thatsTheCatch @ thatsTheCatch @lemmy.nz

Posts

5

Comments

295

Joined

2 yr. ago

Thank you for sharing!

Thank you for sharing!

Holy shit is that bigfoot?!

I've had this, too. Sometimes the videos are quite cool, but most of the time they're irrelevant or poorly made

I work in IT, and I've sometimes thought maybe I should've gone into construction or something that doesn't have such a breakneck pace of changing technology.

What was working in construction like, and how does it compare to your IT job now?

Yes, capitalism is the root problem. Some people argue that you cannot overcome climate change under capitalism (and neoliberalism, specifically).

But I think it's unlikely we'll be able to change the underlying system without society collapsing in some way. Or a revolution.

However, I don't think you have to get rid of capitalism to reduce cars and make a positive impact. Climate change is a scale: the more we do now, the less bad it will be in the future. So doing something is still better than nothing, even if it doesn't solve the problem entirely.

Reducing cars (and therefore emissions) can be helped by improving public transport and increasing the number of options for transport. In many places, cars are the only way to get anywhere, especially in countries that focus on car infrastructure. Having the options to bus, train, bike, walk, or drive will reduce the number of drivers. In the case of bike lanes, at least in my country, there is evidence that adding bike lanes increases the number of cyclists (and therefore decreases the number of cars on the road). "Build it and they will come," if you will.

I have a car, but I most often bike or take the bus. We can't get rid of cars entirely; there are reasons people need them (tradies needing vans with their equipment, certain disabilities needing customized transport options, courier parcel delivery, etc.). But reducing the number on the road at any time is helpful.

Imagine if Trump got in again. Actually, I don't want to

Aren't they whom the exemptions are for?

Saved, thanks for making this!

Thank you for sharing! My partner has this problem and these recaps could be perfect

I wouldn't say this is lazy devs, I would say it's tight deadlines and overwork that don't allow time for optimisation.

Remember, it's almost never the devs, and it's almost always the executives

I enjoyed the beginning, I thought it had some funny jokes. But then it went downhill fast. I didn't watch the whole thing

Oh I remember watching a video about this ages ago! It's cool that it's actually coming out

Not related to the Israel–Palestine conflict, but I'm curious about your perspective here:

I do not support any group that uses weapons against any other group, no matter what.

Is this an absolute? For example, let's say a group starts attacking another group, are they allowed to defend themselves with proportional force?

Again, I'm not trying to get your views on any conflict in particular. I just like talking about these things and broadening my beliefs :)

Many indigenous peoples tell the time of year by the stars rather than the moon. A certain constellation just became visible? Must be X time of year!

I know that the whole think is that YandereDev writes bad code, but that has to be a joke... My faint little heart might just give out if that is serious

I opened the article planning to dislike it, and I do dislike the man's voice (the woman's voice sounds quite good though), but then I thought about it. Sports announcers actually seem like a decent use for AI. I would imagine that it would be incredibly difficult to build decent announcers from pre-recorded voice lines... It's heavily context-dependent, and this way it can even read out the team names, which I imagine are chosen by the teams. I think this could possibly work well. I don't see how to create a system like this without AI

Thanks!

Holy fuck

Removing guns (or at least access to them) can actually reduce the rate of suicide. Guns are quick and easy to use to commit suicide, whereas many other methods take time to set up and don't work as often. When someone is feeling suicidal, often having that little bit of extra time can let the feeling decrease enough to prevent an attempt.

Of course, removing access to guns doesn't fix why people feel suicidal in the first place. That is a whole nother can of worms. But I expect everyone agrees that reducing the number of suicides is good.

RAND: How Gun Policies Affect Suicide

The consensus among public health experts is that there is strong evidence that reducing firearm suicides in contexts where more-lethal means of attempting suicide are unavailable will result in reductions in the total suicide rate (see, for example, Office of the Surgeon General and National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, 2012; World Health Organization, 2014; for review, see Azrael and Miller, 2016).

Save.org: Restricting access to lethal means:

Research has shown time and again that restricting access to lethal means or “means restriction” can saves lives. By restricting access to firearms and other highly lethal methods the decline in suicide rates by that method and overall suicide rates begin to decline. Restricting access to lethal means does not always lead to fewer deaths, but is one suicide prevention measure that merits further research and more individual-level intervention training to make lethal means less readily available.