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

  • Telephone support people have helped me hundreds of times in my life, I’ve have had phone calls with people who have been really kind and thoughtful and done a lot to help, going above and beyond the call of duty.

  • Hey, I’m a gay guy and I’ve used grindr in the past - it’s absolutely nothing like Tinder, beyond the concept of connecting with people over the internet for some kind of relationship.

    Tinder has the whole swipe left, swipe right thing going on, and all that sort of stuff. Grindr is way more straight forward, just a screen with a bunch of profile pictures of online LGBTQ+ guys near you.

    It’s also much less about dating, Grindr is generally much more social, I know loads of guys who just chitchat on there with other guys, without any expectation of a relationship or sex.

    As for other apps - they all do it, I don’t know of a single mainstream “””dating””” app that doesn’t let you choose your own gender and your preferred gender separately. But there’s like a thousand dating apps, and compared to the number of singles in a given area, when you’re gay you have a lot less people to work with. Imagine if 98% of the single women in your region all paired up and got into a relationship together leaving only 2% of them - and then if you flirt with the wrong one, she gets really offended and might attack you - that’s kind of like what it’s like being a gay guy trying to date. So yeah, it’s helpful to have a de-facto place to find people who are also men who are into men.

  • I can’t read French well enough to really dig in to your source and the website doesn’t seem to work for Google translate and it’s too much text to copy/paste, sorry, so I can’t really confirm what you say except the fact that I looked on the site and I saw that they didn’t include pumped storage, which seems extremely foolish. I’m guessing that they were bribed by the nuclear power companies in some way.

  • I didn’t mean they were the same as a single cigarette butt, sorry if I wasn’t clear - it’s just that one of them has a bunch of lithium and electronics as well as plastic, obviously neither is good but the vape is especially egregious imo!

  • What’s your point? If the sun stops shining everywhere for a year we’re all fucked anyways. If the wind stops blowing it’s because the sun has died. And if water decides to suddenly start disobeying the laws of physics then I think we will have bigger problems than turning on the TV.

  • To be able to have a stable grid all the scenarios have to include battery storage and thermal production

    Totally wrong - you need to source this claim if you’re going to make it. All of the studies I have found claim the opposite - wind power is the best for stabilising a grid both in energy demand and frequency response. With renewables and pumped storage there is no need for batteries or for fossil/nuclear power.

  • The United States has enough land paved over for parking spaces to have 8 spaces per car - 5% of the land. If just 10% of that space was used to generate solar electricity - a mere 0.5% - that would generate enough solar power to provide electricity to the entire country. By comparison, around 50% of the land is agricultural. The amount of land used by renewable sources is not a real problem, it’s an argument used by the very wealthy pro-nuclear lobby to justify the huge amounts of funding that they currently receive.

  • The entirety of the US could be powered by solar power if they converted 10% of land which is just parking spaces to solar farming, and there would still be enough parking spaces left in the country to have seven for every car. The amount of land required for the benefits is completely inconsequential.

    Meanwhile, for nuclear:

    • more CO2 equivalent emissions per kWh than renewables
    • very harmful extraction of uranium ore
    • industrial processes to refine uranium ore are polluting
    • huge quantities of concrete are consumed to build a nuclear plant, concrete is an extremely environmentally harmful material
    • huge amounts of industrial traffic moving astronomical quantities of materials across the country for building and dismantling plants
    • huge amounts of water consumed and irradiated by operating plants
    • much more maintenance required
  • Most studies suggest that a 100% renewable source of our energy needs is completely viable. That should be our goal. It’s much easier and cheaper to aim for that - what benefit would nuclear give? It’s just much more expensive for all the downsides.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy

  • They have acted very strongly in their own interests. Do you think they want to be in politics forever? They hang around for a few years to make their name, get the lobbyist money, do some favours for some corporations in exchange for lucrative benefits and board positions and head off into to sunset to count their stacks of cash.

    Again, “the shallowness of their reasoning”, they’re very clearly lying about their reasons because they can’t come out and say “we want to ban encryption because we want to be able to spy on all of our own population at any time without a warrant”

    It’s not ablism to suggest someone might not have the mental capacity to do a job.

    Yes, it literally is. It’s like saying that women are too sensitive to be politicians. I would far rather have a trustworthy person who listens to working class people and has a good heart but who also has an intellectual disability to run the country than what we have right now. It would be far better.

  • No, you're just wrong. Most politicians are of average intelligence or above. Do you have any sort of source which indicates otherwise? What would drive you to this? The argument that politicians are bad because they have an intellectual disability is extremely ableist.

  • Dude, they aren't lacking in intelligence, they're educated and very capable people. They don't give a shit about plastic pollution, they just want to try and reduce the impact of protesters. They don't give a shit about how bad their encryption law would be for people and businesses because it would give them more power and a stronger chilling effect so they can suppress dissidents. They are not lacking in mental faculties whatsoever, they are playing you for a fool.