I’m still not convinced about this. I have known many teenagers who are more adept than me at making mature decisions (late 20s). So I think we all mature at different rates. I don’t especially believe that there’s a magic time in ones 20s where one becomes especially mature. And if there is, it is likely only a couple % higher in maturity points than at other times in one’s life.

Still, this magic 25 number appears a lot when people are trying to advocate for removing rights from young adults. Like for instance, saying trans people have to be at least 25 to transition. I’m always skeptical of it.

I also believe in the science. That’s why I don’t believe in the developed-at-25 myth. If you look it up online you can see it’s been widely rebuked. Here’s an article from the BBC for instance.

Apologies for the rudeness.

well, you just said the thing I said in reverse. I said, it’s not necessarily a bad thing; and you said: yes it is.

oh don’t tell me you believe in that debunked your-brain-is-fully-developed-at-25 pseudoscience.

I’ve never heard of this before. Where else is this the case?

it’s not necessarily a bad thing for parents to have more voting power than non-parents through this means. Parents would generally be voting with their children’s best interests in mind.

As pointed out on hackernews, this is likely attributed to (a) decrease in desktop usage by non-linux-users, and (b) the gaming hardware industry embracing linux (steam deck etc.)

My initial thought was that it’s surprising that the engineer is using i whereas the mathematician is using j. But I know some engineers who are hardcore in favour of i. No mathematicians who prefer j though. So if such an engineer were dating a mathematician of all people who used j, I could see that being ♠ .

tbh their claim of 99% has no source. So it was really kind of pointless of me to include that link.

Seems likely to me the lunar lander will be there for aeons to come. The pyramids are also still there. The library of Alexandria may have burned, though I don’t think that was inevitable, and many of the written works and treatises from that era still survive. Euclid’s elements is still mathematically correct.

Consider also the negation though – the burning of the library of alexandria still affects us to this day. Aristotle’s views on women and Christianity’s views on homosexuality still persist. Colonialism and slavery over the past millenium has negatively shaped the lives of billions. These are all actions by humans with enormously negative consequences that reverberate in the present. Surely we must admit that these agents had meaningful lives.

And there may have been countless more such catastrophes averted, which we don’t know about because the lack of something bad happening is not terribly newsworthy. But people who stopped such far-reaching catastrophes must surely have had meaningful lives.

Then why did you cite that “nothing lasts” as evidence there is no meaning to life?

I didn’t mean to be critical. I thought it was very funny actually.

I know. It’s just still more than I expected.

Nothing lasts […] are we just amusing ourselves until death?

It seems to me like you are of the opinion that the finiteness of life robs it of meaning. If so, why not contribute to longevity research? It’s only been a couple decades since we learned how telomeres relate to senescence. If enough people work on the problem or donate to it, we very well might be able to crack immortality before you croak. At the very least, that will give you a few more centuries to figure out what the meaning of life is.

You might object that immortality would lead to great wealth inequality, and you’d rather live a finite life than an unfair life. You can only believe this if you believe that the finality of life does not ultimately make life worthless. In which case, why not contribute to the cause of socialism?

I started using LeechBlock to limit the amount of time spent on social media including lemmy, it’s been really helpful. Inspired by this video. Has helped me.

Thanks for this one, a really valuable find:

You’re right to question the boiling. I was thinking of death by suffocation in heated steam. Boiling is not the technically correct term.

Here are some more sources that nearly all livestock live in factory farms: [Our World in Data, PETA,]; there are a lot more I can find searching the web but they mostly seem to link back to the Sentience Institute’s research. OWiD’s is based on SI’s research, and I suspect PETA’s claim is based off SI’s as well. More importantly, I haven’t found any claim that the proportion is lower than 90%, or even anyone challenging SI’s figures. Do you have reason to doubt this? And if so, can you find any source? It seems plausible to me just based on the fact that factory farming is vastly more efficient than other methods, and most people aren’t picky about such things. Just as a prior, I would expect that the vast majority of livestock are found in the most efficient types of farms.

Without any attempt to describe the methodology used for their estimates.

I mean they literally have their calculations available right there as an easily-viewable google sheets link. And the data source is clearly stated: “these estimates use the 2022 Census of Agriculture and EPA definitions of CAFOs to estimate the number of US farmed land vertebrates who are in CAFOs (“factory farms”).”

You’d be trying to get that particular farm shut down, get laws passed to prevent that from happening. But you’re not doing that

Who is not doing that? Me specifically or animal rights people in general? I don’t see why shutting down a particular farm would be very helpful, the scale of the problem is incredibly massive; passing laws would be much more effective. I would like to see laws passed, though, to stop these kinds of abuses. What would make you think I am not interested in that?

I know. It’s still more elephants than I expected.

60 % of mammals are livestock, not 60% live in factory farms

99% of US farmed animals live in factory farms, according to this random website I just found. I don’t claim to be an expert, though, and worldwide is probably lower than than 99%, but I would bet you that the vast majority of livestock is factory-farmed.

Agreed though that not all livestock are factory farmed. I should have clarified.

I’ll point out though that even some non-factory-farmed livestock are likely suffering. Bentham’s Bulldog talks about how hens undergo severe agony:

Egg-laying hens in conventional farms endure about 400 hours (!!!) of this kind of disabling agony. Remember, this is agony about as bad as the worst thing that’s ever happened to you, unless you’ve had an experience as bad as being severely tortured.

(emphasis mine.)

–

A seal in the 4% living in the wild may be eaten alive by a killer whale or torn to shreds by a great white shark.

That’s bad, though probably not anywhere near as much agony as being boiled alive for several hours until one’s death. Regardless of whether you feel morally obligated to reduce wild animal suffering, you should admit that (a) from a utilitarian perspective, it’s much easier to reduce factory farm suffering, and (b) from a deontological perspective, factory farming is (collectively) our fault, whereas the food chain isn’t.

more elephants than I expected tbh