aaand again we see that conservatives don’t actually care about any “advantages” but instead just wanna be hateful. what a surprise.

poor girl :(

hell yea

imagine marrying someone just for their appearance possiblities

LEMMY SNI

Lemmy sniper

ah, fair enough. I guess I was wrong, thanks for providing this!

hm… idk. Data Centers need extremely purified water, much more than drinking water so this seems implausible to me, but if you can find a concrete example i’ll definitely change my mind. I just haven’t heard of any cases of that happening.

“fym” means “fuck you mean”, essentially saying “what you said is kind of stupid”

We dont know exactly, but the current working theory is that the brain pulses extremely strongly when dying, which produces extremely vivid images, including the famous “light at the end of a tunnel”.

fym “normal”? But also we can DNA Edit, using CRISPER CAS 9, just not that big of parts. Things like Down Syndrome are caused by a whole missing or extra chromosome which we can’t do.

hmmm this smells like AI

…in case starliner ever flies again. Which… is questionable

uh, no. you’re wrong. If data centers had a closed water system, they wouldn’t be “using” any water, effectively. Right now, data centers use water to cool their computers and to do that, they evaporate water.

Golf courses also don’t take water out of the system.

Report this shit and downvote.

That’s cap. You can be pro-capitalism in some form and still be on the left wing of politics.

But of course, this is extremely subjective.

but it’s averaged for both, so idk what you mean

actually, they do tend to poison the water downstream through use of pesticides etc.

Also, Data centers evaporate water to cool stuff, so idk why it would poison anything “downstream”?

Funny statistic but relevant:

Data Centers use about 0.06% of the USAs total Water per year.

Watering golf courses in total uses about 0.5 percent.

Not saying Data centers aren’t a problem, but… Water is not the main issue we should be focusing on with them.

This is straight wrong. There is little to no real evidence pointing to men being the primary hunters. In essentially all found sites, women showed the same level of hunting participation as men.

So, in conclusion, your premise is wrong, makin your question useless.

I am… so confused. Can someone explain to me concretely what this means? Like I know what the Fediverse etc is but like… this post is written really confusingly