Plants are selected to not be great to eat, basically. Cellulose in particular is almost impossible to biochemically break back down (but not completely), and is a pretty good structural material, too.

Seeds are often still palatable once you get through the shell, basically because turning into a baby plant is an already tough design constraint. Some plants still have tricks - notice that it’s the spiciest part of a hot pepper.

That random mutation didn’t happen, basically.

Evolution is a purely subtractive process. It doesn’t design things in, it just subtracts away poorly-designed creatures (and all hypothetical offspring) until only things equipped to survive are left. And obviously, there are things to eat that aren’t grass.

Edit: Herbivores can be smart, even the grazers. Look at elephants.

I can’t believe how many other replies heap that fallacy on top of teleological evolution. Apes are mostly herbivorous anyway, WTF.

Outing yourself as a Windows abstainer isn’t the worst thing, I guess.

There seems to be a real tendency to want to narrow the band of what a functioning adult is, centered right around whatever age the poster happens to be at.

Not zero-indexing people’s attractiveness SMH. /s

Reddit can be/is evil. Lemmy is decentralised and so can’t really enshittify the same way. Users would just hop to a different instance.

but the structure seems to work against that.

No, having a few thousand actives users only works against that. The sub about weird faucets I liked could exist because there was millions of users and the 0.001% of them that were interested added up.

So then this would mean a 1 in binary is a decimal 5?

Lots of managers don’t understand the tech, and an outright majority have no way of measuring productivity beyond in-seat time, which is supposed to be their whole job.

That’s not really what I meant.

To do this properly, OP would have to start with the relevant timestamp and a brief transcript. The context would then be, like, why this is being mentioned in that video and at that place in the video, even if it’s as simple as “this is a prominent Linux YouTuber talking about the drama a bit in passing”. Just so that it’s not quote mining from irrelevant people and places.

(It’s worth noting that a guy I’ve never heard of being fashy isn’t really a crazy claim, anyway. I’m not going to make final judgements based on it, but then I wouldn’t ask for a source, either)

I would guess that the layout doesn’t equal brand. They would have different models, and other brands might have awkward corner faucets as well.

Well, that’s a little too far the other way. It was still a single comment.

TBH I feel the same way when someone sends me a source that would take a good fraction of my day to check.

Why don’t you put in a little bit of your own time to extract the relevant parts, and explain the surrounding context?

Is it? I think internally is a reasonable way to read that requirement. Even failing that, somewhere else would have to be more equal and just, somehow.

Happy cake day, by the way.

I know it’s the theory that the Western lifestyle in general is built on that, but Denmark’s state budget is pretty easy to verify as coming from Denmark.

You’re getting a lot of “none” answers, but that’s overly pessimistic, given that you used relative terms for almost everything, and free healthcare and education are standard first-world features.

The usual statistics wondercountries would be my answer. Canada, the Nordics and select other places in Western Europe like the Netherlands and Switzerland. New Zealand is having problems these days, but maybe them too, I’m not sure. They all lean towards these stances relative to other countries.

Cheap food is probably hardest thing. It just comes with a certain cost to produce or ship in.

Where from? Greenland is a big resource sink.

Okay, but we were talking about the people themselves, so that point stands.

Sure, the system lacks.

Money Identity Coercion Ego. Those are the primary motivators.

Being rich means you’ve solved money and probably coercion. You can either rest on your laurels or chase the other two, for good or for evil. There’s rich philanthropists - some who give almost everything away - and then whatever Elon Musk is, but most go for the rest on their laurels thing, and so you probably haven’t heard of them.

Dehumanising someone also serves our identity and ego, FYI, which is where this thread came from.

Even the capitalists are behaving differently and more humane compared the fuedalists of the middle ages.

Yes, because their source of wealth is fundamentally different. Lords had to project violence and play court politics to keep their position. Still do, in some places. The rich in developed countries, on the other hand, can rely on strong rule of law to protect their property with very little personal input.

Also why if the apocalypse ever happened, they’d get owned and somebody else would take their bunker.

deleted by creator