Spzi

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
  • I don't believe "there is a god".
  • I believe there is no god.

Both are atheism. First is weak/negative, last is strong/positive. The first merely rejects the theist's claim, while the last makes a claim on their own.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I know that is bs because I haven’t been there in days and I probably added 100 visits a day to their stats. So they’re at least a couple hundred shy.

The article mentions 55.31 million daily visits (average). You decreased their stats by 0.00018%. Even if all new active lemmy users had your level of activity, the other site would still return to normal. There are just so many other users.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know that I am not back. And I won’t be back, and I think a lot of people are staying away as well. That the traffic is now normal seems a bit sketchy.

I'm afraid that's just bubble bias. Most people just don't care or haven't found a viable alternative yet. These +43k active users on Lemmy are huge for Lemmy, but not even a scratch for the other site.

After the initial exodus at the start of this month, you could see more and more comments demanding returning to business as usual.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

there’s a bug where voting causes all of them to become uncollapsed at once.

Yes: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/issues/1510

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for linking! It is 'closed as completed', but I still get it every time?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Utopia (from Ουτοπία) is an impossible Vision of the future, while Evtopia (from Ευτοπία) is the best possible Vision.

Interesting. I never heard of Evtopia, and I also did not understand Utopia as necessarily impossible. Could be possible or impossible, depends on context.

I also don't think being unreachable is necessarily a bad thing. Consider an 'Ideal'. Although some ideals may never be fully actualized, they are seen as something good and worth pursuing nevertheless.

But mostly, I don't think the opinions of proponents or opponents of this idea are swayed by wether we call it Utopia or Evtopia. If anything, using the more common term makes it more relatable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’d think if it was all basic biology we would just have a unique gender for every one wouldn’t you?

Nothing in biology is exactly identical between individuums. A common eye color is brown, although there are as many shades of brown as there are people.

It is just practical and how language, or even perception works, that we tend to categorize similarities, and strongly favor common occurrances over outliers.

the doctor is describing your phenotypic sex based on observable characteristics.

Your doctor is assigning you a gender.

Maybe you two aren't even disagreeing?

I'd say the doctor tries to assign the new born into male or female according to biological sex, and gender is inferred from that.

He calls you either a boy or a girl based on your genital configuration

Yes, that's what I mean. A two-step process. First, biological expression is assessed. Next, based on #1, social gender is inferred.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Basically, do you identify as your birth gender (not sex, gender and sex are different)?

The additional explanation actually confused me. Let's compare the two sentences:

  • A) Basically, do you identify as your birth gender?

  • B) Basically, do you identify as your birth sex?

I assume biological sex can be identified by looking at your body as a new born baby, and gender is usually inferred accordingly. So I would assume new borns are being assigned a gender which mathes their biology, although they probably don't have any opinions themselves on the topic.

Anyways, what's the difference between A and B? I feel you felt it was important to point it out, and I just can't see any.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

If you buy local, and go with the seasons, I'd argue it is rather hard to not have all three (cheap, delicious, healthy) at the same time.

You won't have to rely on produce which is optimized for long transports but can tap into fresh, original flavors. Ripe fruits and vegetables from the fields, harvested just this morning. And because they all ripen now, quality maximizes when prize minimizes.

 

Our tracking system is based on data from firms, a publicly available system set up by America’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration (nasa), which was originally designed to detect forest fires. We have built a machine-learning algorithm that evaluates the location of each fire detected by firms, and assesses whether or not it is related to the war. It consists of 100 separate models built to predict fire activity in non-war years. If at least 95 of these models agree that the number of fires identified at a given place and time is abnormally high by pre-war standards, the algorithm marks these “extra” fires as war-related.

Also explained / showcased in this YouTube video: The Economist - War in Ukraine: Tracking the fighting with satellites

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

See (and please help if you can with)

  • A way to link posts across instances #3259
  • [Bug]: local links #3261
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It's the first and only lemmy app working on my old 2015 android phone.

Great to have backwards compatible options. I also like it :)

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/831266

Hi lemmings, I switched over from Reddit 10 days ago now but I couldn't find a mobile client that I was happy with with an experience similar to the Reddit experience I was used to. So I decided to build my own and I hope you will like it as well!

Play store link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.kuroneko.lemmy_connect

Features:

  • Material U
  • Dark and Light themes
  • List view / Card view / Fullwidth view
  • Filter lists for hiding posts
  • Multiple accounts + switcher across multiple instances
  • Guest accounts for viewing an instance without signup
  • Search and community autofill
  • Markdown support + attempt to navigate links correctly (/u/foo will open that user instead of browser kickout. Same for /c/, !, and @)
  • Saving posts
  • full sort types
  • NSFW view options (hide, blur, show)
  • copy text and url on all posts and comments
  • add comments, replies, and new posts
  • comment replies with line indicators

Here's other screenshots:

Future plans:

  • Improving the inbox
  • Swipe actions
  • Multi-~~reddit ~~communities

Thank you for taking a look. I hope others who are migrating from Reddit like me will find the app useful and I'd love to know your thoughts!

Edit: Community for the app is here: https://lemmy.ca/c/lemmyconnect

 

There are instance-independent links to communities, for example: [email protected].

The good thing about it is, it will keep you on your home instance logged in while visiting the target.

How to make a similar thing to link to specific posts, or specific comments?

 

Hi :)

Since yesterday, I cannot see posts created by me, in neither view nor search. The posts still exist, but they aren't shown to me.

Today, I also noticed the two local communities on lemmy.click apparently have 0 posts.

Not sure if these phenomena are connected. Does anybody else experience the same? Does anybody know what's going on?

 

Markus Reisner finde ich immer sehr informativ und sehenswert.

 

Ist schon paar Jahre alt aber ich fand's gut gemacht :)

 

cross-posted from: https://quex.cc/post/13083

As seen on kbin.social

Site that shows subreddits mapped to the fediverse

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1367812

0:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=23s

But there's one lame excuse that is so common, so prevalent, so ubiquitous, that I want to talk about it and that's the excuse that "My country is too big to have trains, bicycle infrastructure, walkable neighborhoods or whatever."


1:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=87s

So when someone new to walkable cities sees an example of a great City and they realize it's clearly better than where they live, their first gut reaction is to grab any difference between the two and make that the reason as to why their city can't be the same.


2:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=146s

So why is this argument so stupid? Well, quite simply, Americans aren't traveling from Fluffy Landing to Hump Tulips every day. Canadians aren't traveling from Dildo to Spasm every day, and Australians aren't traveling from Chinaman's Knob to Useless Loop every day


2:55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=175s

They travel within their city, so the only thing that really matters to most people is the design of that City.


3:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=185s

For example, in the United States, over 45 percent of trips - all trips - are three miles or less (that's five kilometers for the rest of my audience). These are distances that could be easily done by walking or cycling. So despite the size of the country, and the sprawliness of the cities, Americans don't actually travel that far for most trips, but unsurprisingly, almost all of those trips are taken by car because it's too dangerous to walk or cycle, and public transportation is non-existent, which again is the whole point.


4:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=258s

The problem is not cars, it's car dependency. We need to give people the freedom to not to have to drive.


4:35

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=275s

This is where Americans will claim that America is too big for trains, which is absolutely comical, because America was literally built by the railroads, and so was Canada.


5:01

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=301s

Nearly every town, city and village in the United States and Canada had a train station and was connected by rail, with very few exceptions. And almost every city and town had a streetcar line too, with very few exceptions. And every one of those places was built to be walkable, as every one of those places was built before automobiles were common. Again, with very few exceptions.

A hundred years ago, you could get a train from almost any city to just about any other city on the continent, and even many towns and villages, too. The reason those train stations don't exist anymore is because they were bulldozed, often to make room for highways, along with the walkable downtowns they were connected to.


5:46

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=346s

American cities were not built for the car, they were bulldozed for the car.


6:03

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=363s

There are dozens of city pairs in the U.S that are the perfect population and distance for high-speed rail or high frequency rail, and CityNerd has made a video about this if you'd like more details.


6:16

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=376s

Canada may be a huge country, but about 50 percent of the entire population lives in this little area, which is literally in a line.


6:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=387s

This is Japan to scale, the country famous for all it's trains. So yes, Canada, you can build a high-speed train between Toronto and Montreal.


6:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=397s

Here's China with it's high-speed rail map.


7:17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=437s

The Schengen zone is not constant and new countries are being added every few years. For example, Croatia was just added in 2023 and Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Montenegro plan to join in the near future. But if that happens, will Amsterdam need to tear up all their bike lanes, because the Schengen zone is too big? No, of course not, that would be stupid. Which is the same reason why saying America is too big for bike lanes is also stupid.


7:45

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=465s

The fact is, it is possible to build walkable neighborhoods everywhere. They have existed in every country on Earth for thousands of years, and it is possible to connect those walkable places together by high quality public transportation, to make it so that people can go from any walkable area to any other walkable area regardless of the size of the city the country or the continent.


8:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=498s

Even if size did matter, then why isn't Maryland covered in bike lanes and train tracks, or Hawaii, or Prince Edward Island?


10:22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=622s

The United States destroys over 750'000 acres of natural and agricultural land every year [note: the source talks about 1,200 square miles] to build sprawling suburbs. And Ontario, Canada (where I'm from) destroys 175 acres of farmland per day to build more car-dependent suburbia. That is a choice.


10:43

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=643s

When Americans say something like "U.S cities are too big and spread out to do - whatever" then yes, that's true. But that is literally the problem that urbanists are trying to solve, so it's not really helpful to restate the problem, and then use that as the excuse as to why it can't be solved.


11:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=686s

The Dutch make great places, while North Americans make excuses.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1367812

0:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=23s

But there's one lame excuse that is so common, so prevalent, so ubiquitous, that I want to talk about it and that's the excuse that "My country is too big to have trains, bicycle infrastructure, walkable neighborhoods or whatever."


1:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=87s

So when someone new to walkable cities sees an example of a great City and they realize it's clearly better than where they live, their first gut reaction is to grab any difference between the two and make that the reason as to why their city can't be the same.


2:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=146s

So why is this argument so stupid? Well, quite simply, Americans aren't traveling from Fluffy Landing to Hump Tulips every day. Canadians aren't traveling from Dildo to Spasm every day, and Australians aren't traveling from Chinaman's Knob to Useless Loop every day


2:55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=175s

They travel within their city, so the only thing that really matters to most people is the design of that City.


3:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=185s

For example, in the United States, over 45 percent of trips - all trips - are three miles or less (that's five kilometers for the rest of my audience). These are distances that could be easily done by walking or cycling. So despite the size of the country, and the sprawliness of the cities, Americans don't actually travel that far for most trips, but unsurprisingly, almost all of those trips are taken by car because it's too dangerous to walk or cycle, and public transportation is non-existent, which again is the whole point.


4:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=258s

The problem is not cars, it's car dependency. We need to give people the freedom to not to have to drive.


4:35

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=275s

This is where Americans will claim that America is too big for trains, which is absolutely comical, because America was literally built by the railroads, and so was Canada.


5:01

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=301s

Nearly every town, city and village in the United States and Canada had a train station and was connected by rail, with very few exceptions. And almost every city and town had a streetcar line too, with very few exceptions. And every one of those places was built to be walkable, as every one of those places was built before automobiles were common. Again, with very few exceptions.

A hundred years ago, you could get a train from almost any city to just about any other city on the continent, and even many towns and villages, too. The reason those train stations don't exist anymore is because they were bulldozed, often to make room for highways, along with the walkable downtowns they were connected to.


5:46

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=346s

American cities were not built for the car, they were bulldozed for the car.


6:03

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=363s

There are dozens of city pairs in the U.S that are the perfect population and distance for high-speed rail or high frequency rail, and CityNerd has made a video about this if you'd like more details.


6:16

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=376s

Canada may be a huge country, but about 50 percent of the entire population lives in this little area, which is literally in a line.


6:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=387s

This is Japan to scale, the country famous for all it's trains. So yes, Canada, you can build a high-speed train between Toronto and Montreal.


6:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=397s

Here's China with it's high-speed rail map.


7:17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=437s

The Schengen zone is not constant and new countries are being added every few years. For example, Croatia was just added in 2023 and Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Montenegro plan to join in the near future. But if that happens, will Amsterdam need to tear up all their bike lanes, because the Schengen zone is too big? No, of course not, that would be stupid. Which is the same reason why saying America is too big for bike lanes is also stupid.


7:45

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=465s

The fact is, it is possible to build walkable neighborhoods everywhere. They have existed in every country on Earth for thousands of years, and it is possible to connect those walkable places together by high quality public transportation, to make it so that people can go from any walkable area to any other walkable area regardless of the size of the city the country or the continent.


8:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=498s

Even if size did matter, then why isn't Maryland covered in bike lanes and train tracks, or Hawaii, or Prince Edward Island?


10:22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=622s

The United States destroys over 750'000 acres of natural and agricultural land every year [note: the source talks about 1,200 square miles] to build sprawling suburbs. And Ontario, Canada (where I'm from) destroys 175 acres of farmland per day to build more car-dependent suburbia. That is a choice.


10:43

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=643s

When Americans say something like "U.S cities are too big and spread out to do - whatever" then yes, that's true. But that is literally the problem that urbanists are trying to solve, so it's not really helpful to restate the problem, and then use that as the excuse as to why it can't be solved.


11:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=686s

The Dutch make great places, while North Americans make excuses.

 

0:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=23s

But there's one lame excuse that is so common, so prevalent, so ubiquitous, that I want to talk about it and that's the excuse that "My country is too big to have trains, bicycle infrastructure, walkable neighborhoods or whatever."


1:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=87s

So when someone new to walkable cities sees an example of a great City and they realize it's clearly better than where they live, their first gut reaction is to grab any difference between the two and make that the reason as to why their city can't be the same.


2:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=146s

So why is this argument so stupid? Well, quite simply, Americans aren't traveling from Fluffy Landing to Hump Tulips every day. Canadians aren't traveling from Dildo to Spasm every day, and Australians aren't traveling from Chinaman's Knob to Useless Loop every day


2:55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=175s

They travel within their city, so the only thing that really matters to most people is the design of that City.


3:05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=185s

For example, in the United States, over 45 percent of trips - all trips - are three miles or less (that's five kilometers for the rest of my audience). These are distances that could be easily done by walking or cycling. So despite the size of the country, and the sprawliness of the cities, Americans don't actually travel that far for most trips, but unsurprisingly, almost all of those trips are taken by car because it's too dangerous to walk or cycle, and public transportation is non-existent, which again is the whole point.


4:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=258s

The problem is not cars, it's car dependency. We need to give people the freedom to not to have to drive.


4:35

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=275s

This is where Americans will claim that America is too big for trains, which is absolutely comical, because America was literally built by the railroads, and so was Canada.


5:01

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=301s

Nearly every town, city and village in the United States and Canada had a train station and was connected by rail, with very few exceptions. And almost every city and town had a streetcar line too, with very few exceptions. And every one of those places was built to be walkable, as every one of those places was built before automobiles were common. Again, with very few exceptions.

A hundred years ago, you could get a train from almost any city to just about any other city on the continent, and even many towns and villages, too. The reason those train stations don't exist anymore is because they were bulldozed, often to make room for highways, along with the walkable downtowns they were connected to.


5:46

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=346s

American cities were not built for the car, they were bulldozed for the car.


6:03

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=363s

There are dozens of city pairs in the U.S that are the perfect population and distance for high-speed rail or high frequency rail, and CityNerd has made a video about this if you'd like more details.


6:16

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=376s

Canada may be a huge country, but about 50 percent of the entire population lives in this little area, which is literally in a line.


6:27

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=387s

This is Japan to scale, the country famous for all it's trains. So yes, Canada, you can build a high-speed train between Toronto and Montreal.


6:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=397s

Here's China with it's high-speed rail map.


7:17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=437s

The Schengen zone is not constant and new countries are being added every few years. For example, Croatia was just added in 2023 and Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus and Montenegro plan to join in the near future. But if that happens, will Amsterdam need to tear up all their bike lanes, because the Schengen zone is too big? No, of course not, that would be stupid. Which is the same reason why saying America is too big for bike lanes is also stupid.


7:45

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=465s

The fact is, it is possible to build walkable neighborhoods everywhere. They have existed in every country on Earth for thousands of years, and it is possible to connect those walkable places together by high quality public transportation, to make it so that people can go from any walkable area to any other walkable area regardless of the size of the city the country or the continent.


8:18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=498s

Even if size did matter, then why isn't Maryland covered in bike lanes and train tracks, or Hawaii, or Prince Edward Island?


10:22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=622s

The United States destroys over 750'000 acres of natural and agricultural land every year [note: the source talks about 1,200 square miles] to build sprawling suburbs. And Ontario, Canada (where I'm from) destroys 175 acres of farmland per day to build more car-dependent suburbia. That is a choice.


10:43

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=643s

When Americans say something like "U.S cities are too big and spread out to do - whatever" then yes, that's true. But that is literally the problem that urbanists are trying to solve, so it's not really helpful to restate the problem, and then use that as the excuse as to why it can't be solved.


11:26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REni8Oi1QJQ&t=686s

The Dutch make great places, while North Americans make excuses.

view more: next ›