If you don't do that, and are a homesteader, then yes. You are a very small minority outlier. (Assuming you aren't ordering supplies delivered instead of driving to the store.
> Eat meat.
Yes, not eating meat is in the minority.
> Fly on vacation.
So, don't vacation, walk to vacation, or drive to vacation? 1/3 are also consumptive.
It seems you are either a very significant outlier, or you're being daft. I'm curious which. Would you mind clarifying?
Thank you for the clarification! I'm impressed. I've always been envious of the bicycle friendliness of roads in the Netherlands. Here in the US stroads and poor bike infrastructure still reigns. It really depends on the region.
I could have worded that more clearly: The vast majority (90%+) of corn grown in the US is not for human consumption, with most of that 90% being used for bioethanol.
Private equity will swoop in, bankrupt the company to shirk the debt of training / R&D, and hold on to the models in a restructuring. +Enshittification to squeeze maximum profit. This is why they're referred to as vulture capitalists.
> but will fundamentally limit the growth, I think.
Thank goodness. We need more small social media with inherently limited scope to protect from the manipulative garbage coming out of big social media companies.
Ahhhh. So maybe it's the platforms and their algorithms promoting harmful content for attention that are to blame? And how many of the platforms want to even admit the content they are pushing is "harmful"? Seems like two elephant sized sources of error.
The premise of this study is a bit misguided, imho. I have absolutely no idea how many people _post_ harmful content. But we have a lot of data that suggests a _lot_ of people consume harmful content.
Most users don't post much of anything at all on most social media platforms.
Saying it's "algorithms" trivializes the problem. Even on reasonable platforms, trolls often get more upvotes, reshares, and replies. The users are actively trying to promote the bad stuff as well as the good stuff.
Open youtube in a fresh browser profile behind a vpn. More than 90% of the recommended videos in the sidebar are right-wing trash like covid-conspiracies, nut-jobs sprouting Kremlin nonsense, alt-right shows.
Baseline is in the end anti-democracy and anti-truth. And Google is heavily pushing for that. The same for Twitter. They are not stupid, if they know you and they think they should push you in a more subtle way then they aren't going to bombard you with Tucker Carlson. Don't ever think the tech oligarchy is "neutral". Just a platform, yeah right.
> Baseline is in the end anti-democracy and anti-truth. And Google is heavily pushing for that.
Google et al do not give a hoot about being “left” or “right” - they only care about profit. Zuck tattooed rainbow flag while Biden was President and is currently macho-man crusader. If Youtube can make money from videos about peace and prosperity that’s what you’d see behind the VPN. since no one watches that shit you get Tucker
via their preferred business model: no competition, no market. Their best bet is the right. And since the right's agenda is objectively antithetical to the people's interest, they need to create smokescreens with bullshit. That is exactly what is being pushed here.
They are happy with "left" politicians as long as they buy into the false narratives, and as long as they are willing to play along with their monopolist playbooks.
fooled in what way? I don’t use youtube or any social media since 2019-ish. last time I saw anything on youtube in probably 2018-ish (othercthan my kid showing me volleyball highlights :) )
Well you just posted, telling someone else what Zuck's political interests might be, based upon what even you described as meaningless performative behavior.
But without regulation they clearly devolve into scam and fraud vehicles. Crypto just isn't worth the time or effort for regular folks. I'm not sure what's going to happen first -- abandonment or bank run, but crypto like all unregulated banking systems, are destined to fail. I guess it could end up being regulated but at this point, with such pervasive scam/fraud use, that will probably just accelerate the bank run.
Shouldn't you have already moved on to AI hype? The fact that you're still worshipping crypto is telling as to your close-mindedness.
What have I said that indicates worship? I am simply pointing out that what you claimed was objectively false, and in response you moved the goalposts.
> Currency that can't be inflated... [seriously? the fact that you didn't even recognize that as a statement of faith, well...]
> Outside of pure utility, they have tons of ideological reason to exist
I mean, maybe you're in a repressive regime and really need a way to fight the system. But I'm guessing you just have faith in crypto ideology. Either way, have a great day!
And recognizing a movement has ideological reasons while making no claim as to the strength or rationality of those reasons has nothing to do with faith
You asked how to inflate Bitcoin. I told you how to inflate all cryptocurrency. That includes Bitcoin. I didn't think the "buy Bitcoin with fake currency that is scammed to be the same as real currency" needed to be explicitly stated. But, I guess I should have known I wasn't dealing with someone who could put together simple inferences on their own. Have a nice life, I won't be bothering with you again.
reply