Show newer

Life may have survived far north of equator during
---

From a quick scan of the article, they don't mention activity. That seems like the most likely explanation for an like this, but I assume it would show up in the chemical signature. Whatever the explanation, this is impressive if it holds up.

Say it with me now ... "More Research Is Needed!" And funding. That helps. A lot.

science.org/content/article/li

Behind the scenes of cutting-edge, :

"Got it, thanks. Wow, that's ... uh ... not exactly a masterpiece of organization, is it?"

"ahahahha welcome to my life"

"lolsob"

"My house is a mess 'cause all day I clean up things on my computer, and after I dont have the mind space to clear the space around me."

"I feel that in my bones."

That's just what are like. Cold, logical, precise. Yep. Positively , we are.

@Pat Indeed! I probably should have mentioned that, but I was going more for snark than precision.

Oh kid, you're so close to getting it.

"[Russian] Deputy Head of the Committee on Information Policy Oleg stated on April 4 that he has prepared a bill to recognize as an extremist ideology and argued that overwhelmingly oppose the ' ' in . Matveichev argued that feminism consists of women serving together with men fighting against and alleged that the woman accused of killing of milblogger Maxim (Vladlen ) was motivated by feminist ideology. Matveichev has not specified how the bill would define feminism, and the bill may use a vague overarching definition in order to further promote widespread self-censorship. Russian authorities may increasingly portray other ideologies and groups not explicitly aligned with the Kremlin as being against the war in Ukraine in order to set conditions for increased crackdowns and self-censorship. Ukrainian 'feminism' would appear to be giving Ukraine an advantage in this war since, as Matveichev notes, it has brought many talented and determined Ukrainian women into the fight."

Source: understandingwar.org/backgroun

@Bullix Yes. I hate that this is the country we've allowed ourselves to become. But yes.

So, let's review:

The drove his car into a crowd. The , who was carrying a openly, in accordance with law, raised the rifle in self-defense toward the car coming at him. The murderer, who in addition to using his as a , was also carrying a , shot the victim. " advocates" are supporting the murderer.

Sometimes I wish I still belonged to the so I could resign again.

And that's not even the main issue here. No, the main issue is that the Governor of Texas, along with his hand-picked toadies on the state parole board, wants to legalize . Which, by the way, he will almost surely succeed in doing, in this particular case. Republicans all over the country will back him.

Every day I have a harder time believing any of us are going to live through this.

statesman.com/story/news/local

@blazeward7 —and having said that, I just realized the youngest veterans of the war may not be a decade older than me! Wow, that's an uncomfortable thought.

@blazeward7 Anyone still living who fought in the Bush War must be pretty old by now, and probably not capable of much harm. Their modern sycophants, OTOH ... yeah.

It would be kind of amazing how many are still celebrating this pathetic attempt at a country that only existed for fourteen years and ceased to exist before many of them were born, until you consider that many of them are also still celebrating a pathetic attempt at a country that only existed for four years and ceased to exist before many of their *great-grandparents* were born.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the "" did, in fact, fucking die.

@blazeward7 I think they're still pretty good overall, but they really do try to do the "both sides" thing to an absurd degree. Like practically all of the "liberal media," of course. They really need to figure out that there's *nothing* they can do to keep the right-wingers from hating them.

This one has been flying around my friends list. In and of itself, it's true. I have no argument with what it *says*. But there's a lot it's not saying, and I can't help but feel like it's designed to disparage the concept by that omission.

First, the concept itself. The idea of the 15-minute city ("") is pretty simple: everything you need for your daily life should be within 15 minutes' . Some definitions have "walk or ride," but I think that drastically weakens the concept.

In other words, a healthy, able-bodied adult should be able to get to all the usual destinations in no more than a quarter of an hour, on foot. I would add to this that , the , and people of all ages with should also be able to get where they're going via accessible , in the same amount of time.

*All* the usual destinations. Which yes, means , , , etc.—for people who there as well as the patrons. And every other kind of too. Of course you don't *have* to work or eat or shop close to home. But the option needs to be there, and the work has to be able to pay for all the rest.

That's *always* been part of the concept. If the work criterion is not met, you don't have a 15mC; you have a theme park, like the post says. Fair enough.

Yes, and? If you have a without a roof, you don't have a house, you have a collection of walls. If you have a plate without on it, you don't have a meal, you have . If you have a that can arbitrarily kick out its members for voicing their opinions, you don't have , you have . Everyone understands this.

So if we agree that the 15mC is a good idea—I certainly think it is—then let's try to make it happen. This kind of sniping strikes me as less a valid critique and more an attempt to make the whole idea sound impossible.

Maybe that's not the intent, but it's sure how it comes across. Yeah ... don't do that.

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.