What hills are you dying on?
-
Vista was either magic or crap depending on your hardware/software needs. Almost no middle ground. I was supporting about 100 PC's at the time, and it was a nightmare for work, but I enjoyed running it myself.
From a corporate standpoint, skipping it for win7 was a serious win for IT.
On the upside, the latest Samsung UI on android has something pretty close to Vista's old task manager.
It's truly a shame that most of the world got the short end of the stick here.
Also, I literally just updated to the newest version of One UI and I don't really see what you mean by the similarity to Vista's old task manager. If anything, it just made my color matching app icons look ugly. It even installed Gemini without my permission.
On the previous version, they looked like this:
-
I actually love Vista. It's what made me switch to Linux!
I use NixOS btw
Windows is the best advertisement for Linux.
-
Right back at you
I'm not the one making a positive claim.
-
Moral baseline is not a necessity. It's a comparison point. Basically, if you're not vegan, you should be doing something else to end up net-positive (from a utilitarian point of view). I'm not vegan, I'm vegetarian, so I'm in the negatives I guess.
you are splitting hairs
-
It does, because the meat industry is tremendously abusive to animals. Ontop of that it's a poor use of land and it contributes greatly to global warming. But for sure, the animals feel pain and suffering assuming it is possible for them to do so. Trillions of shrimp die horribly painful deaths every year, but nobody cares because they have a funny-sounding name.
none of this makes eating meat cause pain or suffering. these are all problems with production, not consumption.
-
none of this makes eating meat cause pain or suffering. these are all problems with production, not consumption.
Describe a way to eat meat that doesn't require prior suffering then.
-
Describe a way to eat meat that doesn't require prior suffering then.
an event in the future cannot cause an event in the past. eating the meat doesn't cause it to have been produced.
-
an event in the future cannot cause an event in the past. eating the meat doesn't cause it to have been produced.
I am not interested in discussing meta-physics. For you to eat meat, an animal suffered. That is the point.
-
I am not interested in discussing meta-physics. For you to eat meat, an animal suffered. That is the point.
eating meat doesn't cause an animal to have suffered.
-
Rationality and empathy are equally important. Blind empathy is just as capable of causing harm as a lack of empathy.
The real issue is the relation one has/lacks with capital, not just individuals wealth.
Balkanization typically leads to more violence and worse outcomes. For example, the current situation in eastern Europe is a result of the balkanization of the USSR. WW1 (and 2) were a result of the Balkanization of the Ottoman empire. The balkanization of India.
Where did I say people without rationality should be elected lol.
The individual wealth that can destabilise democracies is a problem. Do you not think so? If your solution fixes that I'm all on board.
More violence in russia? Or more violence than russia trying to occupy europe again? I take the more violence in Russia because it will dtop one day, the uncheckef russian empire ambitions not so much.
-
Russia should be denuclearised and split up.
I agree, but the hard part is how. Splitting up Germany required winning a World War. The next World War will be nuclear. Mass starvation from nuclear winter will result in the death of the vast majority of humans. That's too horrible a price to pay.
We need to bloody russias nose, and break their economy IMO. And be there when the cracks form to ease the maneuver a much as possible.
-
There's a vast difference between capability for empathy (as in: feeling someone else's feelings) and acting upon that feeling.
What I want is people NOT acting because they have empathy. That IMO would already be an enormous step forward.
-
That's a pretty specific use though. A case like this only makes sense because we all somehow decided 9AM - 5PM is a standard business time, when society could benefit from having different business/services open at different times.
That was an example of a situation where time zones make sense. Any time it is important where the sun is in the sky, the time that it occurs will differ depending on where you are in the world. When is lunch break? When do backups run? When can you see the eclipse? If we weren't in an interconnected world, it wouldn't matter much but we need some convention to communicate information that is dependent on where the sun is, as that very often dictates human activity.
It seems like a universal time makes sense but I can't think of a way to get around the fact that activity will vary according to timezones anyway.
-
I’ve been trying to move over to 24 hour time. I swear switching from Fahrenheit to Celsius was easier.
I used math tricks at first. But honestly, just switching even one clock like your watch or phone makes it pretty easy over time.
1pm is easy to remember as it's 13, a prime number
7x2 = 14(00)
3x5= 15(00)
4x4 =16(00)
5pm is 17, also a prime.
6x3 = 18(00)
7pm is also a prime, 19(00).
20, 21, 22, 23, and 00 also have math tricks, but you can also just remember that after 8pm, you have less than four hours till midnight
-
Can you give examples of unnecessary rights?
Sure. Some people think it’s not necessary to have local anti-discrimination laws against minority groups here. Some people think why should LGBTQ get married in a fucking church, can’t they just sign a paper saying legally they are as good as married without sullying the institution?
-
an event in the future cannot cause an event in the past. eating the meat doesn't cause it to have been produced.
That is true, so the pieces of meat which were placed on earth by god 6k years ago can be eaten guilt-free. However, all other pieces of meat require harvesting from an animal first, incurring the aforementioned downsides. Just as purchasing an item encourages its production, eating meat encourages its purchase.
Here are two simple scenarios where eating the meat does indeed cause meat to be produced:
- your eating it means that another person doesn't eat it, so another piece of meat must be purchased for that other person;
- your eating the meat signals to whoever got the meat for you (perhaps yourself) that you are willing to eat meat and hence they pick up a propensity to get meat for you again in the future.
Isn't this simple common sense though? Were you really not aware this is how the world works?
-
I'm not the one making a positive claim.
Well you could have asked this person to explain instead of just saying "no it's not." Also, as far as I'm aware, there's no reason for positive claims ought to have the burden of proof instead of a negative claim. Any positive claim can be turned into a negative claim by phrasing it in the negative anyway, and positing the non-existence of something still carries the burden of proof.
Anyway, veganism generally has a clear rationale behind it that is widely known, but rarely do I see people seriously arguing that omnivorism is as ethical as veganism. So -- burden of proof lies on you I'd say.
-
Well you could have asked this person to explain instead of just saying "no it's not." Also, as far as I'm aware, there's no reason for positive claims ought to have the burden of proof instead of a negative claim. Any positive claim can be turned into a negative claim by phrasing it in the negative anyway, and positing the non-existence of something still carries the burden of proof.
Anyway, veganism generally has a clear rationale behind it that is widely known, but rarely do I see people seriously arguing that omnivorism is as ethical as veganism. So -- burden of proof lies on you I'd say.
a claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. dismissing that claim is not the same as making a claim.
-
That is true, so the pieces of meat which were placed on earth by god 6k years ago can be eaten guilt-free. However, all other pieces of meat require harvesting from an animal first, incurring the aforementioned downsides. Just as purchasing an item encourages its production, eating meat encourages its purchase.
Here are two simple scenarios where eating the meat does indeed cause meat to be produced:
- your eating it means that another person doesn't eat it, so another piece of meat must be purchased for that other person;
- your eating the meat signals to whoever got the meat for you (perhaps yourself) that you are willing to eat meat and hence they pick up a propensity to get meat for you again in the future.
Isn't this simple common sense though? Were you really not aware this is how the world works?
none of that is causal.
-
I used math tricks at first. But honestly, just switching even one clock like your watch or phone makes it pretty easy over time.
1pm is easy to remember as it's 13, a prime number
7x2 = 14(00)
3x5= 15(00)
4x4 =16(00)
5pm is 17, also a prime.
6x3 = 18(00)
7pm is also a prime, 19(00).
20, 21, 22, 23, and 00 also have math tricks, but you can also just remember that after 8pm, you have less than four hours till midnight
I find it easier to just add/subtract 12, the problem is that I sometimes accidentally add/subtract 10.
