Sillan alla on tilaa meille kaikille

  • 0 Posts
  • 144 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 18th, 2025

help-circle



  • I’m always taking the side of harm reduction, but that’s pretty much reserved for when you’re in the voting booth and there’s nothing else to be done. I’m some rando from overseas, but this applies everywhere in the world where you can still vote.

    Before elections is the time to take action so you don’t end up having to choose between evils


  • Tonavato196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneDeadname rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’d add that considering Vegeta’s point of view; he’s calling him Kakarot as a sign of messed up respect. As he’s really racist and prideful, and views all the other races weaker, him using the name Goku would mean also lowering himself to the level of “lower races” as he’d have to admit sayans can be on the same level as them. Him using Goku more and more would be in effect a sign of him slowly becoming less racist

    edit// fixed words




  • by ending harm

    That’s the issue, really. People won’t get behind anything new or radical etc., so the options usually are “getting worse slowly” or “getting even worse right now”, and picking that latter is not better than the first one. What’s the solution? Fuck if I know, but allowing the latter to happen cannot be it


  • TonavatoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldTop of the world, ma
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Just let people live their life how they want to

    I’d rather have them not climb the damn mountain though. It’s become a sort of tourist trap -thing (literally), there’s people selling commercial climbings and all. It’s extremely wasteful and them littering the place with all their trash (like extra oxygen tanks) and then with their corpses is disgusting and kind of insulting considering Sagarmatha has some religious significance to locals as well


  • Yep. There’s multiple layers to it as well, as you can make up compound words, and then you can do the “bending”, adding specific endings to make the word mean whatever. You don’t even really think about it, you just do it kinda naturally when needed.

    For a random example today I used “ylöspäinkapuava”, “(someone/something) climbing upwards”. Ylös = up, päin = towards, ylöspäin = upwards, kavuta = to climb, kapuaa = someone/something climbs, kapuava = someone/something is climbing (adjective) -> ylöspäinkapuava. You could use “ylöskapuava” (up climbing) to make it simpler, but that leaves out some nuance and sounds more like just getting up after you fell down.



  • TonavatoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldlightbulbs
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    The optimal “daylight” is about 5700-5800K. It’s not blue then, but pure white.

    (I know this because that’s the optimal for parrots. They also have to have UV lights as an extra though, they need that for health and to see their full spectrum)





  • TonavatoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldI'm foss plus steam
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Applying strict moral purism to veganism means leaving most of harm reduction out, though, it’s the paradox that happens when moral purism meets lesser-evilism. If the options are getting lots of people to eat less meat by understanding changing cultural norms takes a lot of time and will happen slowly and thus encouraging them to take at least smaller steps towards leaving animal products out (more animals saved = lesser evil), or demanding everyone immediately stops eating meat and becomes vegan, which fails to consider people grown in a meat eating culture will fight aggressively against sudden changes and thus makes people less likely to listen and reduce their meat consumption (more animals eaten = greater evil), a moral purist vegan will choose the latter or do neither (leading to animals still being eaten more than with the first option - so not a harm reduction stance).

    As moral purists views it is completely unacceptable to eat animals, encouraging people to eat just a little animals is not an option. If you can accept the lesser evil, you are not a moral purist, and if you don’t accept the lesser evil then you’re choosing against harm reduction




  • TonavatoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldI'm foss plus steam
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    the question of the worth of a life, and whether a human life is worth a lifetime of meat eating/killing.

    Yes, this paradox is the root of it, I think. Is it ethical for me to live while that requires killing a lot of something else? I don’t think there is any “right” answer since it all depends on what you consider to be worth more (which is also why opinions on this are interesting). I guess generally people don’t tend to say you should kill yourself if you end up in a situation like this, since it could happen to anyone with some really bad luck