pineapplefriedrice @ pineapplefriedrice @lemmy.world

Posts

6

Comments

22

Joined

2 yr. ago

Which is not an issue at all. Plenty of medium-sized subs have a geographically wide spanning mod team. For a large sub like that it's a non-issue.

I used to eat meat. Don't anymore because the arguments against it are just that fucking strong. Basically unless you advocate for religious supremacy it's hard to make a cohesive argument in favor of meat consumption.

OK... I mean if you don't understand the internet then there's not a lot I can do to help you.

This is primarily meant for people to organize themselves online. Local networks already exist and those are the channels through which protests have traditionally gone. Organizing the internet tends to be a bit messier, but when it works it's usually via several "hubs" (think fucknestle, save3rdpartyapps, etc.).

Sure, I'll add that.

Thanks, I'm aware. There's a couple of links in the post already.

But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic.

I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor.

But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic.

I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor.

They're fighting a losing battle, but I hope a side effect of it is that new people come in and change both the economics and artistry of Hollywood. Most Hollywood content sits in a very rigid box. It's repetitive, unoriginal, and unappealing. People are encouraged to eat ramen for every meal in order to "make it", simply because far too many of them try (which is partially the result of the "follow your dreams" narrative in America as well). The further down you are, the worse your compensation. Good ideas get missed or thrown out and relegated to dollar theatres all the time.

If this strike goes on long enough that it starts to flush people out, I'm ok with that. Sucks for the people who are going to lose their livelihoods, but for some of them that was an eventuality. Hopefully in the end creators will have more creative freedom and receive more proportional compensation.

Can we also do this for women?

I'd have men wear more turtlenecks, and tighter jeans. Doesn't need to be TIGHT, just not the insanely baggy styles that have been around for the past 20 years. And turtlenecks... they have the effect of making a guy's shoulders look broader. People underestimate the effect of shoulders on appearance as a whole, in both men and women. If you're a guy with rounded or somewhat narrower shoulders, turtlenecks are your best friend. You can also wear slightly wide-cut t-shirts, or sweaters that have a looser fit at the top or with a logo/detail right underneath where your neck ends.

Supreme court cases. There are some real doozies, not that anyone irl cares.

Hugs on drugs

When I was a kid my teacher told my parents "she has something that nobody else at her age has, and that's genuine empathy". Now I'm an adult so it's not an applicable compliment anymore, but I still appreciate that comment, and I'd like to think it was true.

Omg I JUST did this, though she was in grade 12. Basically did all the work knowing that she wouldn't graduate if she didn't hand it in. If I'm honest it bothers me because she didn't deserve to graduate, and I don't like the idea of enabling someone's bad habits and she makes a habit of skating by, but I couldn't help myself. Not having a high school diploma is a death knell for so many things, and I think there was a very good chance that she wouldn't have gone back to finish school. I don't know if I made the right decision or if she just needed to learn a life lesson and experience some real consequences, but alas here we are.

That's actually really interesting, I like it. I'm trying to brainstorm areas where I've neglected to consider associated costs. Probably cooking for me? I have a strong tendency to get culinary inspiration and drop way more cash than I intended on all the things I didn't realize I would need.

Sorry, unfortunately nutrition is more complex than what you can sum up in a few sentences. To answer that though:

• Chicken isn't categorically "unhealthy" in the same way double stuf oreos cooked in lard are - I said in another comment that it's the ultimate neutral food, and if you look at its profile I think that's a fair statement. It's not completely devoid of nutrients, it has a couple of things in significant quantities - phosphorus, selenium, and B3 for example - but overall it's not very nutrient dense. It doesn't have a ton of huge negatives either - a bit of saturated fat, but nothing to write home about. If you're looking at a "Hitler-Hanks" spectrum where the lard oreos are on one end and a spinach chia seed broccoli whatever salad on the other, then chicken is probably right in the middle somewhere. Its D&D alignment is True Neutral. The point I was making in my earlier comment was that "protein" doesn't make a food healthy, and that there's a lot more to it than that, and if people use that mental shortcut they might end up making misinformed decisions.
• The nutritional profile of chicken would be a lot to type out, but you can look at the NCCDB or Cronometer Gold (which uses NCCDB among others) for an elaborate breakdown. Just keep in mind that it doesn't capture everything - it's an amazing tool, but it won't cover the catechins in your tea, for example.

Ultimately though, if you're reading this, let me take this opportunity to encourage you to GO SEE A REGISTERED DIETITIAN. Your insurance will often cover 80+% of your first appointment, but even if they don't it's an amazing investment. You'll live longer, probably spend less on food, and spend a lot less on hospital bills after your first heart attack.

Lean protein =/= healthy. Like, at all. This is a myth from the freaking 1980s. Nutritional profile is a breakdown of the micronutrients that a food has, and it determines whether a food is "nutritious" and therefore, in general terms, "healthy".

Please, oh please, don't go around telling people that food is healthy if it is a lean protein. I'm sure it's well intended, but it's also misinformed. If you want to learn about how to assess whether a food is healthy, go make an appointment with a dietitian - your insurance will often cover the first appointment.

Chicken has been heavily, heavily marketed as a health food, and while it's not the worst thing you could eat, if you actually look at its nutritional profile it's not particularly nutritious or "healthy". That's just Tyson Foods & co working their magic. It's more like the ultimate neutral food - nothing terrifying, nothing great, a bit like its taste.

BEANS

Addictive carbs and salt, dirt cheap, and healthy as shit. Also convenient and compatible with most dietary/ethical restrictions.

If you learn to like beans when you're 20 and throw it into an index fund, you'll have a modest retirement fund just on the money you saved (yes, I calculated it based on money saved and growth of the S&P).