So are you saying that they suffered from a filesystem bug that caused deletion failure? I’d imagine they use standard filesystems on their backend, I haven’t heard about any bugs like this.
If you ask me, what’s more likely, that a company known for shitty behavior lies about deleting files so they can continue to use that information to profit, – OR – that they are experiencing a filesystem bug on their backend, I’ll choose the former.
What else was meant by “wrong to kill” other than evil/bad/not ok? We can use “bad” if evil is too loaded.
Would it be right to morally judge a lion for eating meat when it was born into a grotesquely overpopulated world, where the only appropriate way for the lion to eat is to participate in the food production system that treats prey animals as objects?
I hear you say “but humans don’t need to eat meat” or “humans were not evolved to eat meat” and to both of those I say you are wrong. Like I said, it’s possible in modern times with B12 supplementation but this is fairly recent. An understanding of the digestive system and comparison of it vs other animals shows we are obviously evolved to eat meat (stomach pH, intestine length, microbiota all point to meat digestion).
I respect vegans, those willing avoid animals for moral reasons and using modern tech to do so is admirable. I was a vegetarian (still consumed milk and egg) myself 20 years ago for about 3 years. But I don’t think blaming humans for desiring what our genes make us desire is the right direction. It’s like blaming people for desiring sweet foods, sugar production causes massive harm as well.
In fact a similar issue exists with sugar. Significant harm to animals, the humans that harvest, and the environment come from sugar production. But the solution to this issue isn’t to shame those who consume sugar, it’s to understand that the issue comes from operating at a massive scale that devalues the lives of the animals (humans included) who produce the product.
The fact is, life is not pretty when looked at from certain angles. Animals higher on the food chain can only live by consuming those lower on the chain. The prey hunted down by the lion isn’t having any better of a time than an animal raised humanely and slaughtered without torture.
This video presents a false dichotomy between meat-only eaters and vegans and treats a specific group as if it represents all humans. Also, there are not many people actually claiming all early humans only ate meat.
Pre-humans were omnivores as we are now, we evolved for adaptability. We can adapt to diet with virtually any ratio of animal to vegetable. Either can be healthy or unhealthy depending on exactly what’s eaten and how it’s processed/prepared. How much meat vs vegetable was eaten varied greatly between groups of humans and at different times/seasons. There was no single “cavemen” or “paleo” population that all ate the same diet.
If a person chooses to avoid animal nutrition for moral reasons, that’s great. Every animal counts. Counting on a majority of the world’s population to deny what biology tells them to eat to solve climate change or animal cruelty is a vain pursuit.
I don’t think it’s right to call an animal evil because it exists in a world where it’s food natural is produced in an evil manner (i.e. it was born into an evil culture). If that’s the case, even if you’re vegan, are you certain your clothes or possessions didn’t come from exploitative labor, otherwise, you’re evil too right?
Also, one can buy their meat from small non-factory producers or even hunt or fish their food, not uncommon at all in many parts of the world, I don’t see why this is inherently any more of a “problem” than any other animal eating meat (again, the problem arises from the scale of humanity).
Overpopulation isn’t the issue either, since we’d save land compared to now if we all ate plants.
At best ideas like veganism pushes problems of overpopulation back a few more years. The planet is not infinite, we cannot just grow forever so long as everyone is vegan and lives in a city and takes the bus.
Ancient and prehistoric peoples didn’t care about dogma, being “vegan”, that’s a modern thing. To these peoples veganism would’ve been dumb, a population that denies important nutrition isn’t likely to compete well against other populations that don’t. They didn’t have factory farms and YouTube videos showing how cruel they are. They didn’t have social media showing them cute cows and saying they deserve life. Animals were food if we were hungry.
I’m sure there have been groups that were mostly vegan for periods but B12 is essential and not available in plants. To think that most of humanity somehow acquired B12 and decided to forgo meat is silly.
Oh, and those “vegan” cultures for thousands of years, they probably figured out how to supplement such as via brewer’s yeast or were not completely vegan. Remember, they didn’t have their “vegan” dogmatic friends around them to shame them if they ate a bug.
just because we’re adapted for something doesn’t mean we should continue that behavior.
So you’re saying, rather than consider how our population affects us and our world, we should go against what millions of years of evolution has come to as being appropriate for us?
Red meat is not carcinogenic, if it is, why don’t we see carnivores dying of cancer constantly? Cancer is a growth due to mutated DNA, are you saying red meat mutates our DNA?
Conventionally raised animals get all sorts of drugs, vitamins, etc. I’m sure.
Cows and other ruminants wouldn’t normally need to be given B12 as it’s created by their gut microbiota and available to their bodies. If they are indeed supplemented with B12 I wonder if it’s because a corn based diet doesn’t support a microbiome that can create B12?
Any animal higher on the food chain than herbivores causes animal suffering, this is nature, I didn’t make things this way, and I’m not evil/bad/whatever for doing what my genes instruct me to do.
We don’t have to consume animal products (in modern times where people have plenty of choices what to eat) , that’s true, but it doesn’t matter except to you, your friends, and the particular animals you didn’t eat.
I’m all for vegans choice to eat whatever, but many vegans say that we should all be vegan to save us from climate change or prevent animal cruelty and that is simply not going to happen. That’s like expecting the world to go on a diet and succeeding, or asking billions to abstain from sex. Our genes drive us to eat meat, you’re not gonna get a vegan world without a fascist world leader enforcing it harshly.
We can’t even get people to give up driving cars, why would vegans think people would give up meat? If we want to be realistic about solving climate change and reducing animal cruelty, we need to look for realistic solutions that don’t depend on most people in the the world denying biological instinct successfully their whole life.
Red meat consumption is associated with increases in cancer. Correlation does not imply causation. What is the alleged mechanism of cancer inducement?
I agree, more people should be vegan (well not really, just veganish), and I’m glad you are, but that’s not the solution to our problems. Asking billions to deny a huge part of their biological hunger imperative and changing fundamental aspects of long-term human culture is just not going to happen on a wide enough scale to help in time to do much about climate change.
First part makes sense. Humans, like other primates get B12 (outside of supplementation) from either eating animal/dairy, bugs, or feces, since humans can produce B12 in our guts, but really only in our colon where it’s not available to us.
Ok, but why did feudalism come about, after 200,000+ years? Capitalism is just a current incarnation of an exploitative system brought to us by dominator culture. Before Capitalism it was Feudalism. If you back far enough, you get to stable groups that operated for millennia apparently without the need for domination being the primary driver of society.
Using game theory, if the players start out cooperating, this can go on indefinitely, but once someone cheats the game becomes exploitative. Sounds a lot like what happened in our species.
I know that’s the common story, not sure I believe it.
I don’t know that it makes sense to talk about class dynamics at a global/species level until the 19th or 20th century when culture and ideas could spread. Until then any class dynamics were probably intra-group.
Evidence shows that the change from pre-agricultural to agricultural societies was not linear or quick, it took thousands of years and happened in fits and starts in different areas before really catching on everywhere. It doesn’t make a lot of sense that we invented agriculture and suddenly culture changed to protect the crops.
Feudalism did not occur everywhere, it was mostly a European thing
I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that, don’t necessarily agree either though.
I don’t think class conflict (that drove feudalism etc) arose just from there being grains around that “needed protection”. Without the dominator instinct, grain storage just means insurance, food security (security against bad weather, not finding the herd to hunt, or outside groups raiding).
I think class conflict was due to individuals who both desired power over others and understood that grain provided a means of attaining power because it provided a hoardable resource that allowed paying others to back them up. “You want to eat good? Then protect me and my hoard” That then sets up a situation where the grain holders become the upper class, those they pay for protection become class traiters, and everyone else ends up exploited.
I posit that humans as a species are a generally good cooperative species but due to natural variation, some individual’s brains are wired to think in a more exploitative way. But this exploitative person would be viewed negatively by their community and without a state to protect them, would be vulnerable to the direct consequences of their actions; and so this exploitative strategy was kept in check and unable to grow.
The ability to hoard grain allowed those with the dominator instinct to gain the upper hand against their community and take power. Feudalism evolved from that.
The rare dominator instinct + hoardable resources evolved into large scale exploitative economies of various types where the dominator instinct then became common and is now in most of us.
Is this “dominator instinct” backed up by science, or vibes?
Vibes, mainstream science is a product of capitalism, why would it vilify itself?
Is it not more likely that…
These things are not mutually exclusive. The dominator instinct is not a metaphysical thing. Every species chooses (by evolving) a life strategy. Think about Bonobos vs non-bonobo chimps, same biology for the most part but they chose different strategies at the species level, chimps went with the dominator strategy and bonobos didn’t. The dominator instinct probably pops up in some individuals the bonobo populations but is kept in check by the bonobo culture.
The chimp/bonobo thing does have a scientific basis. I’d say genetic variation that causes modulation of personality traits is pretty well established as having a scientific basis. The fact that mainstream science doesn’t view things in terms of a “dominator instinct” doesn’t mean anything other than that those funding the science don’t have motivation to view things that way.
House Speaker Mike Johnson describes himself as a Christian before anything else. He has said his “faith informs everything I do.” He has told people curious about his views to “pick up a Bible.” His wife reportedly runs a counseling service whose operating agreement, which he himself notarized, states, “We believe and...
Simpsons did it! (i.imgur.com)
S10E22 “They Saved Lisa’s Brain”
Healthy alternative rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
iPhone owners say the latest iOS update is resurfacing deleted nudes (www.theverge.com)
cross-posted from: sopuli.xyz/post/12670977...
No it's the vegans who's wrong
Growth as an end (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
W for Water (lemmy.world)
Devout Christian Mike Johnson shows up to hush money trial to defend a guy accused of cheating on his wife with a porn star (www.vanityfair.com)
House Speaker Mike Johnson describes himself as a Christian before anything else. He has said his “faith informs everything I do.” He has told people curious about his views to “pick up a Bible.” His wife reportedly runs a counseling service whose operating agreement, which he himself notarized, states, “We believe and...