I’ve never had them, so I can’t comment on their taste, but aesthetically, it looks like a dish you’d be served in a Soviet prison.
I’ve never had them, so I can’t comment on their taste, but aesthetically, it looks like a dish you’d be served in a Soviet prison.
I mean, yeah, but that’s so much better. Sure, our food sucks, but it sucks in such an elevated way that it’s almost an art form. British food seems like it was made by a guy desperately trying to put together a meal from ingredients he bought at a gas station. American cuisine seems like it was made by a chef who is losing his sanity to Lovecraftian horrors beyond our comprehension. The world looks at beans and toast and laughs at how pathetic it is.They look upon the Cool Ranch Doritos Locos Taco and weep, for they now know there is no God.
You could throw that spider off the 50th floor, it would be fine: https://youtu.be/f7KSfjv4Oq0?feature=shared
And yes, I’m on .world, but very little of my identity is tired up in my lemmy instance, and I’m certainly not going to bat for the .world admins when they do something crazy.
Well, various vegan catfoods have been approved for use in not only the U.S. but also the E.U., but your point about regulatory capture is fair. Unfortunately, it’s undercut by your support for vaping, a nicotine product brought to market with an insane lack of oversight. Ironically, most of what you’re complaining about with the cat food is exactly what makes vaping so dangerous. We don’t have as much research or long-term studies on the effects of vaping to say it’s as dangerous as smoking, but we know that they contain propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin, which are toxic to cells, aldehydes, which are associated with lung disease and heart disease, acrolein, which can cause COPD, asthma and lung cancer, as well as various heavy metals. I’m pretty sure that a lot more people will die of vaping than cats will die of veganism. That being said, I don’t think people who support vaping should be removed from lemmy for using a product that’s probably unsafe, and and it’s not the job of admins or moderators to stop people from taking bad health advice from strangers on the internet.
Maybe, but this seems like a problem that’s bigger than a single instance. A few months back someone came with some pretty good receipts showing .ml admins going after people for having some very fair and moderate criticisms of China. Seems like most instances either have power tripping mods or are too small to have much activity.
Yeah, to be clear, you should not feed your cat a Vegan diet. Cats are obligate carnivores. Synthetic Taurine has made vegan catfood somewhat more viable, but cats don’t just need Taurine from prey. They need several vitamins, amino acids, and fatty acids from animal protein to survive. Beyond that, their digestive tract isn’t very efficient at digesting plant matter, so even if these foods have the nutritional value they need, they might not be absorbing it. Also, a lot of these products seem to be made from grains and other carb heavy products, and cats need a very low carb, high protein diet. If you want to completely divest from the meat industry, you simply shouldn’t own a cat.
That being said, Vegan catfood products are on the market, so whether or not they are good for cats, they have been approved by several regulating bodies. You can claim that they’re unsafe (I certainly do), but having an admin nuke a comment section for claiming otherwise is a huge overreaction. It would be like going into a vape community and banning accounts that claimed vaping is safer than smoking; it probably isn’t, but I don’t need admins deciding who gets to have discourse about that.
Finally, I’m also not a fan of dead cats, but if you’re dumb enough to take veterinary advice from an internet vegan group, you’re probably too dumb to keep a cat alive anyway.
I mean, leaving .world is a pretty fair response. That community is full of insufferable idiots, but an admin overrode their moderating decisions, and then the admin team made up rules to retroactively justify their decision. That’s pretty egregious.
I have not had a single Pro-Palestinian comment get removed from world, and I’ve had some pretty confrontational conversations in support of Palestinians.
I would be extremely cautious giving a cat any of these products. Dry food is already not great for cats; it tends to be very carb heavy, and cats need a very low carb, high protein diet. On top of that, cats are obligate carnivores, meaning their wild diet is almost entirely animal meat, aside from the contents of their prey’s stomachs (they will occasionally eat or chew some plants or grasses, but that’s usually for their digestive tract, not nutrition). I’m very skeptical that you can give a cat a healthy diet with these vegan kibbles, which all seem to be mostly grains.
I’m guessing the legal department had been looking for a test case to see how far they could take the forced arbitration clause in the Disney+ ToS, but they didn’t consult the PR department as to whether this would be a good idea.
How would I know if I can see all the…? Oh. Well played.
Yeah, I meant people generally give away this data, not you specifically, and again, I can see the potential for abuse, but alcohol isn’t like other goods and services. When a bartender serves you alcohol, they become legally liable for your actions if you overconsume, in civil and (in some states) criminal court, and for good reason; irresponsible alcohol sales can kill people. Regulating how this data can be used is one thing, but sharing data on what customers are liabilities is objectively good, not just bars, but public safety.
Your email app will give your messages to other companies, your navigation app will share your exact location with marketers, and your dating app will sell your sexual preferences to the highest bidder, but sure, bars having a way to warn each other which costumers tried to assault a waitress is a bridge to far.
Yeah, and a lot of this will depend on how it’s used. If I were still in the service industry and I saw that a guy had been to 20 bars in the last year, and I saw he got flagged at one for violence, I would think, “Well, this doesn’t seem to be a pattern of behavior, maybe he wasn’t the instigator, I’ll keep an eye on him but I’m not too worried.” But I could see a lot of larger places, like clubs, who aren’t hurting for business, just rejecting people who are flagged out of hand. The information seems objectively good to have, but the application could be really problematic.
That’s very true, although I think it’ll be unlikely that an individual bartender will get blamed for overserving in a large venue. I worked at a relatively small venue (280 at capacity) and on a busy night it would be difficult to tell you who served an individual customer, much less who gave him the drink that, “overserved,” them.
Possibly controversial opinion, but this sounds reasonable. The flags they can put on customers are, “violence, assault, destruction of property, sexual assault, fraud, and theft.” Those aren’t petty gripes like, “rude,” or, “poor tipper.” I was bar staff for a while, and I’d have wanted to know if the guy I was serving got violent the last time he went out.
That being said, I could see how this system could be abused. If one power-tripping bouncer claims you sexually assaulted someone, and no one will serve you anymore, that’s bullshit. Some regulations around how businesses use these databases would be good.
Honestly, I spent a lot of years tending bar, and most of the time, if someone was too drunk, it was my fault. Sure, there were times when someone was pre-gaming too hard or snuck in alcohol, but 9 times out of 10, if someone overconsumed, it was because I overserved.
It’s easier to tell them apart visually:
To be fair, I think their actual national pastime is Cricket, which is significantly more boring.