toebert

joined 1 month ago
[–] toebert@piefed.social 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They're doing their part in UK politics. Tories stole everything they could and drove it all into the ground until everyone got sick and elected labour. Now they're raising taxes to put money back in and doing everything they can to make sure they're hated enough that there is no chance they get re-elected. Then, Tories can just walk back in and take all the money coming in from the new taxes again. It's a beautiful cycle of the general population getting fucked from both sides.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It feels like this is treating symptoms, however helpful it may seem in the short term.

Obesity in pets is 100% the fault of the owner, although pet food manufacturers don't make it easy.. I have 2 cats whose breed is well known for being commonly overweight but they're both at their ideal recommended by the vet. It did take effort to find healthier food for them and the correct amount, as well as build up their habits that they get as much as is in their bowl and nothing more regardless of the amount of complaining. It's the same logic as with humans, count the calories going in and adjust that - except pet food manufacturers don't often disclose even an estimate.

Outside cats are a divisive topic already though, in those cases it's arguable whether the owner is solely responsible for it all (due to the decision to let them out) or the other people who also feed the clearly well fed cat a 2nd and 3rd meal because they're trying to befriend it or it "looks hungry".

If we could just have a "don't feed someone else's pet unless you're asked to" mentality + people would research good food for their pets as a standard it'd go a long way imo and it seems safer than putting animals on drugs.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 6 points 1 week ago

I think your example is great for how the messaging of "pick a job you love and you'll never work a day"/"you can be whatever you want to be" can be quite harmful, I know several people in similar situations with various art/creative degrees.

The only thing I'd add is to consider what a degree will do for you if you can't work in the field it's for. E.g if you get a degree in marine biology it may be used to re-train as a teacher or similar, but not much else. Meanwhile a degree in some business subject will probably allow you to apply for most office jobs in general. You may not love it, but it's a lot easier to have a decent salary and find a hobby than to starve trying to get paid for your hobby.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 5 points 2 weeks ago

This is true but there is a matter of being able to split up work into multiple pieces easily and prioritise between services. E.g. the piece of legacy service that nobody likes to touch, has no tests and is used for 2% of traffic can take its' time getting sorted out without blocking all the other services moving on.

You still have to do it and it should be ASAP, but there are more options on how to manage it.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 4 points 3 weeks ago

Nah, we just let half the country flood once a year instead.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Luckily they can just keep proposing it nonstop until everyone is burnt out from constantly fighting it while also working a day job.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

I'm just so tired of paying taxes and then having to spend more money to support various organisations to fight the government using my money against me. Even sending representatives emails about these issues just feels like spending 5-10 mins of my time to write it, then paying for 5 mins of their time to get back a long version of "yea sure". I might as well just start setting money on fire instead, same outcome less effort.

[–] toebert@piefed.social 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not vegan myself but I had asked a similar enough question to a vegan friend a while ago and liked his answer:

He said for him it's 2 parts, 1 is that while the animal that died may not have been harmed by humans, the ecosystem that relies on scavenging carcasses will be hurt if humans effectively start removing their entire food source (same way we have driven species to extinction by hunting).

The 2nd part is that with humans everything with even the tiniest loop hole will get abused.. Imagine that we say this is okay. Today it may be the odd naturally deceased animal, in a month it'll start including animals "killed accidentally", in a year it'll be someone farming animals with some weird way of culling them so they can claim it's still natural causes by some twisted logic.. at the end of it we'd just not be able to trust any of it anyway so it's easier to not even entertain the thought - the energy to figure it all out would be better spent on improving alternatives.