htrayl

Money. Donate. There isn’t a near term world where money won’t matter in giving you a voice, so you should use it.

Limited visibility, limited comprehension, limited attention, and limited risk aversion.

No, most of us are broke because we insist on ensuring that suburban mcmansions are the only places to really live. When you spend 30% on driving and 40% on housing, suddenly you are broke.

I mean, you can say the same about every form of entertainment. Music? Majority is crap. Movies? Crap. Sports? Crap. Books? Crap. Video games? Crap.

Oh fuck off dude.

Meh, maybe 10% of a single generation at most know how to use computers. Technically savvy millenials vastly overestimate how technically savvy other millenials are.

*It is definitely not too late to mitigate a ton of suffering. *

I’ve said it elsewhere: environmental nihilism is deeply unethical. There is a ton we can do to minimize damage and restore the environment.

It’s the same thing with recycling, companies trying to sell the idea that climate change is a personal failing of every single person even though said companies are responsible for like 90% of carbon emissions.

God I wish this talking point would die.

1. Companies emit on the basis of your consumption. This is not arbitrary, emit out of no where.
2. Individuals being unwilling to tolerate even minor inconveniences or adjustments to their lifestyle makes systemic change impossible. Government and industry won’t change until collective individuals are willing to deal with it.
3. Meat consumption, housing size, housing location, voting patterns, vehicle choice and use, are all individually driven decisions.

Phone apps are absolutely not a substitute for eink screens. The reading experience is worlds apart. Support an alternative company like Kobo.

Not the Southeast - Southwest-west. Honestly mostly California.

I would say more California than Tex - Tex Mex has heavier emphasis on fried foods. The company is headquartered in California. It looks like the owner got most of the inspiration in San Francisco, and then moved to Colorado.

Meaningful legislation follows collective individual conviction - this mindset that the individual does not matter is simply an excuse to resist change, which means that government will basically never feel the mandate to make any meaningful legislation. People must be willing to be better, and that starts with personal investment in the problem. For example, if you bike more and use transit more, even when it is mildly inconvenient, local politicians and authorities are far more likely to invest in those modes.

Further, there is a lot that people can do to their effective emissions, regardless of external emissions. Quitting meat, for example, is an individual action that can have enormous benefits collectively. Buying solar panels and home investments, even at a slight loss, drastically reduce emissions. When you talk about externalized emissions, you fail to admit that a massive portion of the global emissions are due to the individual consumption of resources. Period.

Additionally, individual political action - donating, campaigning, and running, are all individual actions that contribute to the greater collective action. The idea that this is fundamentally different than other type of individual action is wrong.

As far as I am concerned, the mindset that the individual doesn’t matter is an immensely toxic and dangerous one: it is escapism, denial, and a transparent effort to assuage one’s personal guilt toward responsibility.

The level of zealous dogma in this thread is pretty sad. Carbon offsets are an enormous field - and definitely there are a lot of low effort scams - but simultaneously there are many opportunities for it to be an extremely valuable part of the climate response. We do need it to be highly regulated, and by itself it really isn’t enough. But, for example, buying low value land that was never a real factor for climate change is not the same as, say burning biomass for biochar or removing refrigerants, or subsidizing renewable energy.

An alternative to direct carbon offsets is political contributions - you have an immense amount of power locally in particular. That can help drive more sustainable construction, cleaner transit, and renewable local generation.

Additionally, the claim that individual action is not important or valuable is also pretty pathetic and honestly just an excuse to not make any personal changes. The reality is systemic change follows personal change. Government needs a mandate to make important investments and regulations, but it cannot do it if people are completely unwilling to change their lifestyle.

Probably soon it will be some form of single cell protein like methanogen. Being able to grow with less sunlight is pretty valuable.

Meh, this is not a great take. Resistance training is unambigiously great for the heart, nearly as good as aerobic in isolation. A runner who doesn’t do resistance training is in roughly the same position as a weight lifter who doesn’t run (both seem to reduce risk by 30-70%)

However, aerobic and resistance together seem to be better than either in isolation.

Additionally, resistance training has a number of additional health benefits outside of cardiovascular health, to the point that I would say that doing resistance training in isolation is functionally a better use of time for your health than aerobic exercise.

Ideally, you should do both.

The only time this is not true really is when the individual is taking PEDs which do increase risk of heart failure.

A 200 page tome filled with questionable arguments for the veracity of his religion written by my grandfather after he got cancer. I did give it a chance and read through large portions of it (minus a large section on a theory he had regarding the location of the mythical events in the religion). It was… Unfortunately poor.

Then it was a balance of not trying to tear apart one of his proudest pieces of work and not pretend I believed it until he passed away.

Yes, for those guessing - - I grew up Mormon and that is the religion in question.