I use Jebora and am happy, is there something important I’m missing? I was a Reddit is Fun user before and I like both because of how simple and basic they are. I hated the official reddit app for the reasons above.
Edit: the one thing I don’t like is you can’t, or I don’t know how, to collapse all child comments.
Haha, you know what, you’re probably right. But I was very nice about it. And it could be one of OPs favorite dishes. Lots of people share photos of every meal they eat on Facebook, so why not here? I’ll retract my statement.
This is easily explained like most anti EV articles.
Don’t forget about alternate motivations (money and power). We know that there is an extreme amount of money put into tricking the public to not buy EVs from many organizations (Political, gas and oil companies, countries depending on gas and oil production… Etc). Check the source - it’s Faux news… Red flag
does this make sense, do we have a comparison? Surely this can’t be the first time EVs were cold. I live in Europe, and I know the Nordic countries have tons of EVs. When I was in Iceland during the winter, I rented a EV and it was fucking cold. Mine was fine, they all are fine despite likely worse conditions… This article may have some seeds of truth somewhere but sounds like bullshit.
I’m Curious. it looks very very symmetrical. What asymmetrical part are you talking about? The lights in the windows?
It’s likely a inky cap. They get gross and black drippy when they age. Edible when young, but never to be eaten with alcohol as they are then toxic. Best to avoid.
Coprinopsis atramentaria
Anyone know or can find who funds them? I can’t.
Yes and no. It is not in your face anti EV, that would be too obvious and it does not need to be. Answer a few questions for yourself (don’t worry answering them to me).
Will this article make people want to buy a EV as their only car?
Is this article mostly for or against EVs? Would you say it’s 80 or 90 percent about the problems of owning a EV?
Does this article have fair criticism of gas cars and gas Infrastructure in wild fires? Do they even mention the issues with gas cars and fires?
Will people question the safety of a EV after reading this?
They address peoples personal safety while charging, specifically for woman (the most likely buyer of a EV). They talk about back areas, poorly lit places where you are alone and they could be dangerous. How will this make women feel when considering their next car purchase?
The US like everywhere has a history of nearly 100% gas cars and gas car infrastructure. To have a article pointing out that gas car infrastructure is better than electric vehicles infrastructure is shortly said as no shit, how is that not obvious? So then what’s the point of pointing out the obvious? More importantly what’s the cause of pointing this out? More people will consider not buying a EV. When less people buy a EV there will be less infrastructure for them. See where this is going?
I get it, you feel like we need to talk about the problem to fix them. But do we? Is this not obvious already? Do we all not know that taking a EV into remote areas and wildfires may not the the best of ideas?
EVs are great in 999 ways out of 1000, but let’s find one extreme example of how they may not work perfectly in extreme conditions that won’t happen to the majority of people. There are obvious bias things in the article, as with many anti-EV articles as gas companies pour millions every year into anti-EV articles. Do they mention gas stations are turned off around fires for obvious reasons so gas vehicles also have issues - nope. There are simple obvious solutions around this that are simply not presented.
It just reminds me of an article that I read everywhere about how a tesla blew up. Nearly every article talked about it like it just spontaneously blew up. Nearly no article mentioned that it blew up after it collided into a huge boulder on the road. Nor did they mention that the driver was totally fine as it caught fire half an hour after the accident. Or the obvious, that gas cars can also blow up but they slam into a boulder at high speeds.
Correct, my bad, just googled it. we need 1.75 earth’s to sustain us, not 2… 😂 But that doesn’t change that we only have one. If everyone lived like the people in the US (which is the global direction of things) we would need 4 earth’s. Four earth’s!
And you and I can give our opinions about population growth or decline but what is the professional concensus on the topic? Are we projecting a decline or growth in the next 50 years? Or 100 years?
Got any solutions for when too many people are in one place and not enough in another? I know immigration is scary for some people, but they can get over it. I can think of a few counties that have already.
Many populations are in decrease but is that a bad thing? At our current population and consumption rate we would need over two earth’s to sustain us. We’re destroying rainforests for their land, our rivers are going dry because of agricultural usage, we have fished many parts of the ocean to a point of collapse. Imagine if we had to feed, cloth and house one billion less people. Yay. Would it be hard economically, yep, but we should still do it.
Why does our population have to always be sharply growing forever? Isn’t there enough humans? We are a plague that’s starting to kill it’s host already.
I haven’t looked it up but these websites and programs are always funded by huge shitty companies as the rich loose money and power with population decline. We are not running out of people on this earth. We have taken over nearly all of it for us and our food. Would it really be so bad if there was 1 billion less people? Would climate change be better? Yep. Would there be more resources for everyone? Yep. Our over usage of water would be fixed. Simply having less of us would make so many things better.
Population decline needs to happen, it’s foolish to think we can keep increasing forever.
Yeah… But not just reading. If found that I have to explain extremely basic story plots or what happened in a movie to people. Like they never watched anything that happened in it.
Yeah and no. Cows eat about 2% of their weight each day. Over 98% of this comes from food that we grow for them. It’s true that a lot of it we humans wouldn’t eat, but we still grow it for them to eat. The idea of cows eating grass in a field and that’s what they eat is extremely rare.
For the US as a example less than 1% of the cows feed is grass. The majority of things like soy (77% of what is grown and we could eat) goes to cow feed.
“There were about 92 million head of cattle in the United States at the end of 2015, with roughly 30 million head slaughtered that year. For perspective, the grass-fed industry currently slaughters about 230,000 head, or less than 1% of the total conventional slaughter.”
Ohhh I most definitely am in a bubble. But it’s also just common sense. You have to produce plant food, then ship the food to cows for them to eat and grow then to be killed and eaten. And it’s not like you put 60 kilos in and you get 60 kilos of meat. Just look at yourself for an example. So it’s only natural that if you simply feed the plants to the humans it would be better in every way. People should know this shit mate.
I asked how bad this really is: to produce one kilogram of beef requires 25 kilograms of grain – to feed the animal – and roughly 15,000 litres of water
No shit? Is this not obvious and generally understood?
Unlike spiders, Daddy Longlegs don’t spin webs because they do not produce silk. Daddy Long Legs actually have only two eyes unlike spiders who have eight. Another difference is that Daddy Longlegs are not venomous. They do not have fangs or venom glands. - from Google.
I miss communities that I can ask a question to. When I have a problem with a plant, or a legal issue in Japan, or a question about bike brakes… It’s nice to have someone to talk to about it that knows more than I do.
All child comments, the entire post. It makes finding things easier then going into the replys if I want to. Usually child comments are less helpful.