• 0 Posts
  • 159 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 9th, 2023

help-circle
  • Why bother? They’re safe at room temperature unless they’ve already been refrigerated, might as well use that fridge space for some that actually benefits from the cold.

    At room temperature they’re good for a month or two. If you want long term storage you might as well prep and freeze them which will last you about a year, or there’s a ton of other long-term preservation techniques.



  • This is true for all public holidays in the UK, there’s a (usually) fixed number of public holidays but the dates are flexible.

    They’re also included in the minimum 28 days paid time off too, meaning if you’re a full time worker and have to work on a bank holiday your employer is legally required to offer an extra day off somewhere else instead, either a fixed date or added to your holiday allowance. Conversely, the “extra” day off you get when a monarch keels over may be subtracted from your holiday allowance for the year. This is also why my employer is allowed to follow English bank holidays despite having next to no presence in England; the number is fixed but the dates are not.




  • my_hat_stinks@programming.devtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldThe worst
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The fact it’s a long game isn’t an issue, the problem is that it’s long and bad. A winner is usually determined pretty early on but then there’s still half an hour of random rolls as everyone slowly loses their money. That’s why house rules are mostly adding safety nets, the game’s already over and it’s just not fun running around a board watching your numbers go down. Since house rules don’t change the core gameplay they don’t fix the game and just make it drag even longer.

    There’s some very good long games and some very good short games, how long a game is doesn’t determine how good it is.




  • Jesus Christ, this is toxic as fuck. You are not a bad person for enjoying life. You are not a bad person for being happy or seeking happiness. Excessive consumerism isn’t great but you are still not a bad person for owning things. You are definitely not a bad person for trying to improve your life or the life of people around you.

    I have no idea why they decided to attack renewable energy, it’s undeniably better than the fossil fuel systems it’s to replace. They say they’re against alternative energy immediately after complaining that a third of the world has no electricity. This doesn’t even make sense! They don’t want you to make electricity available to people, they just want you to feel bad about it.

    Inequality sucks, but you are still allowed to enjoy things.

    What does make you a bad person is actively seeking to make other people’s lives worse. For instance, making a comic with the sole intention of shitting on people just living their lives.









  • A little ham-fisted, sure, but if you think it’s irrelevant you evidently didn’t take any time to actually think about it (you did also reply instantly, so I’ll take that over you lacking reading comprehension).

    I’ll simplify.

    Digital piracy is illegal copying of unlicenced content.
    Alice creates content.
    Alice licences the content to Bob.
    Bob decides to distribute the content with advertisements from Charlie.
    You download the content.
    Charlie does not pay Bob.
    You did not breach any licences.
    You did not pirate the content.

    And just to further clarify, Alice is the person who made a video, Bob is Youtube, Charlie is an advertiser. Your argument is not an ad is piracy if “the advertisement company [hasn’t] paid the content creator.” The advertiser pays the distribution company, and the relationship between those two companies is irrelevant. The advertiser failing to pay does not retroactively turn you into a pirate.

    The whole argument is pointless in the first place, it’s irrelevant whether or not you consider ad blocking to be technically piracy. A sensible adblock argument would be around the ethics of manipulation versus payment, or security versus whatever it is advertisers want. Arguing semantics doesn’t matter.




  • Parachute effectiveness is a very reasonable thing to study, it’s pretty important to know how one parachute design performs compared to other designs and the obvious baseline is no parachute. A lot of things which appear to be self-evident have been extensively studied, generally you don’t want to just assume you know how something works.

    Though throwing people out of a plane at altitude with no parachute probably isn’t the most ethical way to study parachute effectiveness.