Been using this handle on the internet since 1993. I'm the real, original Syun.
Here because it's still the 80s in my brain.
And? I know all that. OP clearly didnt. And none of that contradicts what I said.
False equivalency, eh? No. And you're looking right past my point, which is that giving cyclists an inch leads them to take a mile. Pedestrians who don't walk in the street following the same rules... talk about asinine arguments. The Idaho rules and their derivatives absolutely open the door to the very egregious behavior I mentioned, save for the gunshots.
So, I'll break down why the article is nonsense. The author of the article's premise is basically "First off, I am very smart. See? I'm an academic. That said, bikes shouldn't have to follow the same rules. Why? I have two reasons. The first is that having to stop and start is a drag. The second is that if a bike hits a car, it doesn't matter".
It's also a drag to have to stop when you're driving. Inconvenience is irrelevant. The bike hitting a car thing, that's absolute crap. First, a cyclist might not be hitting a car. Maybe another cyclist. Maybe a motorcycle rider. Second, depending on the nature of the crash, that car could be totalled depending on any number of factors. Considering that cyclists don't have to carry insurance, and a whole lot of people can only afford basic liability insurance, a cyclist hitting a car could well mean some poor person having to pay out of pocket and not being able to afford it, losing their car, and that unraveling all kinds of things in their life. Lives are ruined every day in the US by people losing their transportation. Or it could just be that some asshole runs into your car, puts a dent in it and fucks your paint up, and you have to pay out of pocket because this dickhead whose judgement is missing happens to be no worse for the wear and decides to scoot rather than deal with a problem that's "not his". Or it gets reported properly and you have to sue this dude to get the money to fix your car before the scrapes start rusting.
I call that "it's no big deal" attitude entitled.
But what's more, it's a traffic incident. It means police getting involved, it means insurance companies and the potential for the driver's rates to go up through no fault of their own, and if the cyclist is seriously hurt or worse, it means a lot of heartache and trauma for everyone involved, maybe more people than that. Discounting the realities of how disruptive, expensive, or downright bad it can be even if it's the cyclist running into a vehicle or the incident just being their fault is irresponsible at best and a bad faith argument.
Going back to the idaho rules specifically, those same rules would make perfect sense for a car, too. We've all been stuck at a red light at night with nobody coming for blocks. If the coast is clear to go, it's clear to go, right? Well, no, the rules are in place because capital P People are a bunch of idiots, and they'd be crashing cars more than they already do if those rules weren't there even when they don't seem to make sense in the moment. The same is true for cyclists. As many times as cyclists have blown through their red light into my green light, I've seen them do that to others even more. Same of cyclists shooting in between me and my parking spot while I'm very obviously parallel parking, backing up with my blinker on and moving.
Different sets of rules for different vehicles sharing the same space are a bad idea, full stop.I have spoken.
YSK that abortion is indeed legal in the US, and that it takes a simple majority to pass a bill. 60 votes (sometimes 66) are needed sometimes on procedural points.
Maybe don't write YSK posts when YDK.
You're pissing on the wrong leg. Don't mistake disagreement for ignorance of the article. I live in entitled cyclist central, and I've even been shot at while driving by one who got pissed at me for not seeing him wearing all black riding at night with no lights running a red. I got no time for cyclists' bullshit, even being one. We can follow the same rules as everyone else, and should. You have no idea how many times I've heard/seen/read cyclists saying that they're better people than car drivers so shouldn't have to follow the rules. It's a LOT. I currently live in one of those states with "similar laws". It's a nightmare, and cycling culture has devolved in part because of it.
As a cyclist, there are a HANDFUL of corner cases where streets are set up in a certain way where it's actually safer to disobey lights so that you can actually maintain visual awareness of what's going on around you. I encountered this in Boston, which is about the craziest kind of street layout possible, and lots of times the only sane thing to do while driving a car is also illegal, and everyone just kind of understands that and lets things slide.
But outside of those edge cases, no. We're not fucking special, if we're gonna use the road, we have to use the road correctly. Most of this entitlement to different rules comes down to a segment of cyclists thinking they're better than everyone else for not driving. Piss on that.
Strange, he's not Palestinian, he's an Algerian citizen, and born in Syria. I could understand if someone else got it wrong, but he's claiming this now?
He was living in Columbia student housing but wasn't actually a student there, and that's a situation I don't really understand. I'm sure there's a perfectly good reason, but it does make one wonder why the school would let him just lead a massive protest on their campus if he's not a student.
Putting all that aside, I'd say he's got a point if it weren't for the fact that the protests he led got violent against Jewish students and went well beyond the limits of the first amendment when it veered into harassment and threats and fisticuffs. I don't say this lightly where this current administration is concerned, but it looks to me like this guy's actually broken the law, and is now bending the truth about his origins to score points while trying to hide behind an amendment that doesn't protect everything he was actually involved in. Which I don't care for any more than I do Trump's insanity, frankly.
It's pleasantly surprising that they aren't deep sixing the lifetime pass.
Yet.
Yeah, they threw LNT straight out the window and down the open manhole with flames shooting out of it with great delight. If you search for pics of the place, claiming "leave no trace" is beyond farcical.
This is gospel truth and people downvoting this are delusional.
The places with the fewest places to deposit one's trash are always the ones with the most litter. Always.
If someone wants another person to adapt a behavior, from a purely practical standpoint, that person must make the other person's job easier or it will simply not work to get them to adapt. If this wasn't a forest (such as it is, it being the UK), the only proper thing to do would be to dump as much trash there as possible while demanding the bins back until they get the message and cave in. I could write a whole book here about how the packaging industry paid lobbyists and PR firms to put the blame on consumers for the useless crap they make existing in the first place, and shaming them into keeping it out of sight and thus out of mind. I won't. But it's a tale vile enough that it convinced me that there's a time and a place for littering as protest. The woods aren't the place.
Besides, there ARE receptacles that are critter resistant. This is an absolute cop out, and seeing how landscaped the area is, a couple of bins would hardly scar the landscape. This is pure crap. I looked the place up, and it's NOT the kind of place where you deny people trash receptacles, nor is it the kind of place you can credibly base your argument on "we don't want animals to get used to people". Good lord, what a bunch of idiocy.
Green's grandstanding doesn't impress me much. The guy's a rapist, and it takes almost nothing right now to look impressive compared to the rest of the democrats. There's almost no chance of this getting off the ground right now, and zero chance of it going anywhere. The dems' strategy of outreach while Trump burns everything to the ground will help them at the midterms in theory, but they don't actually need to do the outreach for them to do better in the midterms and they're probably alienating more people than they are poaching voters with their fecklessness.
Green choosing to become a creature of the press right now just tells me he's looking at advancing himself, maybe in the midterms for Cornyn's senate seat. Maybe a presidential run.
All that said, there's a reasonable chance that dems will pick up 2 seats in the house in april and another one later this year. If so, they could impeach, but Trump will weather that just fine.
Are you talking about Animal free "meat", like impossible burgers, or are you talking about actual lab grown meat? I'm not aware of lab grown meat being on the shelves yet, and animal free meat options isn't the same thing as lab grown meat.
From what I've read in a few places, and this really does make sense, it's one thing to grow a vat of animal derived proteins, but all you have at that point is basically goo. That has to be processed into "muscles", which is a process of creating long chains of these proteins and bundling them. Then there's the question of fat: what is that process? You can't just add some oil and think it's going to actually be analogous to fatty layers, and lipid cells have to be arranged into, I dunno, rinds? Blobs for "ground beef", I guess, but you see what I mean.
I think this is as neat an idea as anyone does. And I can ask you the same question: any data to support the idea that I'm wrong? Everything I've read about this that goes into any amount of detail talks about the difficulties of actually processing this into something that resembles meat as we know it. I have seen absolutely nothing, and I've looked, to suggest that there's been any kind of meaningful success in making these protein slurries into anything we'd call meat. I'd imagine that ground meats would be the obvious first thing to come to market, that's gonna be the easiest thing to do. But a steak? Boy, color me skeptical. The other thing that I would imagine would be a difficult thing to replicate is going to be flavor. The animals we eat get their flavors in large part from how they're fed and raised. Chickens in the US haven't got the flavor of chickens in Europe, for example. Or a domesticated turkey vs a wild one. There are high grade steaks that you can get and when you see the fat caps, you can see a difference in color due to the cow's diet. How do they control for that? How do they create these proteins and make them flavorful? Will simple nutrient baths do that? Is there more to it than that? What will the B vitamin content be, and where will that come from? Will it be more bioavailable to the eater? Will it be premethylated, or will people with methylation problems in their livers not be able to effectively get those B vitamins from these meats? How will all of that effect cost?
Everything I understand about this is that while they can grow the proteins, the food engineering that it takes to make a piece of meat that will be able to compete with meat from the hoof is a way off, and that we're a long way from this being cheap.
I'd bet that the first lab meats we see coming to market are going to be gooey and bland. I'm imagining ground turkey but worse. And I'd be happy to be wrong, but I don't expect that making meats that are actually analogous to "real" meat is going to be a process of fast iteration. I was around for the beginning of the meat substitutes that came along in the 80s and they were DIRE. And there's nothing to suggest that the processes they've discovered for texturing plant based mock meats can be applied to this lab grown meat goo. Everything I've read, and it all makes logical sense to me, suggests that this is going to take a long time to become actually appealing to the masses just because of the pretty substantial food engineering problems that it presents.
My guess is that it's going to end up being its own thing, more like the "mock duck" and things you can get in cans. Bite sized pieces. I'll be happily surprised if they can grow a steak in a lab within my lifetime.
How unnecessary. Lab grown meat will fail to sell and be dropped from stores all on its own merits.
I've degoogled and life is sweet.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Me too! Yesterday was my first day here, and Nicole was the last thing I got before I went to bed.
Please do. It was a good idea for the US to ban TikTok due to Chinese security law, and of course the worst man on earth granted it a reprieve.
Also, when are you guys going to denaturalize Musk? He cheated on his US citizenship, so I hold out a shred of hope that after his rampage is ended and it all wraps up, we'll revoke his citizenship as fraudulent and he'll have to return to a failed state that's following in Robert Mugabe's anti-white race war footsteps. Can't think of a better place on this earth for a Nazi to belong to.
Well, an unpaid job that involves exercising power over others is always going to attract insufferable, self-important people. It's why I say they're the same people who run HOAs. Just petty little power trippers. I mean, if it ever gets bad, one can always start one's own instance, make competing subs, and make them off limits to the offending mods. Odds are good they'd be driving the members away as it is.
Hehe, I actually joined my instance in no small part due to it already having taken anti tankie countermeasures. Don't need those people buzzing around like horseflies, I had a tankie father and my patience for that shit is basically zero.
Thanks for the recommends, neighbor!
Bye Reddit @lemmy.world Well, I assume a lot more people are gonna be showing up any minute now.
"Most Americans sound so freaking DUMB", says the guy who doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, and shows his rank ignorance so very confidently.