htrayl

I think the better solution is to simply set up a filter for the word “Unsubscribe”.

My process:

1. Cut in half
2. Remove core
3. Cut in quarters
4. Peel.

If only sex was as simple as a selection of gametes. There is a wide range of chromosomal, hormonal, genitalia, and physiological variation in human sex characteristics, and it is much more common than you think. And that is ignoring much more subtle variation and overlap between the sexes - cognitive, emotional, psychological - that are just as much a part of the natural variation of human sex as any other.

And before you come back with an argument about some rhetoric about “conditions” or what ever - all of evolution starts as a rare variation that becomes common in a certain population. Certain eye colors are nearly the same rarity.

Finally, there are plenty of animals that have individuals that do not reproduce. Examples are naked mole rats. We aren’t a eusocial species, but it isn’t to say we don’t have some very early characteristics of it.

Money. Donate. There isn’t a near term world where money won’t matter in giving you a voice, so you should use it.

Limited visibility, limited comprehension, limited attention, and limited risk aversion.

I mean, you can say the same about every form of entertainment. Music? Majority is crap. Movies? Crap. Sports? Crap. Books? Crap. Video games? Crap.

There are plenty of studies displaying improved cardiovascular health in those who drink 1-4 cups of coffee a day.. Generally, cardiovascular risks of caffeine from coffee are not important for the average person’s health decisions.

In addition, there is a good argument for caffeine prior to exercise - it improves performance and therefore results and therefore health outcomes.

Also tea has caffeine as well (technically dark chocolate too, but less than tea so not really a concern).

And again, the solution to sleep issues are to not have caffeine (tea, coffee, or otherwise) more than a few hours after you wake up.

Withdrawal symptoms are not a major concern - they are temporary at best.

Edit: there are plenty of sources of polyphenols - but frankly the average American does not get nearly enough generally. If you have a typical American diet, I would not recommend quitting coffee as a health measure unless you have already drastically increased consumption of polyphenols generally.

Coffee also is high in polyphenols - the benefits almost certainly outweigh the drawbacks. Just don’t drink coffee after the morning.

• Pretty much any hobby is carbon positive. Gardening is almost certainly on the lower end of carbon positive hobbies.
• In the agriculture domain, growing plants for the sake of direct consumption is not the primary source of emissions - that would be animal based agriculture by far.
• Gardening promotes community resilience and health.

*It is definitely not too late to mitigate a ton of suffering. *

I’ve said it elsewhere: environmental nihilism is deeply unethical. There is a ton we can do to minimize damage and restore the environment.

It’s the same thing with recycling, companies trying to sell the idea that climate change is a personal failing of every single person even though said companies are responsible for like 90% of carbon emissions.

God I wish this talking point would die.

1. Companies emit on the basis of your consumption. This is not arbitrary, emit out of no where.
2. Individuals being unwilling to tolerate even minor inconveniences or adjustments to their lifestyle makes systemic change impossible. Government and industry won’t change until collective individuals are willing to deal with it.
3. Meat consumption, housing size, housing location, voting patterns, vehicle choice and use, are all individually driven decisions.

Not the Southeast - Southwest-west. Honestly mostly California.

I would say more California than Tex - Tex Mex has heavier emphasis on fried foods. The company is headquartered in California. It looks like the owner got most of the inspiration in San Francisco, and then moved to Colorado.

Yup, this can easily be a 10 year + project.

Yeah, don’t buy into the strawman. At no point did anyone say “let’s not do anything else”. Removing the parking minimum tax enables the rest of it.

Oh the Urbanity had a great video on how a large portion of non-commuting trips can be made by bicycle.

Adjusting parking minimums and reducing parking over time is absolutely the way to promote alternatives. It promotes higher better access to services (as land can be used for alternatives) and cheaper housing (meaning you can live closer to where you work).

The reality is we are vastly overparked. Depending on where you live, there can be 8 TIMES the number of parking spaces than cars. You can pretty easily reduce parking by 1/3 and have near zero impact for drivers 99% of the time (maybe on black Friday you may need to take a ride).

Also, just want to point out to the conservatives and libertarians in the crowd: Parking Minimums are a TAX. Worse, they are a tax that overly affects small business that is less likely to be able to get the support they need endure the taxes effect on their finances.

People do this all the time in communities that emphasize biking. Easily. And actually, it isn’t that difficult to do.

Further, driving isn’t feasible for everyone, but driving is emphasized in such a way that alternatives cannot thrive.

See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

Part of why you have to live so far is because parking minimums create vast amounts of space that sits empty 90% of the time.

The other part is because of stringent zoning regulations that kill real housing options.

Meaningful legislation follows collective individual conviction - this mindset that the individual does not matter is simply an excuse to resist change, which means that government will basically never feel the mandate to make any meaningful legislation. People must be willing to be better, and that starts with personal investment in the problem. For example, if you bike more and use transit more, even when it is mildly inconvenient, local politicians and authorities are far more likely to invest in those modes.

Further, there is a lot that people can do to their effective emissions, regardless of external emissions. Quitting meat, for example, is an individual action that can have enormous benefits collectively. Buying solar panels and home investments, even at a slight loss, drastically reduce emissions. When you talk about externalized emissions, you fail to admit that a massive portion of the global emissions are due to the individual consumption of resources. Period.

Additionally, individual political action - donating, campaigning, and running, are all individual actions that contribute to the greater collective action. The idea that this is fundamentally different than other type of individual action is wrong.

As far as I am concerned, the mindset that the individual doesn’t matter is an immensely toxic and dangerous one: it is escapism, denial, and a transparent effort to assuage one’s personal guilt toward responsibility.