We’re Costco guys, of course we get the ice cream with our giant slice of pizza and soda!

This is true for the US as well. It’s why legal immigration into the US isn’t as easy as people would try to pretend. Other than a student visa, you are required to have a sponsor. Whether that be a family member or significant other that can support you, or a place of business that is going to be paying you a salary so a person can support themselves.

There are also limitations based on country of origin. Some countries don’t have that much “competition” when it comes to people applying for citizenship, so they can get through the process quickly. Other countries have huge populations of people attempting to immigrate, causing year of delays on processing paperwork. That is why “illegal” immigration is so common in the US. The process is bogged down in bureaucracy and paperwork, all of which generally require time/money/legal representation. Something a majority of US citizens could not afford if they had to do so to stay in the country.

An old fashioned meme but it checks out

I agree that if Google is getting the content for free they should, at least try, to keep it ad free for the consumer. But I don’t know if Google has to pay licensing for stuff like PBS. PBS does technically have ads, but they are unobtrusive, shown at the beginning or end of a show and are presented as “Brought to you by….” Less of an ad and more recognition that a company has paid to support bringing PBS to you for free.

I’ve never uses this service, so I’m not aware of how they might insert ads either. Between shows? Typical ad-breaks times every 8.5 minutes of broadcast time? More?

Isn’t that the agreed upon consolation for free content? Was nobody alive when TV was the primary means of content consumption?

It always irked me that people are upset over YouTube running ads. Like, of course they had to start running ads, hosting/programming/daily operating millions of videos isn’t free for them. They need to make money some how, even at “break even” which prevents the idea of profit seeking would mean running ads.

Hate to sound like a “kids these days” but seriously, absolutely nothing in life is free and if there isn’t a direct cost, advertising is going to be present.

Going to college, getting a good job after acquiring a degree, holding that job for decades, retiring, being able to afford a middle-class lifestyle.

Yuk, imagine getting a blowjob from someone with stinky bacteria breath. Your entire dick and balls would smell like that. Blowjob or not, brush your teeth or use some mouthwash!

Not gonna lie, a few years ago it worked on me. Paid for the Premium, but didn’t get any better results. The gamified dating scene is bad but meeting people organically just doesn’t seem to happen as I get older.

I find that this isn’t actually a successful way to filter or get the “algorithm” to recognize people you might be interested in. Those features are built in, but you need the premium versions of the apps to do the filtering.

I hopped onto Bumble after a few years and nearly every one I get doesn’t match my values or how I swipe. I thought it might work like that, but I get Christian Conservative more than any other demo and my profiles and swipes do not match that type.

And do you have plans to resolve them? I didn’t just make that all up to make veganism sound bad. They are realities that need to be dealt with if we made the ethical decision to not consume animal products anymore. With 80% of the grocery store, currently, relying on animal products, how do we replace them? With agriculture. Those problems now only don’t go away, they get exacerbated. Not to mention all of the pollinator populations dwindling.

I don’t have the solutions, I’m just some fucking guy. But if we don’t want more and more people suffering while reducing or removing animal products from our diets, we would have to take many steps before doing so.

And the person who posted this meme is called “MilitantVegan” and straight up doesn’t seem to understand human evolution or science. I’ve only said things that are true, or what my opinion is based on that truth. It might not be great, it might not be true in 50 years, but just watch a documentary on modern agriculture and you will see that these things are our reality. We farm the soil until it becomes barren, and fix it with pesticides and fertilizers for the sake of commercialization. We can’t keep cutting down natural habitats in the search of usable soil to replace those things without completely ruining the lives of animals…the goal of reducing or eliminating the use of animal products.

None of what I said was misinformation. Turning everyone vegan doesn’t resolve factory farming crops. Chemicals to ensure we can actually grow food, monocultures that are terrible for the environment, limitations of where things can grow.

I’m all for reducing meat consumption, but the utopian world where everyone is vegan has many hurdles to overcome that aren’t just magically resolved. Sure, right now we might be able to reduce land usage for farming, but that is one small aspect of commercial farming under capitalism.

How do people afford food when they don’t live in a place that can grow it? How do we ensure we can continue to grow food when we are so dependent on chemicals to do so? How does a developing country support agriculture without the huge subsidies currently required in developed nations? How do you educate 8 billion people on how to properly get the nutrients they need from new sources of food? How do convince society that GMOs aren’t bad?

These are rhetorical, but moving to veganism requires us to think about these types of things before claiming “but less farm land”

We aren’t carnivores, we are omnivores. An advantage that surely allowed the growth of our brains and allowed us to become the dominant species in the planet.

Our teeth our designed in a way to both rip/tear meat and also grind up plants.

It is great that some sector of the population can be vegetarian or vegan, but it isn’t a realistic option if everyone did so. Farming is destroying hundred of thousands of acres of land every year. Keeping up with a plant-based only diet for 8 billion people isn’t feasible with the current technology and farming practices of today.

Maybe we are looking at different cars, I only really am exposed to American cars. Any vehicle I have been in made after 2021 have integrated most things into the infotainment system. Which are now also integrated into the operations of the cars.

And ICE vehicles rely, quite heavily, on the hundreds of moving parts that have been engineered for 120 years. Nothing mechanical can really regulate managing the charge rate of the battery, or are able to calculate the necessary changes in power to each motor, or managing any kind of safety system. As some of those things have been added to ICE vehicles, the lack of buttons has been notable.

I am not an engineer, but I imagine keeping multiple DC motors running efficiently/in sync together while outside influences change by the second isn’t easy. Communication with a variety of EV chargers at different levels of power must take a logic system. ICE vehicles have a lot of physical parts with 120 years of engineering behind keeping things in order. There just isn’t that level of engineering for EVs, which have only really been developed during the era of microchips.

I get it, I walked into the den and poked the bear. But I think a reality check for this kind of “Linux will take over Microsoft” is necessary. 95% of computer users don’t care about their OS and would never imagine re-installing it or installing a different one. Just the idea of thinking about an OS puts that person in the advanced user category. It took Google to mod Linux and sell it to every public school in America to get it to a 4% user base. It is clearly not something for everyone, it isn’t even for most people who use Reddit or Lemmy, and those communities are def more closely representative of people capable of using Linux.

I understand that there have been many advances to make it a usable OS for the casual person. But it isn’t. Sure, your mom might be able to use it “out of the box” but it doesn’t come in a box. The two widely adopted versions of Linux had to be heavily modified by large dev teams of Valve and Google, for very limited numbers of devices. Would Valve make a version for a non-gaming focused device, or computer at large? Would Google make a version that wasn’t in direct support of Googles products? I doubt it.

It isn’t just lack of knowledge of Linux that is holding it back. Its main demographic is nerdy computer people who are willing to, occasionally, run a shell command or hunt down the necessary things to get their webcam to work. That isn’t what Microsoft aims for, they aim for the average computer user who wants to watching videos, play games, browse the web and check their emails without thinking about any part of how or why it works.

I appreciate the enthusiasm Linux fanboys have about this. But ain’t nobody but the most tech savvy would even consider it.

Linux is not consumer friendly, it typically involves putting in a shit load of effort to get working with your hardware, the ones that don’t still need a ton of work to make “Windows-like” and compatibility is always going to be an issue.

Yes, there have been a ton of strides toward this dream situation. But without financial incentive, making things user-friendly isn’t going to happen. In fact, much of the Linux community prides themselves on having a “difficult” OS.

Once Linux can, by default, have an easy to use interface, can natively run Android apps and windows applications, and can work with a huge range of hardware, it will never take off. Linux might get a few points of market share due to some business applications finding Linux a better option than updating HW and windows build, but those companies are going to struggle and will be even more dependent on their IT staff for the simplest of things.

The problem is that it takes a lot of computer power needed to run an EV. Battery management, power management, motor control, etc. Requiring that much computer power makes it a cheap and easy decision for car makers to just make everything part of that system.

We will get there eventually but it’s going to take a lot of people to want it (many people aren’t even considering an EV as a future car purchase), a lot of the under-the-hood stuff will have to be shoved away, and charging/battery management need to be simplified while still being robust and reliable. I don’t see it happening any time soon, ICE vehicles have only been getting more and more complex in this way. “Stick a tablet in there” is so cheap and easy and resolves so many manufacturing hurdles.

Bespoke windows controls? Nah, button on a screen. Custom entertainment system? App on a tablet. Backup camera screen? Just put in on the screen so it’s the only thing you can see while backing up.

If car makers cant get around these hurdles without incurring, previously saved, costs, the trend will continue.

Reagan started the slow move to conservative legislation by both sides of the US two-party system. It’s the reason a lot of people on social media hate everything about whoever is president.

Our liberals are center/center right, our conservatives are basically fascists and those are the two options. Most of this started with our first “celebrity” president, who was a well-known actor many years before.

Before the Reagan era, Richard Nixon had to resign his presidency for hiding some evidence. Trump was found hiding evidence and he finished his term and is running a second time (while actively fighting multiple criminal trials). The tide shift was Reagan.

Putting the control of books in the library to someone with that much understanding is very good. It seems that a lot of the book bans are spearheaded by parents that watch too much Fox News that don’t even see what the book contains.

It’s more about having “skin in the game” It appears that many representatives/senators are creating or upholding laws that immediately benefit them, the companies that support them, and their industries on the whole.

If someone was closer to middle-age, they have enough experience to make good choices while also being young enough for the negative consequences to happen while they are still alive.