It’s actually mainly about hating car-dependent infrastructure. The stuff that makes cities impossible to conveniently get around unless you’re in a car, because cycling distances are too far and force you to mix with fast-moving cars due to lack of separated paths. And public transport is expensive and slow, if it exists at all, because cities choose not to invest in it and even if they wanted to it’d be more expensive for them than if cities were planned better.

Mate, you’re the arsehole who started out blasting someone for a source (which was provided, btw) for a meme sharing some generally well-known stats (in the sense that it’s generally well-known that most drivers of yank tanks rarely use them for serious work that requires such a large vehicle, even if the specific numbers aren’t known). If you don’t want people like @aniki@lemmings.world to use weak emotional flame towards you, maybe don’t start with the same.

That link 404s.

Edit: did it explain why they had to remove donation links? That seems unfortunate.

We could have used the tilde, which has been used in formal logic & maths for negation in very many contexts for a long time.

It’s used instead in C and many C-like languages for the far less useful bitwise negation. Of course, we could have had it work in the same way as bitwise vs logical and & or, by dialling up the symbol. Which would have massively improved its visibility compared to the bang.

But for some reason, no. They chose the bang instead.

It means slightly better than—but just slightly—America’s Democrats.

Though fyi in Australia we spell it Labor. It’s labour in any other context, but our political party is Labor.

Yeah honestly AA games deliver the experience AAA games gave 15 years ago, and that’s what I want way more than whatever AAA is today.

Not a scam. Higher prices give other benefits outside of safety. Better venting or aerodynamics. More fashionable. Might be more likely to have a “free replacement if you crash” type of deal.

I am surprised that the article has no mention of MIPS, Wavecel, or Kineticore, because looking at the study itself I found its discussion of rotational vs linear injury to be the most interesting bit, in relation to popular discussions in the cycling community. It points out that

Nine best performing helmets were equipped with the rotation management technology MIPS, but not all helmets equipped with MIPS were among the best performing helmets. Our comparison of three tested helmets which have MIPS and no-MIPS versions showed that MIPS reduced rotational kinematics, but not linear kinematics.

Which is pretty in line with my expectations. They only had one Wavecel helmet to test unfortunately, but had this observation:

Interestingly, the helmet with the Wavecel technology, designed for rotational risk mitigation, produced the lowest linear risk (0.141) in our cohort of 30 helmets, although its overall rank was #13 due to the high rotational risk (0.301)

Which is very counterintuitive. And no Kineticore mention, though they do say

There are several other helmet technologies that are currently available in commercially available helmets. Although these technologies were not within the helmets selected here, they warrant testing according to the protocol used in this study

This has implications with digital content in general

Not even just digital content. This is only half a step removed from right to repair campaigns, and that’s all about physical hardware, ranging from mobile phones to tractors on farms.

It’s really unfortunate that Lemmy handles deleted posts in this way. It’s one of very few genuine advantages of the Reddit platform. Over there, if the OP deleted the post, the text they wrote would no longer be visible, but all the comments under it still would be. And people could continue to have that discussion, so long as they had the link.

That’s a bit doomerist of you. Why leap to the assumption that voters are against it rather than the far simpler explanation that people are unaware of its existence, or don’t feel they understand it well enough to have an opinion?

In which case what’s needed is a much stronger social media effort, preferably headed up by the organisers themselves, or someone else who can make it their entire thing, from where it can hopefully radiate out to other interested parties.

Or that you’re going to pull back your shower curtain one day, and there’s going to be a bear in your shower?

Ha! Joke’s on you. I don’t have a shower curtain!

No, it is genuinely a good point. The fact that its use so far has been entirely limited to the two that ended WW2 was certainly not a given. Some US military leaders wanted to use nuclear weapons in Korea.

The Korean War was so soon after WW2 that the strong taboo against the use of nuclear weapons hadn’t yet taken hold, and the USSR had a miniscule stockpile, so the US could genuinely have done it with limited risk to themselves. The fact that they didn’t use them is a really important turning point that helped build in the taboo against their use that has so far held to this day.

I never played Civ VI. Stuck with V instead. Though to be honest, what I really wish they would do is return to the cool alternate game modes that Civ II: Test of Time added. Being able to keep playing with a second playing arena after completing the ship to Alpha Centauri, or play an entirely different game of fantasy or science-fiction flavoured civ was really cool.

I’ll just leave this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v0dYQ9t5WU

That’s going to always increase parentalmotivation.

Ah I see. I’m not sure that’s technically possible, but if it were, that’d be great.

I think better would be simply outlawing any communication between a donor and recipient, if the donor wishes to officially remain anonymous. Not they “have no way” to prove their identity, but they’re not allowed to prove it—or even imply it.

I don’t know what you mean by

double-blind to the donor AND recipient

But to me that phrase kinda implies that the donor doesn’t know who they donated to. Which…no. It should be blind to the recipient. Entirely blind. But people donating can still choose where to donate to.

The only country whose opinion should matter here is Taiwan. If and when they decide they want to be recognised officially, they should be. Not before, and not after.

I Google-searched “site:unbelievablefactsblog.com truck”, which turned up the right page. It linked to this site, which in turn links to this very detailed page.

Pinging @marduk@lemmy.sdf.org and @toaster@slrpnk.net.

I guess the way I’m thinking about it is that just because the third party doesn’t know it’s poly, doesn’t mean it isn’t poly to the people in the primary couple. It’s unethical and dishonest, but it is a situation where some of the people involved are being non-monogamous.