prohibiting substances does not have a great track record in terms of either effectiveness or collateral damage

he doesn't it's a terrible machine learning upscale. which is a weird choice because The Matrix is available in high resolution so whoever upscaled it could have just pulled a better still

Allowing the scooters to be left on the ground is completely down to (lack of) regulation in the municipalities. the same scooter company in the same country in:

• city A: completely banned
• city B: allows scooters to be "parked" (read: abandoned) in any public space
• city C: requires scooters to be parked in designated, painted bays, out of the way of bike lanes and street crossings

In city C people get fined up the ass for parking anywhere else (you have to take a photo of it parked to end the trip) and you basically never see a stopped scooter outside an official bay.

Anywhere you see parked scooters inconveniencing people (Berlin is so bad locals have started hanging them from streetlights), the local politicians made terrible choices.

to me "pedantic" means that a difference doesn't matter, and in this case I think it matters a lot.

"chemical" / "non chemical" (and "natural" / "artificial") are marketing terms with no agreed-upon meaning and I think the world would be better if we stopped using them - because they overshadow terms which have clearer meanings like "safe" and "healthy".

in your strawberry example I'd say the useful metrics are the usual nutrient contents, and if any of the ingredients are known to cause health problems. "% strawberries" would be an objective metric that personally seems kinda meaningless to me personally but at least wouldn't be misleading.

I do not think "intelligible ingredient list" is a good metric, just because a company chooses to put a wholesome* natural* kind of word on there instead of a scientific one has no bearing on if the ingredient is good or not.

*marketing terms with no agreed upon, let alone enforceable, definition

"couldn't hurt" is a weird turn of phrase for the suggestion of "lubricate the soles of your shoes" 🙃

yes the US can and should allow in anyone who wants to be there. the US government has caused most of the problems causing people to flee their homes... and the country was founded by "uncontrolled numbers [..] coming in" in the first place.

aka the "ol Beehaw"

even the WHO disagrees, you have been successfully propagandized and are now repeating it

WHO disagrees with you

sugar is a chemical..

brb selling advertising space in my pronouns

also why is Stalin literally the only one with:

• hair
• a shirt
• wrinkles
• teeth
• eyebrows

Especially when e.g. Hitler was very famous for his facial features?

"form[ing] partnerships with the private sector" is literal privatisation.

and the Canary is one of the (the only?) worker owned news outlets in the UK, sometimes it's a bit sloppy but calling it "trash" is doing free PR work for plutocrats

thanks for the constructive answer. I'm less confused about lockdowns than I am about mask mandates and air quality rules, which seem like they wouldn't be as affected by at least the pressure from other countries.

"normal" except a new, relatively easily preventable longterm immune disorder is going around, causing different kinds of organ failure, reduced mental capacity, chronic fatigue. even the mostly useless WHO still classifies it as a pandemic, plutocrats still mask and test - governments that have given up caring about it are not doing right by the working class.

it shakes my faith in AES governments that all these places seem to have given up on mask mandates, testing, and air quality 😢

in terms of chemistry, the reactions that happen at vaping vs burning temperatures are basically nothing alike. this should be fairly obvious from the smell of smoke vs the (almost complete lack of) smell of weed vapor.

"different" sure, different enough that they don't need abolishing, no. or do you think "police abolition" was just a call for reform and rebranding?

policing and prisons are ineffective at achieving their stated goals, and the human cost of their failures is immense.