• 0 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 22nd, 2023

help-circle

  • Well, like I said, there is still a chance of collateral damage, which is why there has been so much study to try and make sure that isn’t going to happen. We’ve been sitting on the ability to do this for a long time. As for chances of killing other species, I don’t think that is a risk from the method. They basically just breed mosquitoes of the targeted breed, and modify their genes so they can only have male offspring which can also only produce male offspring, etc.


  • AEsheron@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldWe're coming for you
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    The biggest reason it may be different this time is previously we were all like, “let’s exterminate dogs,” and it turns out dogs are important. This time is more like “let’s exterminate pitbulls.” There will still be plenty of mosquitos around if the plan is ever put into motion, we are only targeting a very small slice of them. That doesn’t mean there won’t be issues, it could well be just as big a mistake as all the previous times. But at least it is more likely to work out.



  • I mean, if you’re going to attempt to kill with a bite, I’d assume they’re going for the neck or other particularly vulnerable place. I’d argue commoner bite attacks should have very low chance to hit, but could plausibly be lethal. Most places they get a good bite won’t be able to do any damage, except maybe cause a Con save for disease… I’d say an improvised attack with Disadvantage for 1d6 damage probably works pretty well.






  • AEsheron@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldSocialism
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Sapient, not sentient. Sci-fi has co-opted the word, but sentient basically means able to feel emotions. There are plenty of sentient species right here at home. Sapient is the word sci-fi usually wants, there are no known sapient species aside from humans. Though some may argue that a couple other animals may qualify, it’s a very fuzzy concept that is hard to identify with a being unable to communicate abstract concepts.





  • AEsheron@lemmy.worldtoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldMans got big hands!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    If it slowed down it would get closer, not further. The truth is, any orbit is only stable given a specific timeframe. The longer that timeframe, the less likely any given orbit is to remain. The moon has just a little bit more speed than the Earth can hold onto, so it is in an extremely slow escape, and always has been.



  • Neither happened. The restaurant isn’t owned by Disney, it is just listed on their website as a recommended place for allergy free dining, and they while own the property, it isn’t a part of the actual park, springs, etc. The family signed up for D+, and therefore “read” the terms, including the arbitration, and then used their D+ account to sign up for the trip, and had to “read” the terms again. The whole D+ argument wasn’t that they had to go to arbitration because they used the streaming, it was to show they had to go through the same terms multiple times and should be familiar with them. And basically, this is an issue with the labeling on the website, so would be covered by those rules. Who they really should be going after is the restaurant, if they made the same allergy free claims there. Agreements requiring arbitration are indeed bullshit and should be more limited, but this is proper enforcement of a shitty system, not the batshit insane enforcement it has been memed into.