• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle


  • Most of the time, it feels like people are just saying “yall are just mad cause I’m right” but using different words because its often obvious why: an unpopular opinion or believed to be objectively false. These comments already have plenty of replies explaining why their comment is bad in some way. The only cases where there should be confusion about why is is if you are posting in a community that gets the same comments all the time and so its spam and you don’t know it, or you said something that is being misinterpreted but for whatever reason you are unable to tell why and you haven’t gotten any replies already (but for some reason are paying close attention to your internet points).




  • I’ve never seen the image before, but the “threat of violence” was obviously a joke comment like the rallying call to “elect Biden so we can force feminize the cissy men.” In case you didn’t know, that’s also a joke. Its very different from threats to take a vehicle (whether a truck or a steamroller) to a pride event and use it on people, for example.

    If you can’t understand context or jokes, maybe don’t make inflammatory remarks about an entire group of people based on one person’s comment with confidence without at least asking first. Nothing wrong with taking things too literally, but weaponizing your lack of understanding isn’t the answer. Of course a lot of people do make veiled threats (in minecraft) when they actually are encouraging violence, so we should be careful about language and surely there’s cases in the middle where it could go either way, in which case calling out the language without insinuating it was intentional or representative of a larger group could be appropriate unless there’s a clear pattern…


  • Probably something along the lines of “not negative or positive, but in the middle”. Basically a synonym for net zero except net zero may account for other GHGs while carbon neutral may only refer explicitly to carbon. If the process releases CO2 at some points and absorbs the same amount of CO2 elsewhere, then it would be net zero or carbon neutral. But if you release carbon that was stored for 100s of millions of years and would have continued to be stored otherwise and then just store that same amount of carbon for 1-5 years, then you aren’t really offsetting and aren’t really carbon neutral. Given none of the offset programs seem to have presented concrete evidence for long-term storage, they’re worthless in this context. I suppose you could fund short-term storage indefinitely, but how could Apple prove that they’re going to be able to fund carbon offsets for a watched purchased today in 75 years? If funding a lumber farm program that harvests trees after 15 years, I suppose you could just fund it every 15 years after an item is manufactured indefinitely? But how would a company demonstrate they’re going to continue doing that in 75 years?




  • It’s been more than a couple years since Ive tried using Linux (back when I used it as my primary os).

    My experience have been mostly with ubuntu-based OSes like Mint. First laptop I installed Linux on, the audio didn’t just work. It didn’t work at all for a while, despite trying many fixes. Otherwise it actually did work decently well. On my next laptop, it would just one day no longer boot or login for some reason or another and I’d just have to do a clean install because I didn’t know how to fix it. That happened maybe every other month? On both laptops, the two-finger scroll behavior had settings to change how it behaved in the default installed software, but on Linux it was always finicky getting it to work the way I wanted.

    Also installing things is a lot more annoying for stuff that require command line vs just clicking it and telling it to install.