Didn’t realize so much of France was so rural.

Lina Khan is a national treasure.

I mean, tbf that was admittedly last millennium.

Personally I am very willing to pay full price and even occasionally buy pointless extras I don’t care about if it helps reward their passion for a project I see as a valuable contribution. I’ll even pre-order or provide them some free advertising in some cases. Especially if its the sort of dev where it seems like their long-term survival might be in question.

I feel like you can usually tell when the dev needs money or doesn’t.

Except an asteroid stops when it impacts the surface. Since a microscopic black hole would absorb the atoms directly in its path, there would be no “impact” where it imparts all its kinetic energy to the surface.

Don’t eat fissile cucumbers.

That is fair. I would encourage you to make sure your interpretations of science concepts are accurate to its practice, though. Science education requires that we take certain shortcuts, we honestly don’t really have a choice when there’s so much science and so few years in a human lifetime for learning about it all. This is why it branches into specialties, incidentally. It is useful to recognize which shortcuts are shortcuts though, and understand why we had to do that, and how they are different from any sort of scientific “law” based on hard, empirical experiments.

Absorption being a concern does not mean we cannot engineer a nutrient to be readily absorbed. Similarly, what flavors are liked/disliked is similarly based on specific molecules that can also be created if we so wish. No one is talking about injections, that’s a strawman.

What they need to live is specific nutrients. Thinking about a hard requirement for how those nutrients are acquired is a misuse of the classification system. Ultimately, both of these classification systems were devised by us, and are fundamentally imperfect because of that.

If we took a carnivorous bacteria, I think you could see a little more easily how we could synthesize its diet if we wished. Would we then need to reclassify it as something other than an obligate carnivore just because we could synthesize its diet? Even though it would still have to stick to its diet anywhere in its natural habitat?

The classification system is not an absolute arbiter of truth. It is a communication tool. It is not perfect, and we very much can get around it. The rest is just, as I’ve said before, vibes.

In what way is it not sorted if all the necessary nutrients are provided?

This all stems from people using the classification of cats as obligate carnivores to justify an inappropriate claim. That’s not what classification systems are for. It is definitely the same as misunderstanding how Pluto can get reclassified.

You are more than welcome to explain your reasoning on any complication I missed.

And yes, nuance very much matters. That’s the cause of this whole problem, the misunderstanding of the nuance of how scientific classification systems work. This whole argument is fundamentally no different from the “pluto is a planet” thing.

Sure, understandable. But their scientific arguments for it being animal abuse are very distinctly first year bio-tier.

To me it just indicates how much of the Lemmy population hasn’t studied any bio past maybe first year HS level, or any advanced chemistry either for that matter. And how much people on the internet like fighting with vegans. The two influences together are very powerful.

The ASPCA stance is a lot more nuanced than that, if you investigate the whole thing.

Toodles.

This is not sufficient evidence to support a claim that it does not work. We use the preponderance of evidence we have, absolutely while examining potential flaws in the research. We do not simply discard all studies paid for by vegans though, or those with some ambiguity.

If you could provide any evidence it results in poor health, you should do so. Logical arguments based on animal classification systems of their behaviors and lifestyles in their natural habitats are meaningless to the discussion though, when the nuts and bolts of biochemistry is what we’re talking about.

A century ago you might’ve been right, but not anymore.

Any molecule found in meat can be found or made in other ways if we want. The body is complicated, but not that complicated.

I don’t see the falsehood of the equivalence at all. Living things need certain atoms and molecules as inputs. Provide those, and the living thing lives. The rest is just vibes.

By this logic, oxygenating a fish tank to provide the fish with oxygen is animal abuse. You are artificially adding the necessary oxygen into the water, after all.

tbf, pwning vegans is one of the internet’s most time-honored traditions. Up there with harassing women.

But yeah, you’re right.

You’re probably right. Our system was not designed from the ground up to make sense though, instead its a pile of rules and customs that accumulated one by one over the past few centuries.

Our default position is always to allow something. We have to take action to make something illegal if we want to change from this default setting of “allow all” on everything. So, essentially, nobody has changed it yet.

Now, with people making money from it, there’s also going to be lobbyist money resisting any sort of change, combined with general political inertia where most people just don’t really think about it very much. Ultimately any politician that could change it is going to consider how it would impact their election chances, including things like public popularity and how it would impact doner money. Someone like AOC could take action if she felt it was important, she doesn’t need investor donations, since she funds mainly through crowd funding. A republican from middle America does need big doner money though, and would be reluctant to piss off investors and risk them supporting someone else.

So, basically we haven’t bothered to change it, and not many politicians have strong reasons to do so.

Pretty hard to boil legal, political and economic realities to a 5 year old level, but this is more an eli14 I suppose.

Yea neither of those says anything got anywhere near stopped in its tracks. Slowing the spread on the one platform where accounts were removed is not terribly impressive. lol?