the Nazis being Nazis would’ve justified vaporizing every civilian man, woman, and child in a city or two
The bomb didn't "vaporize every man woman and child".
175 000 Volksturm (civilians pressed into service by their government, including women and children) died fighting the Allied advance into Germany. Dropping the bomb to end the war early would have prevented these deaths.
This isn't to mention the number of civilians who died as a result of being too close to the fighting. 125 000 civilians died in the Battle of Berlin alone.
Also consider the number of soldiers who died on both sides which wouldn't have happened had the war been ended early. The US produced so many Purple Heart medals (given to those who are killed or wounded while serving) in preparation for their invasion of Japan that they're still using them today.
So yes dropping the bomb to end the war in Europe early would have been justified. Now please stop being a literal nazi apologist.
Argon2 has parameters that allow you to specify the execution time, the memory required, and the degree of parallelism.
But at a certain point you get diminishing returns and you're just wasting resources. It seems like a similar question to why not just use massive encryption keys.
Yes, a hashing function is designed to be resource intensive, since that's what makes it hard to brute force. No, a hashing function isn't designed to be infinitely expensive, because that would be insane. Yes, it's still a bad thing to provide somebody with a force multiplier like that if they want to run a denial-of-service.
They're designed to be resource intensive to calculate to make them harder to brute force, and impossible to reverse.
Some literally have a parameter which acts as a sliding scale for how difficult they are to calculate, so that you can increase security as hardware power advances.
The point is that mass factory farming is the reason that meat is cheap now, and one of the technologies that's enabled mass factory farming is refrigeration.
Because the focus wouldn’t be on profit just for profit’s sake
what socioeconomic system has existed where increased productivity was viewed as a bad thing?
e.g.:
pure feudalism would've led to economies of scale because it would make the king of the castle wealthier.
any kind of socialism with a centrally planned economy would've led to economies of scale because it enables the government to more easily meet the needs of the people.
even pure marxist communism probably would've led to economies of scale eventually because any communities that worked together on a global scale would've been more prosperous for their community members, which is still a goal of the system
The technologies just allowed it
or in other words, their invention led to it, which was the original quote I was responding to
Plus, technologies are not sentient, you can’t blame a technology…
socio-economic systems aren't sentient either
nobody's "blaming" a technology—there isn't even really a consensus in this thread on whether economies of scale leading to increased meat consumption is a good or bad thing
So I can eat 2000 calories in pure sugar and feel full for the whole day?
point 1 was already addressed in my comment
You said it didn't matter in America but that it does matter globally, but we're not talking about globally, because we're talking about how milk forms part of the typical American diet.
Eating meat isn't the same thing as rationalising that it isn't contributing.
Also, it's now perfectly possible to exist in society without eating meat at all. The evidence being all the people who go about their lives doing exactly that.
So yes dropping the bomb to end the war in Europe early would have been justified. Now please stop being a literal nazi apologist.