Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BH
Blake [he/him] @ Blake @feddit.uk
Posts
3
Comments
704
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Had a Google around myself and didn’t really find anything convincing. Just a lot of handwringing about how banning breeds is imperfect because some dogs of that breed can be raised in a loving and caring environment to become affectionate and caring pets. Sure, great, but so can every other breed. There aren’t really any sensible proposals for how to handle the issue of dangerous dogs from those who oppose breed bans. They seem to favour treating each dog individually, but how would that work? We would need to establish a fucking huge office of dog assessors to check every dog in the UK to evaluate if they have good inherent behaviour and that they’ve been raised well, and if they fail the test at that point they’re taking away a beloved family member from people who presumably did their best. I really don’t think that’s a better outcome for anyone.

    As it is we have far too much dog breeding going on, so anything that happens to reduce that or to make it harder is a good thing in my view

  • Absolutely agree with you about banning dog shows. I am sure that there are valid criticisms of breed specific bans, but the article you linked wasn’t very persuasive at all, it was really clearly biased and had many weak arguments. Of the various claims made, I looked deeper into a few of them and found that the article was quite misleading. For example, it mentions that the Netherlands repealed a pit bull ban, with the implication being that they instead treat all breeds equally… but that’s just not true, because the Netherlands still classified pit bulls as a dangerous breed, and dogs classed as dangerous need to go through state mandated testing or be euthanised, which is a lot more work and much more cruel than the UK’s dangerous dogs legislation.

    I’m open to hearing good criticism from a perspective of improving outcomes but surely we can do better than that americentric article

  • Ah, at our school we weren’t directly given free condoms, just told about how we could access them. So of course a bunch of kids got some free condoms which encouraged lively discussion around what flavours were the best before some of them inevitably ended up as balloons.

  • There are massive differences between implementing a ban on pit bulls in a single city (Denver) and across an entire nation (the UK). The US is such a mess of federal, state, county, etc. laws that it is difficult to enforce such a law, but in the UK, it’s much easier.

    Honestly I’d go a lot further and ban all breeds with significant health issues as well, to be honest.

  • This kind of content doesn’t really succeed because it drives less engagement than it would if it was really impassioned and angry, and that means less money. So even creators that start out balanced, neutral and considered are incentivised to become more algorithm friendly by encouraging angry comments on their videos

  • It’s absolutely shocking to me how much effort the capitalist class is willing to expend for such a small amount of control. It should be a no-brainer for them: reduced overheads, reduced office costs, etc. I guess I’m surprised that the control is worth more to them than the profit.

  • We should respond to stupidity with anger

    This is really harmful rhetoric, while I’m sure you didn’t mean it in this way, you’re essentially saying that people should be treated badly simply for being misinformed or, worse, for having an intellectual disability. Wilful ignorance deserves derision, but we absolutely shouldn’t be hateful towards people who aren’t as lucky to be as educated or as intellectually talented as we are

  • Kinda, between the iconic hbomberguy video that tore his videos to shreds and his experiences of being on the other side from his new alt-right pals on the subject of Brexit, he had a bit of a rude awakening and seems to have steered away from political content, but he has never acknowledged any wrongdoing or expressed any remorse for his shitty behaviour.

    He likely still holds the exact same opinions as before, but keeps them to himself now. Either way, he isn’t worthy of your support.

  • They don’t need to define the breeding as being a cross between x and y breeds, but as a set of characteristics for example. I’m not an expert in dog breeding but I’m sure a group of experts could come up with a definition that isn’t overly broad but also defies workarounds

  • Yep, this - deal prices as well. It should be the law that all prices, promotions and deals must show the per-unit price as well. Also they should just standardise on per 100g for everything. I hate the “per biscuit” or “per serving (35g)” unit prices

  • This is another reason why working from home is a good thing - I was born and raised in a little town which pretty much wouldn’t have career prospects, but I was lucky enough to get a well paying career that lets me work remotely. I’m spending a good chunk of my money locally, which helps to keep people in jobs in my hometown. I know I’m just a tiny, tiny cog in a big complex machine, but it’s better than channeling yet more money into the big cities. And as a bonus for this little town, it gets to keep an opinionated locally grown weirdo!

  • TIL, thanks, I have edited my comment accordingly. I have never liked the whole “west Taiwan” thing anyways - while I disagree with a lot of what the PRC does, I think unilaterally declaring that an entire nation should be governed by a different nation is shitty, imperialist behaviour. The only time I think it’s valid is for people expressing their wishes for their own homeland, and even then it can still be imperialist.

  • For a “free speech absolutist”, Elon sure seems to be comfortable supporting dictatorships where free speech is suppressed.

    In my experience, a lot of “free speech” adherents seem to mostly want to be able to use slurs and spread anti-semitism without consequences, but feel that it’s perfectly fine for the government to outlaw the open discussion of issues which affect 5-10% of the population.

  • Words like “slam” drive engagement. Journalists have to pay their bills, and journalistic institutions can only really get money from advertisement or from wealthy patrons who bankroll them as a way of spreading their ideology. For both, engagement and clicks are absolutely vital - advertisers need traffic so people see and click their adverts, ideologues need traffic so people see and internalise their ideology.

    If you don’t like clickbait headlines, get involved with anti-capitalist direct action!

  • “Taiwan regards itself as part of China”

    said Blursty.

    “neither is it part of China”

    said Taiwan’s Foreign Affairs Ministry

    I think what you mean is that Taiwan considers itself to be an independent state, whereas the People’s Republic of China, on the mainland, considers themselves Taiwan to be a part of their territory.

    Difficult issue to even discuss without taking sides, really!