deleted by creator

You can use command + shift + full stop to toggle hidden files and folders, if I recall correctly.

Yeah, but thats a fundamental problem from a UX standpoint. If you’re a software developer who needs to work with those files and folders, you can easily run into issues where you don’t even realize that there are files there that are causing problems (or that you changing or deleting might cause problems with).

There’s no way of globally enabling hidden files and folders, there’s a terminal command that does it for vanilla finder windows, but none for the finder file picker windows that apps use.

Unclear if it’s hardware or MacOS, but despite having the graphical horsepower to push enough pixels, Macs are limited to two external monitors unless you buy the multi thousand dollar Max processor.

It doesn’t support high quality Bluetooth audio codecs like AptX.

It doesn’t natively support Google cast or Miracast.

It doesn’t support sub pixel text rendering so text looks like trash on 1080p LCD monitors.

Yeah, I’m not talking about developing new computer technologies as utter bullshit, I’m talking about the trillions spent on advertising for instance, or social media platforms.

This isn’t really true. It’s kind of true for scientists because by their nature, they work on discovering new things, but even still, the amount we know and understand about say, physics and chemistry, is way way way greater than biology.

Like for physics and chemistry we have a very rock solid understanding of how the vast majority of reactions and interactions that effect the universe at our scale, work. Most of what physicists and chemists are learning these days is at the outer edges of what’s physically possible or studying, there’s very few questions left about common, day to day reactions, those are so well understood that they’re considered engineering and not science anymore.

But that’s not the case for biology. We still don’t understand very basic elementary things about the human body and what parts of it even do, let alone the wider, non human biological world. There is truly more unknowns in biology than the other sciences.

Man, it’s so wild how little we know about biology and how much we as a society spend on absolute, utter, bullshit, instead of figuring out how just the basics of us work.

I know it was never possible before modern computers, labs, and equipment, but we really should have like 1000x the amount of basic biological research going on that we do.

With streaming service password crackdowns I keep thinking that virtually bridging your family and friends networks might be the solution, but don’t understand modern networking well enough to know where the flaws might be.

It’s also the basis of many hit books, action movies, and video games.

Notice how all of those numbers are substantially larger or smaller, by many orders of magnitude, than a couple of hundred.

Are you intentionally trying to avoid understanding what I’m writing?

Yes, it’s this little thing called context, thresholds, and relative magnitude.

If your brain is only evolved to process numbers up to a hundred or two, then everything 10000+ is similarly processed through abstractions rather than your brain being able to directly comprehend and compare them.

If instead of asking a guffawing question, you actually tried to point out why my reasoning was flawed, you may have realized those basic aspects of how language and reasoning work on your own.

Being factually incorrect about literally everything you said changes nothing? Okay.

Yeah bruh, it’s this little thing called being pedantic.

If I say wealth inequality is crazy, no one should have 250 billion dollars, and you say ‘well actually Jeff Bezos only has 210 billion dollars’, then I will be factually incorrect and my point will still be completely valid.

That changes literally nothing of what I said. Your brain did not evolve to process those scales accurately. If you think you can, that just means you’re lacking in self reflection.

Because pop science articles often throw out bullshit like “blowing your nose can cause you to expel over 100 germs” because they know that 100 sounds like a big number and will get clicks.

People not questioning the actual context and meaning behind those numbers and how they connect back to something we actually care about leads to a lot of bullshit science reporting.

Lmao, bruh here thinks his brain evolved to process scales of millions and comprehend a nanometer.

Are you a special unique bro different from everyone else?

Til that OP has no concept of what a particle is or how small it is or how many of them there are in any given scenario because our brains did not evolve to process that kind of scale accurately.

While I agree with the ethical considerations here, there’s a reason there are laws about slaughtering animals. Unless you’re killing sick animals, I don’t think a hobbyist hunter is going to give their targets a swift and painless death every time.

If you think a factory farm where thousands of animals are slammed into cages next to each other watching their peers get slaughtered, is more ethical than shooting a solitary moose and getting several hundred pounds of meat then you are not arguing honestly or actually thinking through the scenario.

Quite frankly it doesn’t matter whether or not it’s a clean kill, it’s still more ethical per pound of meat by orders of magnitude even if it’s not, and your guess that most hunters don’t get clean kills is pretty based on nothing to begin with.

I’m specifically talking about the extra steps required to kill something personally. Which is why I tried to avoid talking about meat consumption in the post. And you and several other people ignored that.

Yes, because those extra steps, are just extra steps along the exact same spectrum of disassociation that everyone who eats meat undergoes.

You are trying to draw a line in the sand and then arrange a question around that line, and you can’t seem to comprehend it when everyone points out that the line is stupid and doesn’t exist anywhere but your own mind.

But I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by that behavior from people that think torturing fish is a fun activity.

I see that your reading comprehension is about as strong as your social skills.

If you think not eating meat from a grocery store is a good thing, then you should be asking yourself about why you do it on days you don’t fish. Otherwise, it comes off as something like: pickpocketing is bad, so I pat myself on the back every time I don’t do it.

Like I said, I do. You’re the one who said you didn’t think consumption was psychopathic. Why do you draw a line?

Either all aspects of meat consumption are inherently psychopathic or none inherently are. And if your definition of psychopathy includes all meat eaters, then maybe it’s not the most useful way of defining it.

Lol, bruh you go online and order a fishing license and it shows up in the mail a few days later. It took me under a minute of effort to do it a few months ago.

I know it’s hyperbole, but it takes more than ten minutes to get a license because you are have to go to the place that issues them or wait days if it’s a mail thing. Relatively cheap is very different from not buying at all. So there’s any amount of effort and output of money done in anticipation of the stalking/killing/eviscerating. It’s not the relative cost compared to camping that’s in question.

Do you eat meat? Because I eat meat, so the days I spent fishing and ate no grocery store meat was a net positive for the world. I don’t enjoy it, but I will nut up and do the killing if it makes the world a better place and the alternative was to force someone else to do it, and I did enjoy spending several days out in nature with my friends and family, mostly catching and releasing fish.

Personally I try and eat increasingly vegetarian and prefer canoeing and portaging trips where you spend time in nature and the effort goes into hauling all your shit through somewhere, but it’s not easy to do that everywhere, and I eat enough meat that I’m not going to get on my high horse and poo poo a friends’ fishing trip if they want to go.

Cognitive dissonance vis a vis actively gearing up, getting a license, and taking the time to hunt are different things and I only have an unpopular opinion on the latter.

Why would that require cognitive dissonance? A) cognitive dissonance isn’t the right term, there’s no two conflicting things that that requires you to believe and B) None of that is hard or unpleasant. It takes like 10min to get a fishing license, fishing rods and tackle are relatively cheap compared to most other camping gear and people love obsessing over and buying new camping gear and then spending time in nature with their friends.

The only part that requires mental disassociation is killing an animal, then cleaning it, then butchering it, then eating it. Why do you draw the disassociation line at the killing and cleaning, but not the butchering and eating?