Something like this already happened when we traded the long-term health and fertility of the topsoil for the immediate high yield output of artificially fertilized crops.

By outsourcing the repleneshment of fertility to the relatively fragile and unreliable supply chains and social organisations of man, we assumed management over a delicate balance which previously belonged to nature.

I’m not arguing against industrial agriculture and its commodification of fertiliser by the way. If carefully managed it’s possible to imagine an endpoint of equilibrium where global supply chains increase total system fertility by selectively resting soil and relying more on imports to then switch once local fertility peaks and so on. Really just sane and unmolested market forces should in theory discover such a negotiated endpoint.

Fertility alone is not descriptive enough to capture, say, the importance of biological diversity or the load bearing capacity of local environments to support ecosystems, while also producing exportable outputs suitable for maintaining population growth in humanity.

Perennial crops are also ridiculously underused in overall food supply chains. They are more difficult to monetize in existing commodity forms because their overall system value is not captured numerically.

I don’t have an overall solution, but any solution will require at its core a way to assign value to the work which nature already does to replenish its own local fertility and to price that effect very cautiously in such a way that it becomes cheaper for intensive producers to rest unfertile soil until it becomes fertile than it is to compensate for unproductive soil by importing chemical fertiliser from somewhere else

this guy can still eat nuts and here he is complaining… smdh

not really, this place basically is reddit only with a smaller user base and even more of a sanctimonious-liberal-PMC kind of vibe. If this became a place that cared about and defended free speech it would destroy the hugbox and alienate their core users, who themselves are reddit refugees. This isn’t really a good place for difficult discussions which deviate too strongly from accepted mainstream talking points. It’s more a place of comfort for people who are exhausted by the relentless nightmare that is modern life.

What would we even argue about? which products are better to purchase? which form of labor pleases oir employers and landlords the most?

in the 1990s we would gather in giant rooms full of people smoking cigarettes, and we would put small metal discs into machines so we could yell at people for sucking at video games in person and it was a kind of church for many

did you see the modern adult swim seasons? i loved the OG episodes and haven’t gotten around to seeing them yet

here’s a few i haven’t seen mentioned yet:

oz - uncompromising US prison drama

garth merenghi’s darkplace - deadpan british tele-horror parody

the mighty boosh - absurdist musical stage-theatre from the UK

dirk gently’s holistic detective agency - fast-paced comedy with an interesting premise that plays out like a douglas adams novel

happy - netflix series which combines a gritty procedural crime-drama with a cartoon mascot. Very violent and dark humour

it’s more than simple bias, larry sanger knows that and i suspect that you do as well.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/pro-israel-activists-blacklist-mintpress-wikipedia/261022/

It is routinely claimed that the ‘tankman’ was killed by the tank right after the clip that is usually shown ends. The full video shows that he left along with others who convinced him to leave. You might not be making that claim, but that was what the anti-chinese propaganda claimed for decades.

The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that the massacre in fact happened. What exists in video form is a man standing in front of a tank and then NOT being killed. Despite many many lies sugfesting otherwise. It seems like you don’t participate in that particular lie, while still uncritically accepting the rest of the narrative. Perhaps if one major detail of the story is false other details of the story are also false? i guess we’ll just have to trust that the same three-letter agencies who have every reason and motive to undermine chinese sovereignty are in this particular case trustworthy.

I mention the burning to death of unarmed police to illustrate to you which side was the more violent and unrestrained. Violence which is characteristic of foreign regime-change operations and hybrid warfare.

I want to defund the police and reform the organisation to serve the people, there’s enough room within this worldview to not be burning cops alive (and i must stress again that they were not armed with lethal force).

You say that you aren’t a normie but then uncritically accept an obviously distorted version of history which has been constructed to serve western imperial interests.

Maybe you’re an operator who does actually know the truth but lies about it professionally. In that case i’m sorry for inaccurately describing you as a normie, when really you would be a glowie.

but just in case you are actually just a normie in denial here’s a thing to read

So if you’ve watched the full ‘tankman’ footage you would know that he wasn’t killed by a tank or by anything else in that video. You can believe decades and decades of breathless propaganda coming directly out of the NED and the other usual characters, or you can believe your own lying eyes.

It’s sufficient to assume that if this one important image was essentially a lie, then many other aspects of the story are also manufactured. For example did you know that many dozens of police officers (who were unarmed) were burnt to death by the student protestors? did you know that the leaders of the student protests were coordinating with and were paid by western intelligence agencies? Did you know that literally nancy pelosi was on the ground during those protests?

do you know anything other than what imperialist propaganda has directed you to ‘know’?

I’d rather be a tankie than a normie

how about one of the original creators of wikipedia no longer using his own software and encouraging everyone to also not use it? he claims that the cia have been using it as a tool of information warfare since 2007

I will admit that for shallow questions like ‘did this thing happen in this year’? wikipedia can sometimes be more useful than a plain search engine, also sometimes from wikipedia you can find links to real sources which can also be useful.

*when you live your whole life under the effect of unilateral sanctions, designed specifically to punish civilians living their life in order to create political change (aka terrorism)

just in case anyone here doesn’t already know, the death toll from the US-Israel bombing of the elementary girls school is currently at 164 with dozens more wounded. Victims are mostly little girls aged 9-12.

For some reason our western media seems reluctant to spread this basic factual information…

*edited US to US-Israel so that it’s super duper accurate

the ‘no domestic surveillance’ is just language that mirrors some limitations (from their pov) from the patriot act. They’re still willing to surveil people outside the USA, and in fact all they have to do is route domestic traffic through an international part of a network and they can legally spy on domestic americans which is what already happens.

this isn’t 1995 man, you can just watch the full video of that not happening anytime you like

how much data do the FBI get from telegram? do you think the russian owner (who got arrested in france for refusing to make changes demanded of him by glowing authorities) is very likely to give any of your info over to american 3 letter agencies?

the minimum would be transparency for the algorithm. If users can see exactly what a social media algorithm is doing with their content feed, they would always have a way to identify and escape dark patterns of addiction.

But this minimum itself would require powers to compel tech companies to give up what they would describe as intellectual property. Which would probably require a digital bill of rights?

The most practical option would be to just ask your kids directly about the kinds of content they’ve been consuming and why. Dinner table conversations can probably reveal those dark patterns just as well