I mean, you can’t really say that we’re going to drive ourselves to extinction, until we’ve been driven to extinction. Most things people list as likely to do this, climate change, nuclear war, are things that could conceivably do so, but honestly aren’t likely to. Destroy civilization maybe, but that just takes disrupting supply lines hard enough. Extinction means nobody, anywhere on the planet survives, even if it’s some little pocket of people in some corner of the world whose climate is good after warming is considered and which isn’t a target of any nuclear arsenals, because in a number of generations such a little pocket can grow to repopulate the planet again. It’s not an impossible thing for sure, but killing off a species capable of surviving in almost any climate zone found on the planet, with the ability to manipulate the growth of it’s own food supply, and adapt new tools actively in response to problems within a single generation, is a difficult task.

I dont think Ive ever even pretended to think they are, for me children, especially babies and toddlers, give me a pretty bad case of the uncanny valley effect and look eerie and cause discomfort, as well as anxiety since Im even less sure than usual what they’re going to do and dont want someone’s kid getting hurt because of something I failed to notice. I dont hold it against them or hate children for it, its not their fault after all, but I do try to avoid being around them where practical.

Doesn’t it demonstrate that the actual dinos in real life don’t have to be big to be popular, because humans will simply portray them how they want to see and bring interest in the species regardless?

I mean, raptors

If they’re calling a brain their original processor, these robots could be a result of successful transhumanism rather than conventional robots, ie, they could be humans that have made themselves into robots, rather than robots built for some specific purpose. In that case, they might create child robots and grow them over time to reproduce, just because they find that mode of reproduction familiar and wish to continue it.

that goes against the whole concept of a cure though. Like, if you kill someone that has the flu, they wont have the flu anymore, but that doesnt mean death cures the flu.

1442? surprised its not 1444

Space.

Ah, sounds like someone going for the herostratus approach to fame

Israel is not Judaism and criticism of it is not criticism of Jewish people as a whole. To hold otherwise is to hold an entire people responsible for the actions of a few (those in the Israeli government), that those people often have no or only limited influence over, which would be an inherently bigoted position to take because it robs those people of their agency. If anything, the Israeli government itself is being antisemitic in a sense by pushing such a narrative in order to use Jewish people as a whole as a shield against criticism of their actions.

I think you have an unrealistic estimation of how much most people understand the topic of communism, if you think not labelling different types of communism as the same ideology is living under a rock. More than half the country doesn’t even realize that socialism and communism aren’t complete synonyms, and a good fraction think paradoxically that center right liberalism is somehow communist.

Basically, I think you’re doing this: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/average_familiarity_2x.png

In what sense is this semantics or bad faith? I meant this sincerely.

As I understand it, “real communism” is supposed to be some kind of stateless society. As the GDR was, well, a state, it clearly did not achieve that. Nor would it ever have been likely to, as actually doing what was ideologically promised would have required those with power within that system to relinquish that power, which is incredibly rare as it conflicts with human nature.

I’m guessing you misread the title as animals instead of mammals, and then didn’t read the actual post text

Not sure why nobody would expect an italian inquisition of food, they literally have a unit in one of their law enforcement agencies trained to do things like find fake extra-virgin olive oil. Ive seen people jokingly call it “the italian food police” even. If anybody was going to run a food inquisition, itd be the italians

Youre wrong on all counts there, but most importantly to the actual topic of discussion, a negotiated settlement in which the aggressor is just given some of the territory they are attempting to conquer (which is exactly what a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia as the war has gone thus far would have been, because what else could Ukraine have possibly offered to convince Russia that it was worth it to give up their attack?) is not a wish for peace, its a wish for appeasement. It sounds like peace at first glance, sure, but by rewarding aggressive action, it gives every incentive for the aggressor to simply attack again later, in the hope of gaining more concessions. If this kind of policy led to peace, there never would have been a second world war. I do not like war the way you seem to think, but I do not want it tomorrow either. Ensuring that there is as little incentive as possible for those with the means to start them to do so, requires that those that start wars are not allowed to gain by doing so, and Russia has indisputably started this one, therefore to ensure peace, it must lose.

It would be great if all peace took was for everyone involved to sit down and talk, but as you say, the world is not like that.

Is that really the best response you can think of?

-“Give me your home.”

“Wtf, no!”

-“Well then I’ll kill you for it then”

Some random observer: “I wish they’d negotiated and just given the guy half of their home, then we’d not be in this situation…”

One of their first rockets was a slightly modified copy of the German v-2 rocket, which was fuelled by alcohol. Unsure what the soviets made their alcohol fuel out of, but it would at least have been possible to make that with potatoes…

I mean, until the next train comes that is