arrow74
@arrow74@lemmy.zip
- Comment on ICE's 'Frightening' Facial Recognition App is Scanning US Citizens Without Their Consent 6 hours ago:
I also gear beards still confuse the system so that’s nice
- Comment on What are you ladies doing tonight 5 days ago:
Pretty much yeah. I know the nozzle is dirty, but that’s just food stuff. Plus it’s a problem even with the regular fountain.
The grime and snot on the screen comes from unknown sources. I don’t like that
- Comment on What are you ladies doing tonight 5 days ago:
I enjoy the cloaca for the liquid choices and varities it provides.
My only complaint is the screen is never clean
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
The initial claim that started this all is that there is not a better system and some rather bold claims about human nature.
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
My claim is that raiding other humans and taking their things was common
This is shifting the goal posts. The statement I initially made was that humans for the majority of history were egalitarian and less violent. This is still true. This statement you provided is true to a specific portion of human history that does not make up the majority.
If the argument is now that a society creating excess leads to violence and raiding we also have evidence of cultures that have not done that.
There’s also an issue with the argument that hunter gatherer societies had nothing of value to take. That idea relies heavily on our modern ideas on what is worth trying to take. For example sometimes people would travel, or possibly trade, with quarry sites hundreds of kilometers away. Having quality stone means being able to feed yourself and your group. Sounds quite valuable, but we don’t see violence increase as you move away from these sites. The same can be said for virtually every limited resource in the distant past.
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
Yeah I’m only an archaeologist.
I’d like to explain what you’re missing in detail, but truthfully it would take a course in it of itself. I’ll try to be concise.
Simply put all evidence that we have points to humans living relatively egalitarian and peacefully for the majority of our history. We additionally have early evidence of trade.
Now there is, with all things, nuance. For the past 10,000 or so years evidence points to humans being very violent to one another and we have seen an increase in social stratification. However, in the modern era violence is on a downward trend relative to the total human population. Social stratification is obviously not.
Skeletal evidence is our best, but we also have evidence in the form of more traditional artifacts.
To be clear I’m not saying we can tell you every human in a hunter gatherer group carried the same social status or that people never killed each other. Obviously not, but what I can tell you is that every member of the group had access to the same nutrition and that evidence of violent skeletal trauma is significantly less prevalent than after the advent of agriculture. There is also significant evidence of trade prior to evidence of mass warfare.
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
Your understanding of human history is lacking depth and inaccurate
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
Well considering for the majority of humanity’s existence we existed in largely egalitarian societies I think it’s up to you to prove this is working.
I’m not going to downplay modern medicine and our technological advancements. Capitalism had a role to play in that is just a shame kids in the 3rd world had to starve or die in mines for it to happen. I think we could’ve come up with a better system than that.
- Comment on The Sodium-Ion Battery Revolution Has Started 1 week ago:
In short, people tend to be motivated by profit
Only in a society that commodifies your existence and success based on the wealth you generate/hold
- Comment on Carrot 1 week ago:
Oh boy do I have bad news for you.
Basically everything in your environment is covered in human poop.
If you bring a carrot into your home it has way less poop on it than your toothbrush.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
The math does several limit the possible number of births. Only about 1,000 of those people would have been female and even if we’re generous and assume 80% were of child bearing age that gives you 800 women that could have children.
That’s going to be an incredibly low birth rate and it’s very unlikely each woman would be having a child each year.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
From my understanding of the subject the current consensus is the bottleneck did happen. There’s been fluctuations in the exact number, but under 5,000 is what is most widely supported.
The only debate I’m aware of is the exact timing and cause of the bottle neck. It was widely believed a volcano eruption was responsible, but that has become more discredited. It appears the population decline occurred before the eruption and took a significant amount of time to climb after the eruption.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
Unfortunately that’s still not quite right.
The individual was, potentially, “evolved”. But the population “reverted” back.
Individuals cannot evolve, but more importantly there is no “reverting back” evolution moves in one direction. It’s the slow slow change in the genetics genetics of an entire population.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abq7487
It’s been significantly lower than 10,000 at least once in history.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
Unfortunately no it does not mean that. At least according to the current science of taphonomy.
Populations evolve, individuals do not. Individuals can have genetic mutations that improve their ability to reproduce which impacts evolution.
Parents of one species cannot give birth to a new species. Sure their offspring may look closer to what we associate with one species or another, but those genetics are held within the parents and greater population. You can have an individual born that appeared strikingly like a modern human, but if their population hasn’t genetically changed enough their offspring go right back to looking just like any other precursor to modern humans.
It’s messy and annoying. People love to have a definitive starting and ending point, but thr world juat doesn’t work that way. There’s are reason the start of a new species is given as an estimate that ranges tens of thousands to even sometimes hundreds of thousands years.
Although there are lots of ongoing arguments on where we draw these lines because it is arbitrary to a degree. However, there is absolutely no acceptance that parents of one species can give birth to another. That just isn’t evolution.
Now that’s the scientific answer. I think the more philosophical questions around what is human is much more interesting. Where should that line be drawn in our deep past? When is the psyche truly human?
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
So in my professional opinion I’d say no. I studied anthropology and work in Archaeology.
Evolution just isn’t simply fast enough to do that. It’s a very very slow series of changes. There would never be a point that two homo erectus would have given birth to a modern human. Eventually the populations would so much genetically we would then arbitrarily classify them as human, but it would be on a population scale.
So yeah there was never just 1 human.
Honestly this demonstrates the flaws of how we try to arbitrarily classify species.
- Comment on At somepoint in human history there was likely a day where not a single human died. 2 weeks ago:
Nope, just a day where there were people alive and no one died.
It’s really only possible once the population gets lower. So it could also be possible in the future too
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 31 comments
- Comment on What if we were *just a lil evil*? 4 weeks ago:
Agree, killing to survive is evil, but it’s something that humans have done for centuries. In the case of vampires they have to to survive. No one wants to die. Still bad though.
Megacorps kill people to make their shareholders more wealthy. They could just not and still be wealthy, but they want more. That’s just pure unnecessary greed and way more evil
- Comment on geography is neat 4 weeks ago:
They should make a national treasure movie about this
- Comment on A conundrum 1 month ago:
Once again everyone knows that is debt. Of course it is debt.
It just so happens to be the lowest interest form of debt you can take and even when added with an existing mortgage payment ia still insanely cheaper than comparable rents for the same property.
My statement is “yes homes have maintenance and that can come at unexpected costs. However you can access low interest debt if you need to. And even if you do you’ll still pay less than renting a comparable property for the same amount of time”
Please consider the whole and dont just take snippets out of context. Homes come with costs, still way cheaper than renting. You don’t have to take out a loan for home maintenance. You can, but you don’t have to.
- Comment on A conundrum 1 month ago:
I never said it was free and I never said it wasn’t a debt. Like obviously it is a debt, anyone that reads “tapping into home equity” as meaning free money doesn’t understand basic finance.
It doesn’t have to extend your mortgage. You can take it out as a second line of credit as an additional loan to pay back monthly. Obviously the ideal would be to have the savings to cover necessary home repairs, but if you don’t this is typically the cheapest way to get a loan to do necessary maintenance.
Sounds like your sister used her equity to refinance her loan and recieved a payout for the difference. That’s going to restart your mortgage and is probably not the best way to go about accessing home equity.
So yeah don’t take on reckless debt you can’t payback. You can responsibly use your home equity for maintenance if you need to though.
- Comment on A conundrum 1 month ago:
I personally grew up quite impoverished and me and my wife did manage to get our home in medium COL area. We don’t have exceptionally high paying jobs nor did we have any help from our families. We just made a lot of effort to build our credit. We’re also not old at all under 30 to not dox myself too much.
A lot of people simply have some wrong assumptions about the amount needed to get a loan. We put down 3%, sure we didn’t get the most competitive rate and our payment is higher, but it worked out to the cost of our then comparable rent. There’s quite a few federal programs that ensure the opportunity for a low downpayment mortgage for first time homeowners.
- Comment on A conundrum 1 month ago:
I always find this to be such a poor argument.
Yes unexpected maintenance can sometimes be a huge problem, especially in the first couple of years, but after that you can tap into home equity and repair say a roof. Everything else while expensive is still cheaper than renting. Using the OP’s example 1k vs 500, I can assure you you will never have consistent 500 repairs per month.
As for the taxes my city nearly went ballistic when the city increase the rate by 5%. At the end of the year it costed me $200. Per month that’s about $16. I’ve never lived in any apartment anywhere where rent didn’t increase by at least $50 per month each year. Even if someone had a home twice as valuable that’s still a very small monthly cost.
Additional once you get past the first 3ish years rent prices have greatly outpaced your mortgage and you will be saving a lot of money compared to of you were renting.
I’d like to wrap up with a question. If owning a home was such a sink of resources why do people become landlords?
- Comment on Step 1: Delete 1 month ago:
I worked at a pet store back in college and this old lady would sometimes come in and load 2 carts top to bottom with temptations. She said it was the only “food” her cat would eat. I tried to tell her it wasn’t food, but no luck.
I wonder if her situation started in a similar way to your story.
- Comment on ISO 26300 1 month ago:
At least for school assignments this is easily fixed by just opening it yourself in the school library and adjusting format. It’s usually pretty minor.
Honestly most of my professors accepted papers saved as pdfs which was helpful too
- Comment on The duality of man 1 month ago:
Yes it is, the “reality” for 100 years ago was a lie.
Literally 100 years ago was the great depression. The side was “workers should be able to eat” versus “the workers shouldn’t have rights”
Fast forward 40 years and it was “it’s okay to sit next to black people” vs. “Races should not mix and any attempt to do so should be met with extreme violence”
- Comment on holup 1 month ago:
If it makes you feel better this would be an unliveable he’ll hole without AC. The American south is no joke.
- Comment on holup 1 month ago:
I just turn the air down 2 degrees
- Comment on 🦈🦈🦈 2 months ago:
Graded on a curve