rudyharrelson @ rudyharrelson @kbin.social

Posts

1

Comments

80

Joined

2 yr. ago

I've had some pretty tasty vegan cheeses before. I'm not a vegan or vegetarian, but I like trying new things. The vegan cheeses made with fermented coconut were really good substitutes imo (and I hate coconut)

I've had some vegan cheeses that were made with fermented coconut and they were pretty darn good. And I hate regular coconut.

For me, it's Dragon Ball. Across 3 mangas, 4 shows, and like 25 movies, the latest content is still enjoyable. Dragon Ball Super, both the anime and manga, are just super fun successors to the originals. It's the only comic book I actually read when a new issue comes out.

That's one of the more depressing aspects. Whenever I see people say, "I can't wait for McConnell to die" I'm like, "It's not like Kentucky is suddenly going to vote in someone who isn't horrible to replace him." Just trading out one shitty politician for a younger one.

Sure, but you also said not to shame people for how they vote. I responded specifically to that statement and not the others because I understand wanting to vote for a candidate you actually want in office.

Unfortunately, strategic voting has to occur in order for things to get better in the USA. Until we massively overhaul the voting system, voters need to understand that you either vote for the lesser of two evils, or are (albeit passively) contributing to the greater of two evils' ascent to power.

Even far-left progressives like Bernie Sanders or Noam Chomsky were like, "Dude, you gotta vote for the Democratic candidate or else these crazy far-right candidates are gonna push the country further to the right. At least if the Democratic candidate wins we either stay where we are, or maybe get to move a bit further left during their tenure."

It's a deeply flawed system, but in the general election, it's a simple calculus. There's nothing Biden could do to lose my vote in November because I owe it to our society (and our allies worldwide) to prevent another Trump term.

Let people vote for who they believe in without shaming them.

Voting is like freedom of speech. Everyone is free to vote for whoever they want, but they aren't immune from criticism for how they vote. If someone votes for a guy who says he'll "be a dictator on day one" and encourage Russia to "do whatever the hell they want", I'm gonna shame that person for supporting such an insupportable candidate who espouses such insane ideas.

where’s the pleasure in watching a story you’ve just created with prompts?

I imagine (some of) the fanfic/fanvid community might love something like this for making fanvids. Some of my friends are big into the fanfic/fanvid scene and would probably love writing/directing their own videos to share with fellow fans in the community.

If I hadn’t gotten a home right before the housing market went to shit, I’d be discouraged too.

Same. My family hit the lottery when we decided to buy a house when the covid pandemic was tanking the market. Locked in a mortgage at around 2.25% and feel so privileged every day for it. The apartment we lived in at the time said they were upping the rent nearly 30% when we were due to renew, so we started looking at houses. We were incredibly lucky that we met someone entirely by chance who was planning on selling their home around the same time our apartment lease was due to renew. They never even listed their house on the market so we didn't have to deal with getting into a bidding war. And it was within our budget. And I got a raise at work right before we signed the papers (we were already gonna be able to afford it, but just barely). The stars aligned in so many ways at such an uncertain time in our lives.

It's one of the few things that gives me comfort in trying times. So many things could go wrong, but we've got a house with a fixed mortgage and a very low interest rate and a half acre of land for our kid to run around and play in. I'd say my general anxiety levels have been lower since buying a house cause it just passively comforts me to have gotten so lucky. Even though maintaining a home is a big responsibility compared to renting an apartment, it's totally worth it, and I've enjoyed becoming more handy over the years as things have needed fixing.

With any luck, we'll never move again. It's a nice place about 15 minutes from the nearest town, which is already a rural area, so there's little light pollution so the stargazing opportunities are nice. Hoping to eventually add some solar panels to the roof to lower the energy bill one of these days.

If we were still living in a basic apartment and paying effectively the same amount in rent that we're currently paying in mortgage for a 3 bed 2 bath house with a garage, I'd be depressed as fuck about it every day.

I'd actually be curious to see the comparison between the power consumption/ecological impact of physical money and digital banking systems vs crypto. I assume the latter is way worse because the proof-of-work model is painfully inefficient and literally just a waste of energy (proof-of-stake is better but still wasteful), but I'd be interested to see actual numbers for comparison. Is crypto twice as bad? Or ten times? Or even worse?

Just thinking of all the things traditional money and banks require (just for the US):

• Growing and harvesting cotton and flax for paper bills (and manufacturing linen from the flax plant)
• Physical buildings need to be constructed to hold money, so all the materials required to build a bank need to be manufactured and then constructed in many places all over the country
• Mining and then refining and forging gold and silver bars for places like Fort Knox
• Power consumption from all the banks' servers that handle all of the digital wiring of money all over the world
• Mining copper/nickel/zinc/manganese for minting coins, and then the manufacturing process to mint them
• Fuel consumption moving physical money from place to place

Prolly more stuff I'm not thinking of. I wonder if any studies have been done to add it all up. At least a lot of the stuff traditional money requires creates jobs, too. Farmers, construction workers, miners, etc.

I agree the situation is oppressive and untenable, but the plant manager isn't the same as a King. We don't know if the plant manager had the actual power to fix anything, given the corruption and embezzling going on behind the scenes. A King is the top of the pyramid, this guy wasn't necessarily, so I don't condone his murder based on pure speculation. The French people didn't have to speculate that the King and Queen were directly responsible for the peoples' misery and oppression.

We just don't know enough.

I would say that's a good reason not to condone mob violence, not a reason to support it.

A few of my favorites that I follow:

Open Culture - https://toot.community/@openculture
George Takei - https://universeodon.com/@georgetakei
Endless Screaming - https://botsin.space/@scream
The New Oil - https://mastodon.thenewoil.org/@thenewoil
Space Telescope Science Institute - https://astrodon.social/@spacetelescope
Linux on Mobile - https://fosstodon.org/@linmob

Dunno if we should justify murder by violent mobs by speculating that the person might've deserved it.

Reminds me of this Weird Al bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGWiTvYZRw

I don't think I'm being "stubbornly naive about the system" by thinking it's okay for people to engage in nuanced discource. You and I will not agree on this, and I am not interested in further engaging with someone whose hardline rhetoric has gone so far as to demonize valid criticism.

There's nothing Biden could do to lose my vote in this election, but I'm not going to pretend he's a perfect candidate. And anyone who thinks we need to treat him as such is deluded. Democrats and progressives (like me) knew he wasn't a perfect candidate in 2020, but they knew he could garner enough support to beat Trump, and he did. Will he do it again? No idea, but I'm not interested in silencing valid criticisms now any more than I was in 2020, because the game hasn't changed since then. You think January 6 changed anything? Ask any given Republican if January 6 changed which party they'll be voting for. There's your answer.

True, he wasn't retired during that time. I was wrong. He just wasn't the frontman sitting behind the desk each night.

If you think I'm part of "the problem" because I do not identify as a campaign staffer and do not assign that role to others during an election cycle, or that valid criticisms of candidates are off the table during the election cycle, then we can end the discussion here. As far as I'm concerned, you're part of the problem because you assume, ultimately, that any nuanced discussion is invalid because Americans are too stupid or ignorant for that kind of discussion to ever be anything more than ammunition for the opposition, which I know isn't the case. Have a good one!

I believe we fundamentally disagree about what Stewart's job is. He spoke his mind in public for years, retired for several years, and now is back to speaking his mind in public again.

Can we at least agree that Stewart's mind has many things in it, and choosing to turn a specific one into a TV show is a conscious decision?

Sure? But that hasn't exactly been the fundamental issue you seem to be taking with his actions, is it? First you said:

Yeah, well, welcome to why you don't talk shit about your candidate during a campaign. Your nuanced point is going to get flattened down to "even his allies are criticising him". Weirdly, this exact quote dismantles his entire monologue there.

To which I replied that it isn't fair to say Stewart can't criticize his preferred candidate just because talking heads will spin it whichever way benefits them. Then you said:

But that doesn't change the fact that any statement right now is a campaign statement. People think they can ignore politics for years and then act all surprised when they're told to postpone "valid criticism". Nah.

To which I replied that Stewart's audience isn't on the fence and the conservative talking heads' audience isn't either. Then you said:

I'm worried about people reading the article above reminding them that even Stewart thinks Biden is too old. Is that what he said? It doesn't matter, it's something you can say out loud now. And repeat endlessly in campaign rallies and propaganda disguised as news.

To which I replied that your core issue seems to be with disinformation, not Stewart himself. Then you said:

It's not a problem of disinformation. [...] Stewart chooses what to talk about. Focus is message.

To which I replied that TDS has always talked about the current news cycle and attempted to inject sanity into the discussion, which is absolutely true; I won't argue this point with you.

So yeah, Stewart made a conscious choice to talk about... the topic that everyone is currently talking about. And he didn't treat his preferred candidate with kid gloves. And pundits will use it as ammunition. If Stewart had been silent about this completely valid criticism of Biden, pundits would have just used someone else's out-of-context quote, or just made something up entirely.

It appears we will not agree on this issue, which is fine. Just giving my perspective on why Stewart isn't obligated to silence himself when he's not being in any way unreasonable. He's a comedian and a commentator, not a campaign staffer.

The Daily Show has always talked about the current news cycle, specifically to try to inject some sanity into the discussion because people are going to talk about whatever the current hype is regardless of whether or not The Daily Show ignores it or not.

And Stewart absolutely is speaking his mind. He's telling his audience what he thinks about the current thing being talked about. Which is that Biden and Trump are both the oldest candidates to ever run for office, and questions about their faculties are valid from their voters.

Do you think next week Stewart will still be talking about Biden and Trump's age? Doubtful. He'll likely be talking about some different topic that has been making the rounds in the news cycle, like aid for Ukraine or the Isreal/Gaza conflict, etc. He could've covered those topics last week, but that would've just been ignoring the elephant in the room regarding the fact that many voters are unhappy with geriatric candidates. So he addressed it. That's speaking his mind.

It seems to me that your issue is with disinformation, which isn't Stewart's fault. You seem to be blaming him for the fact that people will take him out of context or misrepresent what he said. I don't fault him for that when he's being fair with his criticisms. Sure, he could completely avoid ever criticizing Biden at all to avoid getting taken out of context, but I do not fault him at all for not participating in the insanity by refusing flatly to ever criticize his preferred candidate. You seem to dislike that he has chosen to speak freely even though he knows disinformation campaigns will use his statements as ammunition, but I certainly don't. I appreciate his candor and I don't fault him for speaking his mind even though bad actors will be waiting in the wings to corrupt his positions.

Welp, guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think Stewart needs to campaign for Biden. We know Stewart is rooting for Biden to beat Trump. I'd rather he be a voice of reason than a campaign staffer. I doubt anyone watching Stewart's show is now going, "Hmm, maybe I'll stay home or vote for Trump instead cause Biden is too old."

Stewart's primary audience is already rooting for Biden. The audience of conservative talking heads spinning Stewart's reasonable criticisms already weren't gonna vote for Biden. Ultimately, I think Stewart has just introduced much needed earnest discussion into what is going to be an insane and vitriolic election year.

Perhaps OP is looking for a local organization to pick up trash with. Some people like working in groups for a common good.