Since steel frames seem to last forever, Id just get a decades old used bike. Maybe get some new wheels
There is no binary except that which your projection of that as the reality reifies.
Less than a month before election day, we have enough data to know that either Trump or Harris will win. Voting for someone is not an endorsement or showing support for them. A vote ought to be a strategic action, optimizing for outcomes you would like to see.
For me, this means voting for Jill Stein, because I live in Oregon. But if I lived in Michigan, I would vote for Harris with a clear conscious. If you live in a battle ground state, voting is too important to be used as an expression of values.
actual evidence
The reason why I think Harris is better is mostly that the people commiting the genocide prefer Republicans. You can also look at differences in their rhetoric.
But I disagree that you need reasonable evidence of a meaningful difference. If you have a binary chose in a situation like this, you ought to pick the one that you believe to be better, no matter how unsure you are.
If you got dragged in front of a war crimes tribunal for participating in a genocide, a hypothetical argument that someone else would have done even worse wouldn't actually excuse you, same as it wouldn't for any other crime.
This analogy does not work because someone participating in a genocide does not just have a binary option. If they refuse to act, the genocide will slow down. This is not true of an American voter. Refusing to engage in the binary chose only helps the worse of 2 evils.
Your argument basically sets up a justification for voting for any evil- kill LGBTQ people, kill Socialists, kill disabled people, etc- so long as you can argue that someone else would have been worse.
I disagree. The argument needs to be that voting for anyone else would have been worse.
If course, all of these arguments only apply to voters in one of the 12 battleground states. Other voters do not decide who is elected, so they ought to vote 3rd party to attempt to change the policies of one of the major parties.
we can't really pretend we give a shit about genocide and then vote Democrat or Republican
In plurality voting, those who are interested in decreasing the severity of genocide ought to vote for the candidate less likely to make the genocide worse.
In the US, it's pretty clear which candidate is more aligned with the current genocidal Israeli regime.
I don't see the connection between neurodivergence and phones
Yes, so I can probably plan for it.
I think OP believes every town in the US has twice as many homeless people as churches, it doesnt need to be exactly 1 church and 2 homeless people.
But either way, that's probably not true. Since homeless people tend to be in larger cities.
But then again, lots of people become homless in the suburbs and then move to the city to get the social services. If churches in the suburbs housed a few people as they become homeless, it would probably help. It's better to keep people in their communities so they have a better chance of returning to housefullness.
But probably not that much, since homelessness rates are strongly correlated with housing prices, so expensive cities create more homelessness than cheap suburbs.
The obscurity of the Fediverse is not its defense from enshittification. The fact that it's so easy to move from server to server is.
If lemmy.world enshittifies, you can just move to lemmy.sdf.org without a big loss.
I think that lemmy could use more people.
I'm not sure planting forests instead of housing is always a win for the environment. If the land is in a place where people can take sustainable transportation to their jobs, you should put dense housing there. Or else people will have to drive around your suburban forest.
But in the Brain May case, I have no clue where the forest is
Linux is often used to refer to a family of operating systems including Ubuntu, Debian, fedora, red hat, ect., which all use the Linux kernel.
However, GNU/Linux may be a better name for this family of operating systems, since they all use GNU components and (to varying extents) embrace the philosophy of the free software foundation.
Android uses the Linux kernel, but not GNU components, and do not embrace the philosophy of the Free software foundation.
Stalman, the man who founded GNU and the free software foundation published his thoughts on this:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.en.html
I don't think you have thought this through enough.
Car infrastructure takes up the most space, so making a city for driving necessarily exludes other forms of transportation: think about what multi lane highways and giant parking lots does to a city.
On the other hand, excluding (or just minimizing) cars allows these other forms of transportation to flourish. Busses, trains, biking, scooting, walking, wheel chairs, those golf cart things disabled people use in the Netherlands.
Certainly you understand that many disabled people can not use cars: blind people, epileptic people, elderly people, young people, broke people (though lack of income is not traditionaly considered a disability, it can be disabilitating in a car dependent hypercapitalistic society like the US).
There is no one solution for transportation of the disabled, so it's important to have lots of options. This is impossible if your neighborhood is car dependent
I prefer Micromamba since it's faster at solving environments.