[-] DarthFrodo 2 points 5 days ago

With our current lifestyles, 7 billion humans aren't sustainable for earth, which results in a lot of habitat destruction, pollution, climate change and so on. That's what my analogy to deer overpopulation was getting at. Even if we had a global 1 child limit, it would take a few generations until an actually sustainable population is reached.

If we have a right to live even though we cause so much destruction, it's inconsistent to kill deer for causing way, way less damage than us.

[-] DarthFrodo 1 points 5 days ago

You wouldn't need to sterilize more deer for population control than with hunting, obviously. You'd need to sterilize less in total because they'd still compete for food and habitat, just have no offspring. How is that unfeasible? I never said that you'd have to sterilize every single one lol, just enough to impact the fertility of their population in regions where its necessary due to human influence.

[-] DarthFrodo 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

If you have to choose between killing a crying child or killing an adult deer, which would you think is the more moral choice?

What does that have to do with anything? Of course killing a human is worse, but that doesn't mean that killing a deer isn't cruel.

Why don't we spay entire wild populations of deer? :DD

Well, we do this with hundreds of millions of pets and BILLIONS of livestock animals just to improve taste, and hunters already go around shooting them, surely there would be a practical way to tranquilize them and do a snip or something. This is an issue we're responsible for after all, as you said. But yeah, there's no profit and no tasty corpses to be gained so it's not an option, I get it.

Thanks for the laughs though, young city dweller

I'm not sure why you felt the need to be a condescending prick by the way. Maybe basic decency and manners aren't valued in your culture, so I'll try not to judge your character based on that. Have a nice day anyways.

[-] DarthFrodo 1 points 5 days ago

When it is necessary. Humans have replaced the apex predators in a lot of places. If population control isn't done with deer, the population skyrockets, gets out of control, and destroys the ecology, taking several species and the environment with it

But all that applies to humans, and much more so. The harm done by deer overpopulation is completely and utterly dwarfed by the habitat destruction, pollution and climate change that our overpopulation causes. Based on your argumentation, hunting humans for population control is necessary and ethical.

But of course nobody will apply the logic consistently because of how cruel it would be.

Why don't we implement more humane population control measures for deer, like spaying/neutering? It might have something to do with humans liking the taste of their dead bodies...

[-] DarthFrodo 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

(game meaf from necessary population control = ethical imo)

At what point do you consider population control necessary? The inconvenient truth is that the worst instance of unsustainable overpopulation is us humans. No other species could come close to the harm and destruction we cause. Making special exceptions for ourselves while we are the worst offenders by far would be very hypocritical. If you consider population control ethical, you ought to consider school shootings, murder, etc. ethical as well.

I think we need to find better solutions than going on killing sprees.

[-] DarthFrodo 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Weird that this takes so long, with an ongoing war right here in Europe...

[-] DarthFrodo 21 points 2 months ago

BP and Shell only have that much power exacly because people buy fossil fuels from them. If demand would drop, their profits and political power would drop accordingly. As long as we don't even hold the biggest financiers of these companies responsible, how can anything change? Demand drives supply.

It's like saying "As long as hitmans exist, I won't give a shit about the people who pay hitmans, all consumption under capitalism is unethical anyways so anything goes." As long as we ignore those who actually fund the problem, we won't be able to fix anything.

[-] DarthFrodo 40 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

AfD: "refugee children should be shot at the border"

Also AfD: "The problem is that Hitler is depicted as absolute evil"

AfD supporters: "just because they defend nazis, and talk like nazis, and use slogans from nazis, that doesn't mean they are nazis. LOL"

[-] DarthFrodo 27 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The Taiwanese use the meme all the time. Obviously not because it looks like Xi in particular and especially because of fragile censoring, but because they like to be racist against themselves. That must be it.

Calling Trump a guinea pig is probably also considered racist in lemmygrad.

[-] DarthFrodo 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Linke geben den unpersönlichen Konzernen gerne Milliarden

Wo z.B.?

Dem Bäckermeister nicht weil der dann einen Mercedes fährt und man da neidisch ist.

Tafeln sind überlastet, Studenten können sich kein Essen mehr leisten, 2,8 Millionen Kinder wachsen in Deutschland in Armut auf. Ach die kommen schon klar, Hauptsache der Bäckermeister bekommt fette Luxusprodukte subventioniert.

Solidarität mit Armen wäre eindeutig Neid, deswegen nur Solidarität mit denen die sich einen Mercedes leisten können.

Das kann man sich echt nicht ausdenken, wtf.

Blocking instances (self.asklemmy)
submitted 9 months ago by DarthFrodo to c/asklemmy

Is it possible to block all communities of an instance from showing up in the "all" feed? Or would you have to block each community individually?

[-] DarthFrodo 21 points 9 months ago

The neat thing is, you can add stuff like range checks and logging for getters and setters without changing every call. Separation of concerns is also vital in larger projects.

view more: next ›


joined 10 months ago