Has red dead online actually gotten good? Rdr2 is my favorite game, but the online game bored the shit out of me. I thought this looked like Saint Denis, but I have never seen it snow thereâwhy would it be snowing in a swamp?
As for if itâs any good, itâs eh. I have fun hopping in with friends and messing around and doing a few bounties. the game being abandoned after a few updates didnât help though
Someone eventually is going to come in here and say that no, because of modern typeface on computers the convention is a single space after a period and to that person I say this:
RDR2 is really gorgeous like this. I have some photos that show up in my gallery that I sometimes canât tell if itâs a photo or RDR2 Screenshot. Though, I do think compression helps mask some of the signs that itâs a Video Game
Just to the left is an alley way with a side courtyard that goes behind the building with a ladder, thats my favourite spot to sit there racking up a bounty, thereâs only one way up and multiple places to hide.
The Whole town is so much fun to get into a shoot out in with its size and complexity. One time me and a friend (same night this screenshot was taken actually I think) were messing around and got into a fight in the bar and started a whole shootout between cops and all the other players in the town. The only other town I feel like comes close is Blackwater
You should try dog if you get the chance, Elwood dog farm has a low impact factory farm where you can buy Labrador cuts and some gamier breeds if theyâre in stock.
I mean I could but I have a nearly limitless supply of rabbits in my yard. Their fur makes great gifts. My plants love the compost I get from everything else. As a bonus the blood compost deters rabbits from eating my cabbage.
Funny thing, I canât seem to find any type of vegan certification that is concerned with the use of animal byproducts or waste in fertilizer. A few specifically say they do not check fertilizer.
Donât let perfection be the enemy of good. If everyone stopped eating animals, thereâd be no surplus of blood and bone for fertilisers, and other plant based by-products would fill the space.
As for the rabbits, I actually have a small Australian shepherd that runs through my lawn chasing the wallabies that meander by, Iâve been meaning to trap it and humanely slaughter it, the blue coat would make a great gift! And if the owner comes by looking for Bella, I could trap him and humanely slaughter him too. He looks a bit simple, so it seems ethical to me? Heâd make good compost, thatâs for true.
Actually a lot of organic farms rely on blood and bone meal, manure and fish emulsion fertilizers. Theyâre inexpensive as theyâre byproducts of other industries and are very good for plants.
When I worked in an organic greenhouse I often wondered about how vegans would feel about farmers using animal based fertilizers. We definitely told people what we used, as we sold those products, but no one ever said anything about it. I guess vegans canât control that so maybe itâs a nonissue unless they grow their own food and use seaweed based fertilizer(more expensive) instead?
Does that work long term on a commercial scale without egg shells/ bone meal? Afaik, there needs to be an additional source of calcium, but that could of course also supplement crop rotation/fallowing.
Though tbf, limestone is very soft and I could see supplementing with ground limestone.
I have no intent to deceive. Thereâs a moral inconsistency amongst meat eaters. Pigs are okay, dogs are not. Why? âOh, because we like dogsâ Does that mean I can eat any sentient thing I dislike? âWell, no, dogs are intelligent!â Pigs are smarter than most breeds of dog, and have equal capabilities for emotion.
There is no logical argument against veganism in western society. Literally none. Meat eaters collectively breed and kill literally billions of animals per year, destroying the planet, because itâs yummy. Meat eaters have essentially caused swine flu, bird flu, ebola, corona virus, just for the taste of meat. Meat eaters are causing treatment resistant bacteria by abusing antibiotics on high intensity farming, all for meat. Thatâs crazy.
No itâs not. It being a âgotchaâ does not mean itâs wrong. In fact, it is still right, youâre just wrong and think the person you reply to is wrong because they disagree with you.
You arenât the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?
If you mean that âgotchasâ (your words, not mine) cannot ever be logically sound, youâll have to make a demonstration. Until youâve done the work, enjoy being wrong.
Hahaha just answer the question. Youâre like that meme that goes âAPPEAL TO AUTHORITY, STRAWMAN FALLACYâ in the middle of a normal conversation. Likr, if youâre in a debate and someone pushes your argument into a corner, you canât go âno, judged the opposing team is using gotcha arguments that make mine look foolish, I objectâ.
Hey itâs only a trap if your argument falls for it. When have I lied? Stop arguing weird imagined semantics and actually reply like a human. Why do you think itâs okay to kill and consume sentient life?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You literally canât reply, this is honestly my favourite anti-vegan argument Iâve ever had.
Alright alright, Iâm all done. You clearly have no ability to argue, but it was a fun journey for me finding that out. With no capacity for understanding, Iâll block you now to ensure I donât waste any more of our time.
Save your health, the life of animals and the life of the planet and eat plant-based.
The question âwould you eat dog meat?â and your outrage at the question, while a gotcha, is a very solid way to point out your inconsistency. Itâs by no means dishonest because it outlines your inconsistency without false pretense. Youâre being asked a direct question, and you got got.
You donât get a free get-out-of-jail card because you donât like how this rhetorical device proved your position weak.
sophistry is shitty. they had no interest in a genuine discussion or learning anything: theyâre just trying to show how right they are, regardless of the facts
The facts are there: the consumption of animal products the way it is done across the vast majority of the planet is not something you can rationalize: itâs bad for the consumers, bad for the environnement and, most of all, bad for the animals that are being slaughtered on a massive scale.
Donât fool yourself: Iâm not talking about the act of ingesting the flesh of dead animals, which could theoretically be done in a way that doesnât have such a strong negative impact on everyone involved. Iâm talking about whatâs happening in the real world, which is very far from idealized âwhat ifâ theories that is pretty unattainable, and an artificial debate construction carnivores use in debates with vegans.
You and I consume animal products. The difference between the two of us is I find the moral objections to the consumption of dog meat to be rationally indefensible, and pretty ridiculous.
Do consume animal products if you like. Iâm not a vegan, and I would be hypocritical to judge you based on that. Whatever you do though, just donât make the mistake of assuming your moral system is universal because itâs pretty illogical.
Thereâs a lot of awful things in culture. It was culturally acceptable to slap a women on the bottom for a good job.
Your argument is âah wellâ.
Thatâs not a reasonable defense for your objectively immoral actions. You are causing the suffering of sentient life for taste, that makes you immoral. Not to mention the horrible effect your diet has on the planet.
Okay, I believe it is morally reprehensible to kill a sentient being - one that feels fear and does not want to die, solely for pleasure. Eating meat is immoral and in a just world, would be punishable.
Sentience means âthe capacity to have feelingsâ, and it is widely understood by the scientific community that the vast majority of the animal kingdom has sentience.
Do you believe cows can experience pain? Because weâre right up close against rejecting scientific consensus just to justify immoral actions. And that typically is frowned upon historically.
Subjecting something that feels pain to experience pain for your pleasure is immoral.
honestly i got sentience and sapience confused English isnt my first language, anyways point is it really doesnt matter that they feel pain that in no way affects this, and u know that it doesnt because if farm animals were first sedated before being killed it would not make u ok with it so stop being disingenuous.
Youâre right. If farm animals were sedated before being killed, it would certainly be preferable, but wouldnât make it right.
We have no right to cause pain, fear or death to sentient beings, purely for ~15 minutes or pleasure. Doing so is immoral. There is no valid argument against this. Trust me, I did NOT want to be a vegan. I argued against it for four years trying not to become one. But there was and is no argument against it. Eating meat is immoral, bad for the planet, bad for the animals, bad for modern medicine, and in a typical western diet, bad for your health.
I repeat, there is no argument against veganism, and being vegan is objectively he correct moral choice.
u keep saying there is no argument against veganism but reality is that there doesnt need to be one because there is also no argument FOR veganism, there is nothing immoral about eating meat, and u have not at any point presented an argument that would even suggest it is wrong, u just keep saying it is.
Okay, if you and I were sitting on a park bench together, and we saw a dog walk past, and I went off to go stomp the dog to death - would you think that was morally wrong of me? Would you try stop me?
i see the argument u are trying to make and its nonsense, almost everyone makes a distinction between killing something just for the fun of it and killing something to eat it, for 99.9999% of people those are completely different actions.
So if I then ate the dog it would be okay? Why does eating it make it better? Because eating it is pleasurable? Itâs not necessary for survival in the western world to eat meat, itâs just yummy.
Why - in my hypothetical - is your pleasure derived for eating the animals flesh, more significant than my pleasure from dog stomping?
Youâre contributing to the needless subjugation and slaughter of sentient life, purely for ease and pleasure. Thatâs whatâs nonsense.
It doesnât help that the vegans are right. The meat industry is a nightmare, terrible for the environment, and pretty bad for our health.
Itâs insane that most Americans eat meat every day.
If I could put 100% tax on meat tomorrow I would, but thatâs political suicide, so itâll never happen. Itâd be easier to adjust than you think. There are plenty of delicious vegetarian options, and itâd be a lot easier to choose those if they were more common.
I eat meat because itâs culturally acceptable, delicious, ubiquitous, and I donât believe I can make a noticeable difference. But that doesnât mean I think itâs right.
I donât believe I can make a noticeable difference.
Not eating meat wonât change the systemic problems but it will mean fewer animals will be subject to the industry. Over the course of a lifetime, the number of animals you can save adds up.
Also itâs a good habit to transfer thoughts and beliefs into actions.
What bizarre logic, what thorough lack of object permanence.
Just because meat eating outpaces veganism doesnât mean vegans havenât reduced the consumption of meat?
I donât even think you know what youâre saying now. If the whole world went vegan today, thereâd be no meat animal slaughter. YOU are the cause of this problem.
âOh world hunger is getting worse, I better stop my charity donations!â
âOh greenhouse gas emissions are on the rise, might as well go back to oil and gas!â
Like, you realise how foolish that argument is, right?
When you buy something, it tells the person who sold it to you to stock more of it, which tells the people making it to make more of it. Since meat production involves killing animals, it means that when you buy meat, it causes more animals to be killed. If you go vegan and stop buying meat, it causes there to be less demand, which reduces the number of animals killed compared to if you didnât.
âYour honor, itâs true I purchased a hitmanâs services, but I didnât cause his actions. He made his own decision, it just happened to be the one I paid him to do.â
Why not? Youâre saying that market signals donât matter, itâs individual choice all the way down. Youâre paying people to produce meat and put it on the shelves, but according to you, that doesnât have any effect on the amount of meat produced and put on shelves. How is that not analogous to paying someone to kill someone and then pretending that that doesnât make you complicit?
You donât seem to understand how analogies work. You donât get to just say âNuh uhâ when I follow your principles to their natural conclusions. Thatâs just a basic form of logical argumentation.
Since you seem incredibly confused about both how to argue and basic facts about reality, let me walk you through this.
You claimed that purchasing meat has no effect on whether more meat gets produced, because âthey make their own decisions.â This argument rests on the completely insane premise that paying people to do things does not influence their behavior or make you complicit when they decide to do what you paid them to do. If this were true, it would lead to the absurd conclusion that hiring a hitman to kill someone would not make you complicit in the act, because, by your logic âthey make their own decisionsâ regardless of whoâs paying them to do what.
If you want to dispute that, you have to actually find a fault in that chain of reasoning, not just say, âNuh uhâ over and over again.
An argumentâs a collective series of statements to establish a definite proposition. Contradictionâs just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
This argument rests on the completely insane premise that paying people to do things does not influence their behavior or make you complicit when they decide to do what you paid them to do.
If this were true, it would lead to the absurd conclusion that hiring a hitman to kill someone would not make you complicit in the act, because, by your logic âthey make their own decisionsâ regardless of whoâs paying them to do what.
again, this is completely disanalagous with buying meat on a shelf.
Again, you donât get to just say, âNo it isnâtâ over and over again without actually explaining why itâs not analogous. Thatâs how basic reason works.
Also, you can put multiple things in one comment so you donât spam the thread.
iâm not making an argument. iâm contradicting yours.
Yes, youâre literally just disagreeing with anything I (or anyone else on my side) says, with zero supporting evidence or reason. Itâs not an argument, just contradiction. Itâs obvious thatâs what youâre doing, but still hilarious that you would come out and admit it.
wrong. i said it is not causal.
Can you please explain what the difference is between an action being causal of another action vs an action⊠causing another action to happen?
âYour honor, itâs true that the deceased died of blood loss after I stabbed them, however, the idea that they wouldâve survived had I not stabbed them is a counterfactual and therefore cannot be proven at all.â
You can try some in Switzerland. While you canât sell the meat, slaughtering and eating it is legal. There is farms where you can âmake a donationâ and theyâll invite you to dinner.
Gamey unless reared correctly. Better to eat pet dogs as the meat generally tastes juicier. It can sometimes be unpleasant bolting them before slitting their throats after theyâve lived inside for so long, but knowing they lived a happy life free of predators, and didnât die of old age (try to kill before they become yearlings) makes it feel right.
What? Try harder to what? Donât defend yourself in court hahahaha. âDoes the defense have any closing statements?â âUh yes your honour. Ahem. leans into mic t-try harderâ
Apologies but this is just assumptions. Pet meat isnât good quality. Your average commercial pet food uses hydrogenated oils for shelf longevity and that causes a very bitter flavor.
farm raised dog is usually fed on grain and suet or tallow, and avoids this problem.
Great, so we agree no animals are ethically off limits to kill and consume. How about⊠Some of the more simple minded human populace? Like, if through IQ testing we find the bottom 5% of humans, and (without eating brain and spine, avoiding prion diseases) feed them to the masses? Theyâre probably not terribly much smarter than dogs, and they could help curb food shortages. Or are humans off limits?
Only if you eat the brain or spinal column, which I was careful to add. Otherwise the risks are as manageable as with cow meat, i.e., parasites and bacteria. Given that youâre okay with eating cats and dogs, and now simple-minded humans, whatâs to stop me from killing and eating you? I mean, all anyone needs to assert is that theyâre mentally superior to their food, whatâs off the table for you?
Iâm sure mass scale cannibalism might actually be as good for the environment as a plant based diet. Maybe youâre on to something. Weâd be so morally consistent!
go ahead a good third of my country thinks i shouldnât exist anyway and im sick of fighting it, im sure i taste good too
you keep trying to push people into corners about this when most ppl who eat meat do it simply because it tastes good, has good nutritional value, and is easily accessible. for my two cents in w serious manor, the meat industry is fucked up and should be regulated, since you didnât take my initial comment as the shitpost it is
there are moral concerns but for most people (majority will never even know what lemmy is) simply donât care and will never care, because meat tastes good
Pushing people into corners is what good debate is about. If people find their refutations are weak enough to have them back into a corner, then they should abandon that argument.
I grew up on a farm in the south of New Zealand. My brothers were dairy farmers, my front yard was cattle, I was a staunch anti-vegan who swore heâd never eat vegetarian as long as he lived.
I will never care because meat tastes good. Except now I do.
There is no level of regulation that permits - in good moral conscience - the subjugation and slaughter of animals for our pleasure.
Meat is only easily accessible because it is heavily subsidized by the government. A vegan diet is nearly always cheaper - consider that most developing nations eat vegan/vegetarian because of this.
Thereâs a short book I read that absolutely convinced me of veganism called âThis is Vegan Propaganda and Other Lies The Meat Industry Tells Youâ. Iâve had 5 people read it, and ALL FIVE have gone vegan. Itâs straight up insane how brutal a grip the meat industry has on people, through lobbying, ad campaigns, purposeful obfuscation of the industry. Bananas!
i shouldve known i was getting into this before i decided to make that witty comment that came to my mind on a whim
i agree that the meat industry is a disaster, and i wish there was a proper compromise that could suit everyone. many people in the us simply dont care or have this moral consciousness in the first place because, again, meat tastes good
the solution in reality is to somehow get people eating less meats as we tackle the major issues we face today. making a burger that tastes identical to a traditional burger is not easy and it is as it stands now much more expensive anywhere you go, which isnt changing without baby steps
going out to eat in rural ny with a budget, my options that i can afford dont include vegan anything barring a side salad. im not giving up what nice things i can go out and enjoy until theres more options. call me selfish idrc, i have enough to deal with as it stands. not going to give up something that does make me happy like going out to eat with family to prove a point to an industry that doesnt even know i exist
not proofreading this or anything so if i come to reword anything i said thats womp womp for me ig. thats where i stand muting this thread now
âMeat tastes goodâ as an argument for immoral actions is not valid logic. âSex feels goodâ is not valid justification for sexual assault. âMen taste goodâ is not justification for Jeffrey Dahmer.
âLetâs eat less meatâ. Again, there is no valid moral argument for âjust a little bit of sexual assaultâ. âOnly a wee bit of animal abuseâ, âonly occasional racismâ. A moral wrong is a moral wrong. But hey at least it isnât âIâd go vegan, but I just love cheese!â. Well then go vegan but eat cheese.
As for rural NY, Iâd use Happycow.net to find places. Iâve eaten vegan in rural Bali, rural NZ, rural Australia, rural England, and never paid more than my meat eating counterparts. But if thatâs still a concern, then eat vegan at home, meat when going out.
Although Iâd still argue that âitâs more convenient for me commit sexual assault than to hire a sex workerâ isnât a valid justification.
Seriously if you get the option, read that book I recommended, even just the first chapter. I can buy you a copy of you like, DM me an email address and Iâll gift a copy. If you read it, I will genuinely send you PayPal money for a vegan dinner in rural NY. Iâve taken everyone else who read the book out to dinner, itâs only fair you get a free one!
tip if you want to be an activist for something, donât compare something the opposing party is doing to sexual assault. you and i both know that isnât a valid comparison
Cows are forcibly impregnated in perpetuity by humans, separated from their children and then had their milk taken so we can drink it. As soon as the cow can longer be impregnated and becomes unprofitable, it is killed for meat.
If a man sticks his fist in the vagina of a cow for fun, it is sexual animal abuse. If a man sticks his fist in the vagina of a cow, hoping to later kill and eat itâs flesh, itâs lunch.
I think a comparison is valid. Just because you are a willing participant and enabler in this animal sexual exploitation does not invalidate or soften the facts.
do you trust the processing facilities for the underground dogmeat industry to even come close to choosing safety over profit in shaving that meat down as close to cartilage as possible?
Oh weâre talking about eating humans now, weâre well past dogs as it seems like a fair few people here would be okay with factory farming them.
Personally, my ethics are simple and easily define - if it displays sentience, I wonât eat it. Itâs unethical to kill and eat something that feels pain. Iâm more interested in your more nebulous ethics, where some species are okay to eat, some not
It sounds like youâre okay with eating dogs, which id argue is demonstrably disgusting, but in your opinion, is it okay to rear, kill and then eat humans?
Honestly in that case I think the risk of disease is so much greater than any moral question. Thereâs very few things more likely to open a vector for prion or parasite attack than eating your own kind. Plus as mentioned earlier we taste horrible.
And at least you could have gone the creative way of saying âWhat about farming bodies without brains for organ harvestingâ because at least that has some gray areas we can play with.
But NoooOOoo you had to come in with the pseudointellectual dick punch. Iâm sure that was clever back on 9gag but we are on lemmy now so act like it.
Right, so the only thing stopping you from factory farming and consuming humans is risk of prion disease and taste? By which it could be understood that if those two issues were solved - no risk of disease, and the flavour enhanced, you would happily factory farm humans.
And vegans are the weird ones? Your priorities are cooked buddy.
Iâm not suggesting that animal eating leads to cannibalism, which WOULD be a slippery slope.
Iâm suggesting that if meat eaters are okay with killing and eating animals, why not the human animal? I probe because the line drawn in the sand is unclear with meat eaters.
Also, humans are animals. This is primary school stuff here.
What separates eating animals from eating people for you?
Right, but whatâs inherently wrong with eating your own species? I mean, I know, I think any sentient life shouldnât be killed for my pleasure. But with your logic that some species are okay to kill and eat, and others arenât, Iâm wanting to know why those others arenât.
Ignoring âsocietal normsâ, as theyâve been used to commit genocide, slavery, and all manner of atrocities - why is cannibalism logically, in your opinion, bad?
Because regardless of what species does it, cannibalism inevitably causes problems due to prions, diseases, and such. Even if the most dangerous parts (Central nervous system) are avoided, there are still problems (just more slowly).
Well, it doesnât cause prion diseases, it just spreads them. Itâs only transmissible by consumption of conspecifics (or often, as in mad cow disease, by eating similar species - when farmers were feeding cows dead chickens and cows).
So youâre saying the only thing stopping you from eating factory farmed human meat is the risk to your own safety?
So⊠If there were no risk of disease, you would consider cannibalism and ânormal meat eatingâ to be basically equitable, and equally justifiable? If not, why not?
Sorry Iâm just having a hard time getting some solid admissions here, nobody wants to just straight up answer.
As a human, yes I consider a human life to be more valuable than the life of a member of another species. Is that biased? Probably, but if that biased didnât exist, neither would humans.
My concern with eating dogs and cats (which I have) is how they were fed. There isnât a lot of health safety concern with those kinds of underground meat sources can sometimes feed dead livestock back to the populace and that can cause all numbers of prion and parasitic concerns.
I mean, people hardly ever eat carnivores. Even pigs, which are omnivores, are 90% of the time herbivores. I donât even eat meat, but this argument never made sense to me. Yes, there are countries where people eat dogs, but that doesnât mean dogs and cats are equivalent to cattle. You can make an argument for horses though.
The argument works for a Western audience that are okay with killing and eat some animals, but find it abhorrent to eat others. Most people donât like the idea of dogs in pain, and if we did rear dogs like we do pigs, there would be huge public outcry.
And sure, you get Redditors and Lemmy-ites who go âOh ho iâd eat dog!â, but they mean theyâd try the meat once at a market, to maintain moral consistency. The truth is theyâd be just as horrified if they saw dogs yelping in factory farmed cages, like we treat chickens.
But thereâs no reason to treat some animals one way, some another. They all feel pain, they all feel misery, they all call for their children once theyâve been culled. Itâs objectively immoral to eat meat when not for necessity.
Edit: sorry that was a bit snarky. I donât think youâre completely off the mark but I would think an animal needs at least a nervous system to experience pain, so there are categories to consider and it may be morally virtuous to abstain from eating some animals but not necessarily immoral, and we should be careful to anthropomorphize other animal emotional states.
So fish have nociceptors, and a brain that connects to them, and they avoid painful stimuli. They have analgesic response systems in their brain to dull painful stimuli. Even the most cautious interpetation of misery would include pain, so I would not kill and eat it. Fish display sentience, therefore it is immoral to kill them for pleasure.
Maybe Iâm off on this but suffering/misery would include pain + the emotional state of unhappiness or we would just use pain for both? Avoiding painful stimuli doesnât tell me about their emotional state or cognitive awareness of the pain, just an awareness of the stimuli.
No serious study suggests plants feel pain. They do not have a brain or central nervous system. At most, they respond to stimuli.
Many more plants âdieâ for animal feeding than with a vegan diet.
If youâre worried about grass pain, you should focus more on the animals that DO have nociceptors, central nervous systems and brains, and the ability to feel fear that you subject them too, purely for taste preference.
Iâve read some studies that talk about how cabbages in a patch release a warning scent when one of them is being harvested. The scent actually propagates, and even non harvested cabbages release the scent further down the patch to warn other cabbages.
Thatâs either a professional level dad joke, or holy wow, does he not know how much you make?
That said, Iâll build anyone a website for ÂŁ500, no matter how large. But thatâs the base model. Itâll be a template taken from a catalog, and Hugo. My maintenance fees are only ÂŁ250 per hour.
Itâs a pretty good racket. My friends boss saw us building ourselves a site one time when he let us use his shop on the weekend and he got intrigued.
So as payment for letting us use the machine shop we took over his business website from some expensive marketing company that charged a ton we got him down to a domain and a basic weebly plan. We took photos of the shop and just used their shop colors for the text and slapped on all the contact info he wanted.
Then his bookkeeper saw his site and wanted one so we did the same for her, then her son saw the site and wanted one for his friend whoâs a plumber. Next thing you know we are turning down jobs because everyone and their mother wants a $500 website from us haha. It became a better business than what we borrowed the machine shop for to begin with
lemmy.world
Oldest