@jkf's banner p

jkf


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 19:07:26 UTC

				

User ID: 82

jkf


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 19:07:26 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 82

Whatever man -- that's the reason, and she's not wrong. "Turn up the heat" is an interesting approach to dealing with evaporative cooling -- if there were a (metaphorical) retort somewhere capturing all of the quality people who've had enough around here, it's getting to the point where that would be a better place to hang out.

If you are in the forest, there is probably a bear around somewhere -- so isn't the question really "would you rather be stuck in the forest with one or more bears, or with a man and some bears"?

You guys are making some really terrible decisions lately.

There. Is that accurate?

Sure, it's pretty much how it's done in the US.

But it needs to be super clear that this is not in any way instrumental to the production of large amounts of beef -- if those cattle stayed on the range for four months instead of going to the feedlot, they would still constitute a lot of beef. Somewhat less, and quite a bit less marketable (to US tastes) -- but if you banned feedlots tomorrow you would still be able to afford a burger.

I'll also yield to you, for now- that the grazing fields can't be repurposed. I'm skeptical of this but I don't have the means to do a counterfactual analysis on every field at this time.

On this part I guess you just need to spend some time out west? Most of the time when you run across ranging beef cattle it's not even anywhere you might call a 'field' -- it's like literal woods where I am, and in other parts borderline desert. You don't need to believe me, but you could maybe cross-reference BLM leases (in the US) with Google Earth or something? Working ranches will keep some self-owned pasture around that's more fertile, and grow some hay and stuff for winter feed -- but water is a problem out here. Hay will grow a crop a year with ~zero inputs and no irrigation -- I don't know too many crops for human consumption like that.

If you wanna talk about high-impact use of fertile land, I'd turn your gaze towards dairy cattle. Their lives seem pretty pleasant, but goddamn they eat a lot of corn and produce a lot of shit. The footprint of the cows isn't that much, but the acres and acres of silage and alfalfa could be better used if you ask me. People seem to like milk for some reason though.

The big problem is that Young Pierre Trudeau and Young Castro could easily pass for brothers.

One could just shift the conspiracy a generation backwards I suppose -- do we really know what Pierre's mother was up to?

The first is that the introduction of technology makes a lot of things that used to be the domain of trained professionals increasingly accessible to the general public. Take land surveying. Anyone of average intelligence can pull a deed from the courthouse, buy pro-grade survey equipment, and locate a pin, which is probably enough to do the trick if you're trying to see where you can put up a fence on your own property. But the field is deceptively complicated, and when the same guy decides to go into business for himself as a surveyor with no more training than basic YouTube tutorials, he's asking for trouble.

This seems fine? So long as that person is not allowed to claim to be a licensed land surveyor who's surveys will be accepted by, like, the Land Titles Office (much less the neighbours) -- consumers can probably decide for themselves whether such a survey is of value to them? (hint: the only time anybody is likely to get something surveyed it's because some government agency (or maybe the neighbours) is forcing them to; if that agency won't accept the results the survey is worth zero dollars

HOW could that NOT have an effect?

The obvious answer is that 120ppm is really not very much -- CO2 is essentially a trace gas in the atmosphere. Would adding 120ppm of neon to the atmosphere have noticeable effects? Maybe it would, IDK -- but it's not obvious one way or the other.

Like I say I'm not the hugest fan of intensive dairying, so fine if true -- but I do think they will run into trouble with energy inputs. One cow can generate a truly shocking amount of milk, and they don't really eat that much. The problem (to me) is that the demand for milk products is also truly shocking -- so anyway you slice it there's going to be some shocking resource usage going on.

The rise in property taxes has nothing to do with the rise in property values, and everything to do with bloated & useless municipal governments spending beyond their means. If more boomers understood this, maybe we would have less cities run like Toronto and Vancouver.

I mean it's pretty antagonistic, but his points seem valid enough -- it's not so much "you suck" as "what makes you think you're so great". Which seems like a pretty valid thing to ask somebody who's proposing some radical shit on thin rationale?

If you guys really want a forum of witches, tone-policing the antiwitchers when they make mild criticism of the witches would be a good first step.

In most other situations "I made a bad decision because I had too much to drink" does not carry much legal weight. Assuming the women in your scenarios do in fact consent "in the moment", how can you invalidate this consent without also invalidating (for example) a woman's decision to go driving while in such a state?

ie. 'drunk woman decides to drive and crashes into a pole' --> prosecute her (I think?); but 'drunk woman decides to sleep with some gross nerd' --> prosecute him (?!)

Your framework seems to be denying women significant agency; seems a bit patriarchal to me.

Especially Australian safetyists -- their COVID response was intensely dumb, why should one believe them on their longstanding crusades against similarly low-risk 'threats'?

Only if his wife will let him...

  1. False
  2. Part of the problem

Fortunately I am pretty polite, and don't have much use for the 'well bless your heart' style of polite disagreement. I know it when I see it though.

They do it yearly around here -- property values have about doubled since 2020, and I can assure you that municipal budgets have not. It's more like 'create a (bloated) budget and divide by total assessed values; everyone pays that percentage' than 'multiply assessed values by X% and bloat the budget to match'.

Either you live in a very unusual place, or are suffering under a very common misconception of how property taxes work:

https://www.mpac.ca/en/UnderstandingYourAssessment/PropertyAssessmentandPropertyTaxes

Come the hour, cometh the man?

(see how Tata is closing down their old labour intensive steel furnace and replacing it with a more efficient highly automated furnace that's going to pump out a lot more steel with a lot fewer workers)

I thought the steel plant was profitable and produced very good (ie. difficult to replace) steel but was being shut down for burning coal and is being 'replaced' with an electric one that will use mindboggling amounts of a scarce resource while producing inferior steel to the existing plant?

The stealing/selling of information was never what got him in trouble -- early Facebook was literally giving it away for free, borderline open-sourcing it. Pretty libertarian in an 'information wants to be free' way, but I think they just did it because they figured their graph was really neat and wanted to share.

AFAICT there weren't really negative consequences either, apart from the Trump team using the features as intended -- to create a graph of potential Trump supporters to target political ads at receptive individuals, building an effective campaign with big bang for relatively few bucks. (ie. what the Obama campaign did on the last go-round)

You might not like it, but this is what peak (advertising) performance looks like -- now they do the same thing but keep it all under the hood.

Kyle Kemper is his half brother from his mother

We're not trying to prove who his mother is, though?

Your threshold for antagonism is way too low -- that is the whole deal. The OC was perfectly polite; just that it registers strong disagreement. If you remove the linguistic tools to register strong disagreement, people will just drop off and you will have your forum of (longwinded) witches.

If you stop doing it, I will stop objecting to it.

Your first modhat comment was also bad.

I've been Noticing lately that governments with any significant period of incumbency during the Covid period are tending to get hammered into the ground in the first 'dust-clears' election available. I suppose it's too much to think hope that voters are putting 2 + 2 together on the 'sky-money + forced business closure --> inflation + impending doom' thing -- but the 'inflation + impending doom' thing does seem to be enough.