[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 35 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

idk man I think the mental gymnastics go the other way around here. You have to make a shit load of assumptions to consume human flesh safely and ethically:

  • the person being eaten consents to their body being eaten
  • the person has no family or each and every one of their relatives consents and is totally ok with their loved one's body ending up in a casserole
  • the person has no diseases that can be transmitted by consuming some or all parts of their body: prion disease (brain), AIDS, hepatitis and loads other blood-transmitted illnesses, to name a few obvious ones
  • there are no drugs or medications in the person's body that could be absorbed into your system (regurgitated meth, yummy!)
  • you have the means to effectively and safely process or cook the body yourself or we set up an entire new industry around mass human body consumption which sounds like the plot of a Stephen King novel tbh

As some have pointed out here, if eating human meat is your only available choice in an extreme life-or-death survival situation, it would have to do, but unless you also have the means to carve up and cook the body, you're actually going to consume more energy digesting the raw flesh than what you're getting in return. Humans make for rather poor food overall, that's a fact. I would back this up with some evidence but I don't feel like being put on a list for looking up the nutritional contents of human bodies lol

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 30 points 6 months ago

Nope, don't rotate passwords. Just don't. Best case scenario, you're wasting your time; worst case, people will actually make their passwords less secure by rotating them, e.g. some people would happily change "password123" to "password1" and call it a day.

Just pick a looong password once, make sure you don't reuse it elsewhere, and you'll be fine.

This is as per the NIST latest guidelines.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 49 points 6 months ago

For me the biggest problem is not volume in general but volume of niche content. The best thing about Reddit was all the active, engaging communities that would sprawl around any niche subject you could imagine.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 67 points 6 months ago

Clickbait bullshit. The Department of Defense statement clarifies the US "troops" are just the crew required to operate the air defense battery equipment the US has been supplying to Israel for a while now.

This is not the first time the United States has deployed a THAAD battery to the region. The President directed the military to deploy a THAAD battery to the Middle East last year following the October 7th attacks to defend American troops and interests in the region.

Again, nothing new or different about this. The US is not putting boots on the ground to shoot people up. At least not yet.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 90 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Someone said to me once "Relax! Nothing is under control."

Worry about what you can control —which is very little, especially when facing a world crisis like climate change— and accept what you can't.

The people who should be fixing this mess are not you or I. It's the big corporations and the Governments that should regulate them through robust, uncompromising climate policies. Vote for Governments with honest, solid climate agendas.

Other than that, contributions from individuals like you and I are but a drop in the boiling ocean of global warming. By all means, keep doing what you're doing. It certainly doesn't hurt to lead a more sustainable lifestyle but don't feel bad if you don't do everything you're supposed to do. Don't let the real culprits here gaslight you into thinking otherwise.

Again, if you're worried more about your mental health than the problem itself at this stage, it's ok to feel that way. Many of us do. But the best advice I can give you is to just accept there's nothing you can really do about the situation. Whatever happens, happens. Easier said than done, I know, but once you "learn" to accept this fact, your anxiety will drop right down.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 34 points 8 months ago

Try this engine

https://search.marginalia.nu/

Or a SearXNG instance

https://search.disroot.org/search

You may also be interested in the Indie Web movement. This site is a great resource for it, with yet more links to indie sites and blogs.

Finally, not quite what you asked but here's a freebie, in case you didn't know about it:

https://wiby.me/

It's an old web search engine. It only indexes pages from the 00s and earlier.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 58 points 10 months ago

I love it when real news report headlines sound like an article from The Onion.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 77 points 1 year ago

Voyager. I tried a few others but Voyager has a very slick UI and all the features I want.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 66 points 1 year ago

The guy who started Bluesky was the same Twitter co-founder who push for Twitter to sell out. Thanks but no thanks. I'll stick with Mastodon. It's getting real comfy in there now.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 79 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I welcome this change. It makes it clear to the user in realistic terms how they want to engage with the site.

  • Pay up with your money
  • Pay up with your data
  • Don't use Facebook

I despise Meta and all their products but they are entitled to charge people for them. Shit ain't free to run, you know.

I'd much sooner they showed this banner and force people to make a decision than what they've been doing up until now, which is to "assume" everyone's fine with their personal data being harvested and exploited without their knowledge or consent.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 159 points 2 years ago

It is so ironic that SEO has become the very problem it was invented to fix: all these jokers gaming the system have all but plunged us all back into prehistoric internet times, before search engines appeared and people had to remember which specific sites to go to find information online.

138

With evidence mounting on the failure to limit global warming to 1.5C, do you think global carbon emissions will be low enough by 2050 to at least avoid the most catastrophic climate change doomsday scenarios forecast by the turn of the century?

I am somewhat hopeful most developed countries will get there but I wonder if developing countries will have the ability and inclination to buy into it as well.

[-] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 76 points 2 years ago

Strawman aside, anyone who thinks national socialism has anything to do with socialism needs to seriously educate themselves on Nazi ideology. Socialism to Hitler was nothing more than a buzzword he used to boost approval rates and votes quickly

As soon as they came into power, the Nazis did a complete 180° and swept every single promise they had made under the rug, kicking out or straight up murdering anyone, even in their own party (e.g. Sturmabteilung), who may have genuinely believed the party's socialist façade.

Their socialist agenda was not the only falsehood the Nazis pushed though (surprising, I know!). The only three things the Nazis actually believed in were:

  • Hitler
  • Jews/Poles/anyone Hitler didn't like = kill
  • Germany is entitled to take what they want from anyone because Lebensraum
view more: next ›

LiamMayfair

joined 2 years ago