HubertManne

well maybe if he would but like at least whatever he feels like doing can possibly provide value

I mean as long as a license is open source this is sorta a good thing though. If it has enough merit folks will be bound to fork it.

ok yeah when he talked about it sorta fitting in between the cracks. so yeah it is closer to more solid. Thanks that actually wraps my head around why better.

I mean at least initially with things like nightmare host (im making a joke im not sure if dreamhost is still around) you did not need to mess with the mx records if you just went with their built in. We definately had some issues with email getting marked spam or blocked but admitadely that could have been from the services source servers having to much spam coming from it.

he mentions only vertical offset but I don’t see why it could not be done horizontal if the lines are stop/started at regular intervals. Im guessing it would not be stronger though than a continuous line.

This is so wierd given how people were crazy over the cia. This is like a super secret cia with no congressional or judicial oversite that is being given authority and access to all parts of the executive in an unlimited manner. I mean its crazy just writing it out in words.

yeah but so thats the thing. that service still is the one running your email and its likely you are going to get more issues with it being blocked just from being an little used domain. unless you run your own server and deal with the mx records and such.

My problem is the whole change of address thing. Unfortunately google had perfect timing when they offered a decent amount of storage. It was early enough that changing email was no big deal and late enough that soon it would be. I very much don’t like this because if google like just went dark all of a sudden it would be a bad day. Yeah I know its unlikely to the xtreme but still. I know privacy people do not like this idea but I really would like the government to run an email where all citizens are guaranteed one. To me this would make it much easier to have an official one and other emails. I don’t get why folks are ok with corporations doing it and trust that they will use safeguards but don’t trust the government would. The US postal service is a good example. Laws were well made to protect mail to the point where one way of safeguarding things from police searches was to put it in a stamped envelope. Man I wish our current society and government would be doing things like that again.

alright. look. I have put way more into this than I intended to begin with and this argument you have here is just broken from reality and im not going to go further with this discussion.

oh man you do not understand how business/capitalism works. production is based on consumption. no iso facto. its just how it works. companies that make things that are not consumed lose money and go out of business.

regardless the point is its pounds on one feed or another so maybe dairy beef ends up being a bit better but I think its pretty irrelevant in the long run for what we are talking about.

it caused it by creating the demand. It was done to sell to people who consume it. Without the consumption the activity would not have happened.

ok we are getting into economics but it certainly does. food production is not to throw in landfills its to sell to humans. humans who buy create the market to make.

I have seen estimates of one to several years but its possible the one is rounding up. As I said before the big stat is basically pounds of cow created on grass vs pounds created by feed. The reason the cow is moved to the feedlot is they reached the age where they can pack on the pounds.

its the demand for beef that caused this. it most certainly does. it would not have happened if folks had embraced the hippie era and reduced consumption back in the 60’s

ok so the link I have uses industry data. So take that for what you want but for the second part you don’t need a paper. The amazon rainforest was logged to create grazeland for cattle. Sure if the only cattle we ever raised were in areas that are natural grassland it would be a bit different but beef production really screwed the pooch there. Im very suspect of the mostly by product and not feed products given we grow a ton of feed. I have never seen any numbers to support most of their lives grazing. I have seen one year grazine and few years in the feed lot. More importantly you have to take into the weight difference from birth to feedlot and start of feedlot to end of feedlot. Im 100% that animals are inefficient as we do them now. as the same goes for chickens which become much better if they are basically just scavengers. There is absolutely no way the level of meat, cheese, and eggs could be supported on animals just eating and using land in a natural state though.

I mean in the mix I have the food conversion link and that data as I said is industry data so im not sure if that suffices. I think we just sorta went on a tangent with the one paper. Its the most straight forward anyway for the vegan vs meat reduction. vegan being 1/1 usage of plant matter and chicken 1/3, pork 1/6., beef 1/14. I mean that as averages and there is variability especialin in beef but even in chicken worse case to beef best case it wins out and average conversion your looking at four fold efficiency so bascially if you can get X number of people to be vegans getting 4X people to limit themselves to chicken should have the same effect and anything more is gravy. My point way back with militant vegans is they will harras the idea of reducing meat because everyone should become vegan but from my experience limiting meat intake to chicken and/or reducing meat in general is much more likely with folks and much more likely to get in large numbers so they are sorta working against themselves. I mean americans eat a rediculous amounts of beef. All meat really but mainly due to fast food a lot of beef. To give a real world example my wife and I are not vegan but we do eat mainly chicken and pork and now we will split a chicken breast between us in a typical dinner. Compared to what we ate two decades ago or I think even worse when we were young and unmarried and like a dozen of our current selves would have to go vegan to get the same effect. None of that is obviously and exact thing as im averaging and using a bit of guestimating but I hope the gist comes out.

ok I think we have a few issues here. Firstly I am not even sure if any of the things I was talking about get their data from poore and nemecek wich as far as I can tell is about co2 from the little I have access to them. So its sorta a tangent for me to begin with. I think now I get that you are reference references that the poore and nemecek paper uses to show the data is limited in how it can be used. Ok so im a guy on the internet and while I do have some experience with evaluating scientific papers I don’t do it in my current day to day and im quite frankly not going to. I do know that it is common for a paper to mention limitations of its study but that does not invalidate a paper that uses it as a reference. At the end of the day its great you have an issue but its not enough for me to throw out common data from relatively reputable sources when I can’t find any more professional critiques and thats even assuming the paper you pulled out is source data for it which it may not be. You did successfully get me to go look at a lot of things again and I posted links so its not a total waste but look. Im pretty much done. You have not convinced me that articles are working with flawed data.

do you have a link to that.? I don’t get how you expect me to do this if you don’t think I use a search engine to find it.

Ok. again Im trying my best here but maybe im just not finding what you find from google searching. Nothing like an an original article in its entirety is coming up for me.