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/)MI
Posts
1
Comments
105
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I just love how you end with "I have zero reason to listen to you" when no one has claimed such a thing and you were the one choosing to do the listening.

    All of this because of me pointing out that WHO still claims that there is a daily amount of aspartame that is safe to consume and that the only thing you can prove is that something is unsafe and not the other way around.

    By the way... If you think we should avoid aspartame because there is a suspicion that it might cause cancer I can imagine what you think about sugar, animal fat and protein which there is actual proof that it can cause everything from heart disease to cancer.

  • You use a (heavily questioned) statement of an organization as a base for your claims when the organization explicitly doesn't support your conclusion. It's a fact that WHO still claims there is no dangers consuming the recommended daily amount.

    The method used on rats to estimate the dangers is the method used when estimating dangers every other substances. So the argument is valid as long as you claim that every other substance cause cancer.

    Then you end up nibbling on edges of the classic "the great aspartame conspiracy" but what you totally miss that "big sugar" is even more powerfull...

  • The statement you think is supporting your belief is actually saying the opposite. WHO specifically does not claim that aspartame cause cancer.

    However, what they did state is there was no reason to change the recommended acceptable daily intake level of 40 mg per kg of body weight per day .

    Also, The FDA disagrees with IARC’s (what you refer to as WHO) conclusion that these studies support classifying aspartame as a possible carcinogen to humans. FDA scientists reviewed the scientific information included in IARC’s review in 2021 when it was first made available and identified significant shortcomings in the studies on which IARC relied. FDA also pointed out that JECF (also WHO) did not raise safety concerns for aspartame under the current levels of use and did not change the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI).

    So yeah.... Just believing journalists trying to click bait you is probably more likely to give you cancer than following the recommendation from WHO regarding daily intake of aspartame.

  • Ads?

    "Hi, I'm calling about your recent interest in furry related content. We at Furry Fetish inc recently mailed you a catalogue of our products... Oh...you haven't recieved it yet? Well, no worries. It was sent to 324 North Street..oh... You live on 325 North Street? No worries, your name is printed in large so whoever received it knows that is was for you and will probably deliver it to you..."

  • Wikipedia:

    I got curious about the last statement in the article about war crimes and wanted to find information on what war crimes the division was responsible for.

    According to Wikipedia there has been numerous investigations which all (as I understood it) has been unsuccessful in finding hard evidence.

    Now, I'm not defending Nazis and I'm not saying this division was nice in any way or not guilty of war crimes. I'm just concluding that most things in life are not just black or white.

  • Isn't "anyone can fork if a project doesn't really fit their taste" sort of the curse of open source?

    Swallowing your pride, merging into another project and taking a less glamorous role in that project is not as easy as it was to fork when steering your project.

    This is generally speaking. I'm definitively not saying any of this is that case with the XFS project.

    Ps. Murdering your wife is also something that seems to be bad for filesystems....

  • It seems that you think something can't be bad if there's something else that's worse.

    You bringing up things that doesn't even share a similar context is either plain stupid or very deliberate.

    I'm voting for the latter.

    By the way... You do agree that the Russian aggression against Ukraine is caused by Russia attacking Ukraine and that Russia have a deliberate strategy of killing civilians in Ukraine, right?

  • Old timer here.

    In the old days Microsoft essentially conquered the web by creating specialized features only available for their web browser.

    This is the reason why we still suffer with IE compatibility mode in Edge. A lot of corporations still have systems that rely on clients being IE compatible.

    Google essentially does the same with their services and Chrome.

  • What do you propose the government should limit/stop spending on to reach over 0.5% of the real yearly earnings of Gates, Musk, Bezos, the Waltons and all their billionaire friends?

    (Note that I'm not even asking about if the actual real yearly earnings of millionaires.)

  • This.

    And to add to it. If you were making 10 million dollar and someone approached and said that they could make it so that you keep 1 million in taxes if you pay them 100 thousand you would most likely be one of the ones doing it.

    If you make enough money you can afford hiring people to find new ways to keep your expenses down. Tax is an expense as any other to many rich people.

    "After all, you made your fortune without getting any help so why should your earnings go to p1eople who use the system"