daniskarma @ daniskarma @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

3

Comments

1,262

Joined

1 yr. ago

Yo could do that at home. I do.

For many people a gym is a matter of discipline. To force them go and do it.

But for me it works the opposite way, the extra time going to another place dissuades me from going at all. So workout at home works better for me.

Once in WEP days, before smartphones. I was on vacation on this place without internet and I cracked someone's wifi password to get internet. It was wild how easy was to crack Wi-Fi's passwords.

I wrote another comment about this friend that votes for a political party that would make Trump look like a liberal. Still not an issue, because we are both very peaceful people and we are not very pushy, so really even if there are differences we don't try to hurt each other over those differences and we don't take it as an insult or something of extreme gravity. Because once again, not everyone is extremely political. Even if you think they should be because the current situation mandates doe more political activism or whatever, it doesn't mean that people are..

And second big reason is the reasons she has to vote for that party. She does it mostly in spite of the socialist party to bring them down because she thinks they are corrupt thieves (and as I said in the other comment sadly it has recently been proven to be right).

Also it's important to understand that your vision of an opposite political party is not the same vision that the voters of that party have of it. In this example, and I'm sure it applies to trump as well, I think vox is a fascist political party. But she does not, she doesn't think they are fascists and of course she doesn't think of herself as a fascist (neither do I). She doesn't vote it to stablish fascism. I remember saying to her that if they get elected they will cut right for women, she just doesn't believe that's going to happen, and that's it, different believes on what's going to happen if that party gets elected.

And I'm skeptical on my own knowledge of the future as well, before the current government was elected I said that the government wouldn't do some things or some other things won't happen, and those bad things ended up happening and I was wrong about those.

I think a big part of being open minded is knowing that yourself could be wrong, and being able to understand the reasons other people have to believe they are right. Not trying to make up those reasons for my own convenience. It would be easy, and politically convenient, to say that everyone who votes for vox (or trump in that case) is a fascist, but that statement would be closed minded and, probably, radicalized. People are complex, some would vote alt-right because they are fascists, but other would not. When engaging into any kind of relationship with anyone it's good to listen to the reasons they have for the things they believe in. If a person would be a fascist I wouldn't be friends of her, but that's not the same, imho, as voting for a party that I think is fascist.

You tell me. I can tell how I characterize myself.

I used to vote between the far left party and the moderate left party. And for the next election my plan is not vote because they disappointed me big time.

Giving more examples I have this friend, she votes for the alt-right party here (vox). But I get along with here very well. One instance of discrepancy is that while she is not homophobic (she knows I'm bi and she never said to me anything bad because of it) she is on the opinion that "gay people" is more promiscuous. Like she has some of these prejudices but she is not ill meaned, she is also Christian. But I don't think she is a bad person, and it's not like she is talking all the time about that or about politics in general. Most of the time when she talked about politics she just said that she was going to vote the alt-right because our current president is a thief. Which giving the current events in my country she might be right on that (big corruption scandal just blew up). But what I mean, is that she has some different opinions and when casting the ballot she votes for this radical party. But our relationship hasn't been hindered because of that, and she is not even a bad person, she just don't like the socialist party. And overall we don't really talk that much about politics, it's not a central theme for either of us, but even when we talk about it we have never argue, just talk differences calmly and with respect, we never insulted each other because politics.

I get that people on lemmy are usually very political, and a big chunk of their lives orbit around politics.

But for most people that's not the case.

I think that's why I see so many comments of people shocked that someone would date other person who would vote for a different political party.

If politics is not a priority on your life it won't really have much an impact on their relationship.

Talking from experience, I've dated people that have voted both the right and the extreme right. And it really didn't burdened our relationship. You must understand that our conversations usually never pivot about politics, and when we talk about politics we don't get passionate about it it's just more like "you think that? Cool I think this other thing. So... what are eating today?"

I suppose in long term when you are all your life with a person overtime there can be frictions, specially if one or both become more passionate about politics.

Most people don't care that much and they are not that passionate about politics.

For some people politics ideologies is not the central point of their lives. Thus it really doesn't become something that disallow dating.

I wonder how does that work with federation.

If a second instance does not have that restriction, is there any "legal" effect on the federated content?

Mod hosting seems to be a great usecase for torrent. It only need a suitable frontend and we are golden.

In Spain yes. We call them "patriotas de la pulserita" because they always have wristbands with the spanish flag.

We don't have flags on poles, put people put the spanish flags on the balconies.

Is there a list available?

At this point I'm curious what they consider violent. Straight up military uprising and civil war?

Despite its connotations the USA flag is pretty good.

why are you so aggressive?

I'm not dishonest. Please be respectful if you want others to respect you aswell.

Hard to find a source for fertilizer usage per type of crop so of you want to dismiss that for lack of source I'm ok with that. Still think that a crop with higher sugar content and a more precise composition would need more input. But if you can provide a source otherwise would also be welcome to clear doubts.

When I'm talking about economy I'm not talking wall street. I'm talking about the definition of economy. Which is the distribution of resources.

I don't agree in your final statement. For many reasons: It's not a good thing being global, it is not desirable that your food comes from the other side of the world just because you decided not to eat a local chicken. That's quite complex and a different conversation overall but I think local food consumption is better overall. And without putting restrictions as in "do not eat meat" it's easier to achieve local consumption.

While winter storage is important, plant based food can also be stored, and we see animal consumption in human cultures from places without cold winters so the statements can be labeled as not true, or at least not sufficient.

Most people eat meat because it's the easiest way to have the necessary caloric and nutrient input. Not for pleasure. If we would only eat for pleasure we would only probably eat sugar which is plant based. Vegan diet is just too much of a headache within a population that already have issues maintaining balance with an omnivore diet. Many pleasure foods are plant based, like pizza, so that must no be the only reason people eat meat.

There's a economical difference. Growing plants for animals is cheaper. Plants for animals are easier to take care. We dump a lot of fertilizer on animal crops. But we dump even more in human crops.

They amount of care and soil usage is always going to be higher on crops destined to human consumption.

This could grow if we tried to grow only human based food? Yes, but with much higher economical effort andes yield per sqrmeter. When nutrients grow thin in soil is not only that things straight up do not grow, is that less things grow and they grow smaller.

It's not tradicional. It's observation of history. Humans have not grown as omnivore because of tradition. We have not domesticated animals because of tradition. We have done it because it's the most efficient way to do things.

You for instance are vegan because of tradition. Not because economics or efficiency dictate it, but because a series of moral considerations that were passed onto you thus modifying your behavior. But most humans population if faced with the nutritional challenge will both grow plants and farm animals because it is the most efficient way to do things.

Traditional exceptions would be the opposite. Like the cultures that forbid certain foods because religious reasons.

Sofons be like.

Do you know what "alfalfa" is?

I don't know if that's the correct english translation.

Widely used as a source of animal food. Good luck trying to eat that.

Search which cultives tend to be part of healthy crop rotations and most of the times you'll find a crop that's used for animals and cannot be eaten by humans.

Also not are grains and soy are created equal or are as suitable for human consumption in a healthy diet as other plants. Or almost most planta that are used for animal consumption. There's two fact here, first that many times there's a mixed use (part of the plant goes to the animal and part of the plant goes to the human) and other times even when everything is for the animal, there tend to be different varieties. The corn dedicated to human consumption is not the same corn dedicated to animal consumption. It grows different and can take different amount of nutrients for the soil, or take different economic requirements. Human food tend to be much more expensive overall, because our stomach cannot digest plants as easily as herbivores.

Do you think human beings have been farming animals and those "extra crops" just for funsies. It's the most efficient way to feed human population. That's why it have been done for millenia.

Most of the food we grow for animals is not edible by humans.

Also the soil we use for growing that food is not suitable for growing human food, permanently or temporary.

One of the basics of agriculture is crop rotation. And this crop rotation usually need for foods that are good for animals but not so good for humans.

That while talking about food that is grown specifically for animals. A good part of animal food is just residues from human food. For instance, in my grandmother's house I remember the chickens were basically a walking bio-disposal bin, at not point food was grown specifically for those chicken.

In the matter of wasted food, resources. A lot of it have to do with transportation from very far away places.

Back in my school days we just copy assignments from a web that hosted usual school assignments from different places. "ElRinconDelVago" was called.

Teachers even had "ElRicon" detection mechanisms as they have now with LLMs.

Students always find the way to be lazy and cheese their way over homework.