• 2 Posts
  • 1.43K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 6th, 2023

help-circle









  • I mean, that’s a legitimate option.

    Honestly, it’s not Lemmy, it’s the whole Internet being overrun by bots. There is no safe haven and I haven’t heard a single feasible solution to the problem. But, at least in my experience, staying off the Internet works great. When I’m talking to someone face to face I practically never worry that they might be a bot.

    Also, having offline conversations tends to make me happier. So there’s another benefit. I know it sounds cliche or like I’m joking, but I’m really not.



  • Do you mean what ubiquitous toxin will be next?

    Or do you mean how can we get by without plastic?

    If it’s the second one, the answer is easy, fucking aluminum. We’ve had the answer forever and it still works great. Glass too, good for many applications.

    Now the actual problem isn’t plastic bags or beverage containers though, it’s clothing and tires. Most clothing is plastic these days and tiny plastic fibers break up into micro plastics and take to the air or end up in the sea. Car tires are also just plastic these days, not rubber (which is arguably better for the environment than leveling rainforests for rubber tree plantations, sigh…), the tires rub off on the road like a pencil eraser on sandpaper. This also ends up in the air and sea.

    So anyway, replacing plastic beverage containers is a great step, a no brainer, but it also doesn’t address the real problem at all. I hope that some day soon tires and clothes can start to be made with biodegradable “eco plastics”, but if that doesn’t turn out to be feasible, we’ll be in some serious trouble. And once we have some real, feasible, affordable replacements, then we need to actually outlaw the use of older plastic tires, in every country on the planet, despite heavy lobbying against any new measures from vested interests… I can’t even imagine how to make that happen. How did we do it with lead? Has every country outlawed lead in gas?


  • Fuck the mods

    First off, to be clear, I don’t agree with this statement, I think it’s the wrong stance.

    But after that, I think this is a really an interesting point. [In general I understand a policy of not inciting violence] but if for instance, (purely hypothetically) the country were to fall into civil war (a crazy suggestion I know), wouldn’t this policy instantly seem inappropriate?

    I mean, encouraging people to join the war effort would be a matter of course, to quash that sentiment and silence those voices seems unethical.

    As we slip closer to that possible outcome, surely the time for seriously talking about violence would come before the first shot is fired, right? So where do you draw that line? At what point is a statement which incites violence “violating site rules” and at what point is it “legitimate discussion of impending hostilities”.

    And I for one, am very interested in how mods feel about this question.

    edit for clarity in brackets