• 0 Posts
Joined 2Y ago
Cake day: Jul 08, 2020


I was wondering if someone would parrot out this talking point from the taxi lobby! Sorry, I know I’m being harsh, but it’s a baseless and misleading argument. Taxis are not mostly used by disabled or elderly people, they are mostly used by rich lazy people who can’t even be bothered to drive themselves.

If disabled people are allowed to drive their own private cars in the restricted zone, then of course a taxi which is carrying a disabled person should also be allowed. It would not be hard to provide the disabled with some kind of card which the taxi driver could scan to grant them temporary permission to enter the zone.

To prioritise walking and cycling and the use of public transport, it will build a ring road around the city centre within which private vehicles cannot travel.

I hope they’re not planning to allow taxis to travel in the restricted zone. Taxis are already allowed to use bus lanes in the UK, and they really should not be. They are worse than private cars (which often only carry a single person) because taxis make journeys to pick up their passengers at which point they are effectively carrying zero travellers. The only reason taxis are allowed in bus lanes is because they have a large political lobby in the UK. I couldn’t find any mention of taxis in the article or in the linked presentation on the Birmingham council website.

“Remember, we do not support spamming or advertising other networks in channels topics or in other forms”

The wording here seems to reveal how freenode’s new owners view this enterprise they’re getting into - a competitive cash grab. No other IRC network has had any issues with mentions of other networks. If anyone was still on the fence about whether to stay, this crass heavy handed approach should push them off.

Interesting, I wasn’t aware of that. You sent me down a short rabbit hole! Taking psychedelics must’ve been a very different experience before our scientific worldview matured to the extent it has today though. It must’ve been a lot easier to get carried away, to allow the boundaries between reality and fantasy to become muddled. It’s something I can get wrong even in the modern world, so I think if I’d taken anything like that hundreds of years ago, I would’ve been burnt at the stake for witchcraft, or started a religion lol

I think it depends to a large extent on how effective your local collection service is. In my area, the waste is collected and methane gas is captured as part of the process, so presumably in my case it is better to use that communal service.

DMT is relatively highly concentrated in the root bark of certain acacia varieties - I’m pretty sure it’s not present elsewhere in significant amounts. Even if the roots were to somehow burn, it seems very unlikely that there would be anything like a high enough concentration of DMT in the smoke to cause any effects. Also remember that DMT needs to be vapourised not burnt in order to experience its effects.

I don’t think there’s any need for psychedelics to explain the origins of religion though. Just human imagination with a healthy dose of untreated mental illness is sufficient. I’m not being disrespectful about mental illness at all - it really wasn’t that long ago that people who heard voices were deemed to be under the influence of demons and the like. Most of the time, people with these kinds of illnesses would be ostracised if not outright put to death by their communities, but on rare occasions, when the stars align just right, it’s not hard to imagine how they could end up starting a cult.

If strong and weak are meaningless, then so is fitness - in the context of genes, evolution selects genes which give their owner greater chance of reproducing, therefore causing those genes to survive over many generations. In other words, “survival of the fittest” merely says “those best at surviving will survive”.

There is also no requirement, in nature, to be in balance with the environment. The fossil record tells countless tales of species which have caused their own downfall by over-exploiting the environment.

The point I’m trying to make is that we can’t look to nature for guidance on morality. It can be easy to daydream of days gone by, when we humans lived peacefully in smaller groups, in harmony with nature, happily singing songs in the firelight. Those times never really existed - there was no harmony with nature, nature is red in tooth and claw, and we have always had to steal our survival by spilling the blood of others. Never was that blood freely given.

So we can’t find easy answers in nature, we can’t simply step back to a rosy-tinted past of harmony, we have to move forward. We have to take what we have, look objectively at its faults, and equally its benefits, and strive to make small incremental changes to push the system towards one which is more fair and just.

Unlike the revolutionary political innovations of the 20th century, capitalism didn’t first exist on paper before being put into practice. It evolved out of the ways in which people in growing societies naturally interacted when exchanging goods and services.

Once a society starts accepting tokens as a representation of economic effort - be they conch shells, precious metals or government-backed IOUs - mechanisms will emerge whereby the tokens become unevenly distributed, and with that the power the tokens hold.

The fact that i capitalism has evolved from natural behaviour means it has strength, that it is fit for purpose. It doesn’t mean it’s perfect though, in particular it does not mean it is just. The question is can we, as humans who are ourselves products of evolution, do better?

It seems to me that when it comes to life, there is one rule of nature that underpins all others - the strong have dominion over the weak. In relation to the current economic status quo, how can we prevent the strong becoming so strong that the weak become their slaves?

Strong disagree. IE was bad because it was heavily tied to the interests of its controlling entity. Things like ActiveX broke the OS-agnostic principles of the web. As it was the bundled default browser used by the majority, and therefore the main target of webdevs, its quirky behaviour became a way to enforce its use and help make non-Windows users second-class web citizens.

Now Chrome is well established in its number one spot, we’re seeing more initiatives from Google to use that dominance to similarly create dependencies for users on the Google ecosystem.

Nice! Might be fun to stay in for a night, but I think the lack of running water would become unbearable pretty quickly. Somewhat similar to some cave houses near where I used to live in the UK - https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2020/oct/02/kinver-edge-black-country-to-tea-englands-last-cave-people

I don’t think that’s correct. It seems there’s a low risk of some chemicals leaching into the contents of a plastic bottle over time - if this concerns you, it’s a concern when you keep water in a plastic bottle for a long time, not that the bottle becomes more likely to leach chemicals once it reaches a certain age.

There is the other question of microplastics - these are more likely to be found in water from a water bottling factory that uses plastic than from your tap.

Rice milk is the only one that tastes naturally sweet to me. It’s nice to drink by itself but far too watery to use with cereal or in coffee. Nothing beats soya milk for that IMO.

Coconut milk seems like it should be great for certain use cases, if only I could think of what…

Also not vegan because life without cheese and ice cream would be unbearable.

I’m surprised they’ve seemingly done nothing to make life harder for ad blockers. For instance they could insert ads directly into the video stream if they detect an ad blocker in use.

Like you, the only reason i can think of is that they don’t want to encourage tech-savvy users to potentially lead the flight to alternative platforms.

, if you download videos via youtube-dl the resulting videos will be Google tagged internally anyway

What do you mean by “Google tagged internally”?

If I’m understanding you right, then I think it might be better for this case to have a less specific rule. So the rule might say, “propaganda - viz the deliberate misrepresentation of facts or theories to promote your political beliefs - is not allowed here and will result in your account being banned. An example of such would be pushing the horseshoe theory to undermine socialist or communist discussion”

Additionally the policy should involve a series of warnings in all but really egregious cases.

I do understand the problem caused by these bad actors, but one of their aims is to aggravate division and prevent free and constructive discussion and I think we should take care to ensure they do not succeed in that.

Is it necessarily propaganda? Genuine question. I have not heard of the horseshoe theory by name before - full disclosure: I have no formal education in politics, have never read any significant political work, however I do like to discuss political ideas. I remember years ago discussing this same idea at school with friends, where we said that it seemed to be like a ring rather than a straight line, and if you go far enough in one direction, you end up in the same place as if you went far enough in the opposite direction.

Obviously we were young and naive, but there was no propaganda here, no bad faith. Rather it was merely an observation we had made independently based on the shallow treatment of the subject we had received through school.

Having just read about the horseshoe theory on rational wiki, I can see how it has been abused by right-of-centre people to dismiss left wing ideas. However that doesn’t mean that everyone who sees some kind of equivalence between extreme right and extreme left is doing so in order to push that particular agenda.

At least not consciously, surely?

You bought a refurbished phone and the home button doesn’t work? Were you aware of that before you bought it?

The main concern I would have with a refurb would be the battery. So many people take really bad care of their phone battery - letting it run right down in particular - and while a battery can be “reconditioned” itself (resetting the onboard charge controller all lithium batteries have by running it down to zero then fully charging it), once they are permanently degraded they only get worse.