mushrooms are free if you live in an area where they grow wild… and can forage for them… and have the equipment to dry them… and can afford to take the time to do all of that…

But most people, overwhelmingly, are not out there foraging/cultivating… they just buy from someone.

One of those things is free, the other costs some money and the last is a social skills issue.

ya know, I didn’t know where to put it. It’s not news, it’s not a shitpost… it’s tech drama? so that’s why I posted it here? If you can think of a better place, let me know. But, I thought, as popular as this whole debacle was on lemmy, people at least deserved to see this shithead ragequit.

Lemmy gets hyper defensive when parents put controls and blocks and what a child can access. They liken it to censorship and being controlling.

it’s not even a natural lake, so the “natural state” of things is sort of a moot argument, no?

OP is just naive af and badjacketing this whole thing about a guy who cleaned up the shorelline at his lakehouse. Probably because they’re jealous, probably because they don’t know wtf they’re talking about and think human = bad.

I think it’s a work in progress, but I agree, I think he should plant some bushes along that ridge line before the sand to prevent that soil from eroding and weaking the tree roots.

that buffer zone still exists… the guy didn’t remove the boundary between the beach and sea… it’s still there.

You realize that shorelines shift in change in nature all the time, right? Like, changing tide levels, water levels in lakes, shifiting sands, trees… nothing the original person did is in any way significantly different than normal nature… this “habitat” zone has probably shifted several times in just the course of the year…

there’s nothing even wrong here.

I wish my problems were so insignificant that I had to go look for shit like this to get mad about. What a privilege it must be to be OP. They’re harassing him in his original post too.

This is just basic beach/shoreline cleanup… it looks good. What’s the problem here?

that’s not base 5. That’s just increments of 5… in base 10.

base 5 would be: 2400, 3000, 3300

Who does this help? Neverminding the obvious, “haha helping the ISPs screw over the people”.

But like, the whole job of the FCC is to protect people from companies… so… they can’t just say “we’re screwing you over”. They have to at least try and come up with a reason as why doing this is in the people’s best interest. So, again… who is this helping? Like, how are they selling this?

The problem with teenagers is that they dont care about anything.

Don’t forget that you paid a %50 deposit to reserve/pre-register your “copy” of a digital game

Considering that theyre doing this to prop up oil and coal, they might. I mean, we all might too.

“How has capitalism tricked the masses into vapid consumerism?”

How’s that corpo boot taste? If you lick it real hard maybe you’ll get your own boots, but only if you lick real shiny.

Lemmy is a lot weirder of a place when you start to realize instances are like virtual nation-states and the admin teams are ALL despotic auth-rulers with the temperaments of toddlers.

I think you’re a making a lot of cope to defend casual misogyny instead of just calling it out.

“nono, you don’t understand, Cranston did tv first, totally different”. They’re both actors, and actors frequently alternate between movies and shows all the time. For various different reasons.

OP wasn’t attacking her views on AI, he was attacking her, as an actor. Using language that wouldn’t be used on similarly aged male actors (don’t like my examples, there’s hundreds others to use… DeCaprio? McKellen, Nicholson?). Language, mind you, that dogwhistles and normalizes popular misogynistic takes on women with long careers (especially if they started young).

If that seems acceptable to you but you earnestly believe Hollywood misogyny is a problem, you might want to do some self-reflecting on those two statements. Think about what it means to normalize attitudes and the words used to describe actors and how/when they’re applied.

washed up? What are you talking about? She’s been the lead on two different, highly rated, shows for nearly a decade now. And that’s discounting her decades prior of accolades.

But here’s the real problem, you jump to call her “washed up”, she’s only 49. Is Brian Cranston washed up? Was Pachino? Calling a female actor “washed up” because she’s older with a long career just exudes and perpetuates the culture pushing out women as they age.

Just because YOU stopped paying attention to her doesn’t make her washed up. Sorry she’s not the bangable 20something year old “Legally Blonde” anymore. Say what you want about her hot take on AI, that’s fair, but don’t normalize your misogyny as part of it.

We need Ja Rule’s opinion on this. Has anyone asked him?