Would another human readable format make the data easier to read?