Haven’t you heard? Mexico doesn’t exist it is just drawn on the map to make people think that Canada and The United States are to the rest of the American Continent. Everyone who says they are from Mexico are just paid actors. /s
Also they left out New Zealand, which will not come as a surprise for New Zealanders. They will probably be happy that they are even on the map.
If the difference is a factor of 187 wouldn’t you need 187 years in South Dudan to equal a year’s income in the US? 187 / 12 is just over 15, but now you’re comparing years to months
That website is using the nations carbon footprint as a part of their measure of happiness which I find confusing. Carbon footprint is important sure but it doesn’t relate to happiness and gives undeveloped countries an advantage.
and canada, USA plus canada is easy mode. Australia is on some shit right now, they deserve it.
IDK what the others are except for europe and africa, which, yeah that’s about right. Africa is a hot fucking minute away from some spicy shit at the moment, and the other one is probably the same.
aussie land is currently imprisoning a whistleblower exposing warcrimes, as well as reams of government corruption scandals. Africa is undergoing numerous disliked governments, coups, and corruption scandals as well.
idk man, i would say that australia is probably worse than the US, especially considering that they got fucking couped by the us a hot minute ago.
Currently australia is whoring its resources out to the world, while shipping all of it’s realestate overseas to be owned by foreign investment companies. While fucking people over with shit like made up robo debt collection for some unforsaken reason.
Any country with actual welfare, a decent living wage minimum salary, normal Healthcare prices, a gun ban and a non-corrupt police system or at least less prone to corruption.
I live in Europe. It’s not as beauty as it sounds. I’m glad of what we have, but is not perfect, sometimes is not even better than the USE.
We have welfare, but more and more people are forced to private medical companies because waiting lists are becoming ridiculously long.
Violence and support for fascism is on the rise. Terrorism is on the rise. War is at our doorsteps. Many countries are talking about bringing back mandatory military training for all our citizens.
We may have better minimum wage, but median wages are lower and taxes and prices tend to be much higher. On average we can afford tu buy less with out money.
At least in my country we all live in small dehumanizing small and packed apartments. Living space is much smaller. Everything is human made, we barely have natural reserves or parks.
Employment is getting better but sometimes unemployment hits really hard, myself was years without being able to get a job during last decade.
Political tensions and population conflict is on the rise. Many countries are also on the verge or civil war, secession, or some big problem of the sort.
US is not perfect, and I wouldn’t want privatized healthcare, or guns in my country by any means, but I would still would love some things they have in the US. And in other things we are just as bad.
Yeah, they’re still behind most other “first world” countries in every metric stated.
Comparing the USA to a country in the middle East or Africa or something? Yeah, the USA is a cakewalk by comparison to many. Compared to any country that’s similarly regarded, it’s dog shit for living conditions.
“Middle East” countries do pretty well if they’re not the target of bombings (Qatar, UAE etc.), and are luxury vacation spots. Lots of US expats moving to Oman.
Good thing that under the words communism and democracy, there are pictures that give you the context. Which allows you to understand that the actual comparison is between Marxism-Leninism (which are the majority of communist states) and representative democratic constitutional republic (which are the majority of democracies).
Okay, quick question: In your meme, would you say the picture description on the right is something advocating for democracy? (Although democracy in of itself has basically nothing to do with that wall imo)
I honestly wonder where the hate for communism comes from. Yes, the stereotypical historical examples were disasters. But as others here have mentioned, the problems in these systems were not rooted in a communist economical system (which there also wasn’t really). And assuming educated people should be able to differentiate between these I can only suspect the capitalism-blue-pill.
And to illustrate further I’d like to quote my very wise and definetely NOT communist literature teacher: In heaven there’s communism. I think that dums it up nicely. If you sant to hate something, don’t hate the idea, it in itself is pure and you’re making a fool of yourself if you didn’t wish for it in a perfect world. Hate the realisations? Maybe, but also noone seriously tried yet…
But if one just hates on it for the sake of having an “enemy” in turn validating the system oneself is a part of, that’s just a lack of reflection and critical thinking. Capitalism does not work and we’d see it everywhere we look if we wanted to. We just can’t imagine any other system anymore and that is the trap our society has fallen into. Blind religious belief in a economical system (ridiculous by itself, I might add). Let’s atleast try alternatives or compromises before we finish burning down our planet.
Also: I love democracy, fix democracy first. Priority number one.
Ill respond honestly even though I did make fun of tankies not realising this is a shitposting community.
The problem with capitalism is the same as with communism. Corruption, Cronyism, Nepotism, Greed and Dishonesty. People preaching for communism point at those things in capitalism and act like communism wont have the exact same bad actors trying to game the system.
No there hasnt been a modern attempt at communism because past versions were such SPECTACULAR failures (admittedly mostly for reasons that arent actually related to the system of governance) that the well is poisoned. If you cant convince people that masks prevent the spread of disease when its a scientifically verifiable fact you arent going to convince them that communism is viable when it has historically speaking always collapsed or morphed into totalitarian capitalism.
The first video is a list and the next few go into detail about individual projects. This is an ongoing series.
The reason you don’t hear about these like you heard about the USSR or the CCP is because they are doing good things and not turning on their own people, so they don’t make good capitalist propaganda, so instead they stay off the radar. That to me means they’re doing the right thing.
There are thousands of projects you don’t hear about because people that aren’t trying to replace the old boss with the new boss aren’t trying to get your attention. They’re doing the work to make an alternative system that doesn’t get crushed by reactionaries.
Projects and communities arent nation spanning governments. The larger the system the more rife for abuse.
I dont dispute that it COULD work, but I do think that its a bit disingenuous to act like people arent gonna people and its going to be a magical utopia. If we could stop greedy assholes capitalism wouldnt be as bad as it is.
Rojava covers millions of people and does not have a state to speak of. It is a federation. They have no leader.
People will people, but creating power structures that work to counter hierarchies of dominance is how you stop people from being systemically abusive. The idea that bad people exist shouldn’t encourage people to create hierarchies that empower a small group of people to abuse the rest of us, especially when we already know that those hierarchies attract abusers.
The idea that hierarchies are necessary past a certain size is meaningless. Either it’s wrong and we can get rid of them, or it’s right and we’d never know. It’s unknowable if true. You are just stuck in the mental trap of hierarchical realism.
I like this quote, for a few reasons. Namely, Heaven is not real, and since “communism has never been tried” as “all states that did try stopped in the autocratic phase neglecting to dismantle themselves,” and that is almost certainly the outcome that would happen if anyone ever tried anywhere again, communism is effectively not real either. They’re both unachievable utopian concepts that offer simply “hope” more than anything concrete.
Furthermore if heaven was real, I’m not 100% sure it’s not an autocratic “benevolent dictatorship” ran by God and his Angel literal soldiers. It really does seem analogous to communism as practiced. Can you go against God in heaven or would you be cast down to hell with the other political dissidents in a heavenly holodomor?
Heaven is anarchy: everyone does what they want, which is to be good and helpful to each other.
Heaven is a (benevolent?) dictatorship: everyone does what God wants, which happens to coincide with their desires.
Heaven is communism: everyone helps each other and has access to the same resources, although since a lack of scarcity is implied, this may not require helping each other out in material means.
Heaven probably isn’t capitalism: given a lack of scarcity, communal access to resources, and everyone having their own housing, organized trade of any kind seems kind of pointless.
Heaven probably isn’t a democracy: if everyone agrees on the major issues, why would you vote on them? That said, everyone in heaven chose to be there, so that’s the one vote you get.
Note the 3 underlying issues in each of those. Similarity of goals, which isn’t going to happen anytime soon; people putting the common good before themselves, which likely won’t happen until…; and a lack of scarcity, which won’t happen until certain currently-unlikely events occur.
Owning a beater was soo much easier though! And, as I started driving there I’m thankful, 'cause I had a beater. I remember it was a huge deal when we moved to Ohio because we would have to actually have the state inspect our families cars for the first time since purchase.
Yeah, I find this super weird. Where I live, any vehicle more than 3 years old needs to be inspected annually, and anything older than 10 years needs to be inspected every 6 months - it’s a super basic safety check; are your tires legal, do your brakes work, is your suspension system in spec etc. Pretty much just making sure that vehicle is safe to drive - you get a bit of leeway if the certificate has expired, but if it’s more than a few weeks past you risk getting fined or having your car impounded
I understand it when it is specifically for large cities (>500,000 people or so) but when done at a state level it makes no sense. I understand that it is functionality not enforced in smaller communities, but I personally think any law that has poor enforcement for good reason (such as more than half of the vehicles not complying) should be removed or redefined (perhaps only require it on commercial vehicles or make it a secondary crime).
In Oregon they check your carbon emissions every 2 years. That’s it. They don’t give a shit how fucked up your car is as long as the emissions are low.
I know how old my cat is because I know how old my niece is. If you’re bad with dates make them easy to remember. Not going to lie i make anniversaries intentionally on the first and not an insignificant amount have been Jan first which is even easier.
I mean, if you’re starving badly enough you can sometimes completely stop having your period. So in a post apocalyptic setting that one could be kind of believable.
The makeup is permanent. She has alopecia. And her father wore that jacket as he was wasting away in the last stages of cancer--everything else swallowed him up.
Here’s my take: we already know wolves, coyotes, bears, leopards, lions and tigers, along with everyother land carnivore will gladly add a human to the dinner menu of the chance poses itself. In the event of an apocaliptyc event, those would be already accounted for as dangers.
Dogs, I’d risk even domestic pigs, once cut off from human care, would become predatorial. Dogs, even today, can spontaneously form wild packs, capable of predatorial behaviour and aggressive towards humans. Pigs, on the other hand, have a scary capacity to regress and become feral when let loose on the wild; there are records of domestic pigs escaping from farms only to be taken down months or years later by hunters, turned into gigantic animals, covered in thick air and boasting long and sharp, tusk-like, teeth and a very mean and aggressive temper, not like the common wild boar that will actively avoid humans if possible.
These new predator would pose more of a threat than those we already account as such.
I’m in my 30s and working an office job is way less stressful overall than school was. When I’m done with work, I can go home and stop thinking about it.
With school, you can never study “enough”, so its always creeping in the back of your subconscious. And good grades alone don’t cut it - you’ve also got to participate in extracurriculars and turn yourself into a trained monkey to write an “interesting enough” college essay. Oh and if you screw any of this up, your entire adult life could be ruined.
Diligent students have it way harder than office workers. Kids need our support and sympathy.
I’m so glad extracurriculars aren’t really a thing that anybody cares about in my country nor are college essays. School and being a teenager was stressful enough as it was.
I’m a Jew and pretty sensitive to antisemitism, even dogwhistles. I admit I don’t go to lemmy.ml very often, but from what I’ve seen from lemmy.ml posters posting on lemmy.world, there’s been no antisemitism at all. In fact, I have not seen any antisemitism from anyone here that I can recall, which is pretty amazing in and of itself.
Opposition to Israel’s genocidal regime is not antisemitism.
See also major conspiracy theories implying there is a group of secret overlords who control everything behind the scenes.
Any time the supposed responsible party for some conspiracy is an unspecified they/them, that’s usually a sign that they’re trying to be sneaky about serving you a rewrite of blood libel.
Just as a sidenote, whoever wrote the Disney Secret Invasion story needs a hard looking at.
This might sound a bit dorky, but bear with me for a moment.
So in the comics, the Kree Empire vs Skrull Empire is this big, galactic conflict that’s been going on forever, right? Occasionally one side will invade Earth for reasons, everyone has a fun time punching things, that’s it.
Two empires that suck equal amounts hitting each other in space. Good clean nerd fun.
Disney, a company founded by a notorious anti-semite, decided with the MCU that they should make the Skrull refugee victims of a genocide.
Okay, sure, that’s okay, it addresses real world issues, it’s a good message for the kids, imperialism bad, refugees are people too, right?
Hey.
Wait a minute.
Aren’t the Skrull shape shifting lizard people?
A fringe conspiracy theory that after a brief inspection always turns out to be a code for “Jewish people?”
So… Now we have the Disney (((Skrulls))), refugee genocide victims of the Space Nazis.
Okay. Well, that’s not too bad, but obviously they’re going to need to reveal that the Skrull Empire is still a thing in space, right? Because having the Skrull refugees do the Secret Invasion story would be kind of fucked up, but that’s easy to fix, you just make them the survivors of a single planet from…
Nope. The refugees are now taking over Earth by replacing leaders with (((Skrulls))).
Oh, look. Episode Two.
“The (((Skrulls))) were a worse threat than Hydra! You know, the literal Nazis!”
Ironic since Captain Marvel gave me the impression that the Skrull were being coded as Palestinians, down to the oppressive force labeling them all terrorists.
Yeah, until they went off the rails with Secret Invasion you could easily have just assumed it was a simple refugee analogy that someone didn’t think all the way through.
Of course, even if the writers would be horrified to learn what the conspiracy types actually mean by shape shifting lizard men, that would still leave Secret Invasion with the core plot that refugees are an existential threat worse than secret Nazis, so they can fuck off regardless.
“Death to Israel” is also not antisemitic. Jews are not Israelis and Israelis are not Jews. I am not an Israeli. I have no ties or allegiances to Israel, nor do I want them. I think “death to Israel” is an extremist viewpoint, but not an antisemitic one.
1: Kind of like saying there can’t be white on white racism.
2: Only nerds know that Palestinians and Arabs in general are also Semitic.
It does rather point out how stupid all this irredentism is though. These are ultimately all descendants of the same peoples, killing each other over the same God.
Yeah. I am really sick of seeing the argument that any condemnation of the government of Israel is anti-Semitic. It has nothing to do with them being Jewish and everything to do with how they have handled that conflict over the years.
It's ok to be a freak. It's not ok to be an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. We like the weirdos for the colourfulness they bring to our lives. No one likes an asshole.
Keep Lemmy weird. Don't be an asshole. Live by these rules and this place will always be great.
We all have our moments (or so he tells himself). I’m not advocating being an asshole, but they do make things seem more real. I’ve been in online groups where everyone’s blandly cordial and it all feels lifeless.
You can be a difficult bastard without being mean though, it’s practically my whole job these days.
Actually I think being a difficult bastard, stubborn, or an arsehole is actually needed in certain contexts. Sometimes people are stubborn just because they can, sometimes it’s because they are defending themselves or someone else.
Humanity is fantastic, wonderful, loving and amazing. It’s not a shit hole.
I’d argue society is really broken in some places, but not humanity.
As for Social media: it just brings out some dark side in some people. The vast majority of people on social media behave. It’s just that the outliers catch the attention.
Just like most animals the greater majority of people try to avoid as many direct conflicts as possible IRL. And they’re full of empathy and compassion - even for other animals in distress and inanimate objects (saw off the fingers of a plastic doll in front of others and see how they treat you afterwards).
But of course people will lose a part of that compassion etc once they move within society without feeling like a part of it. One example is driving a car. You’re way less aware of being a part of society even though you’re “swimming” in it. Feeling a strong individual agency and being empowered by two tons of steel while simultaneously being greatly restricted by everyone and everything around you will do that to you.
Same goes for the (social) media landscape. We feel empowered by our own echo chambers and/or chosen media outlet while barely interacting with anyone who could challenge our beliefs (which, funnily enough, is often the right call in that context, because we can’t change strong opposing beliefs via social media). And since it’s all an indirect, mostly faceless interaction, our beliefs will automatically be strengthened and we’ll be more likely to agitate anyone with opposing beliefs (while still avoiding any direct conflict).
So I’d say it’s more of a flaw in our design, that is being exploited, than a general lack of sympathy/empathy (of which we actually have plenty).
Which means you can’t hold any one individual to higher standards. Because that’s not where we “fail”. It’d take a much broader appliance of social securities (housing, food, healthcare, education etc all over the world) and a fundamental change in the way we interact. But you and I won’t change that (though I guess it’s comforting telling ourselves that we could individually change things on a greater scale).
One major issue is we assume the motivations of others all the time, usually negative. Add anonymity to the mix and you have social media rage. A good place to start is to occasionally think “Maybe I’m not 100% right. Maybe they are at least partially right also.” Also, “What could be their reasons for thinking that?” without dismissing them out of hand. The press encourages rage by presenting us with a filter of negativity and constantly pressing our anger buttons.
True psychopaths exist but not to the extent people may think.
If you consider that we are currently destroying our eco system that we need to survive and have known for over 50 years that the co2 levels will cause major issues, but nobody really felt the need to act. And when the countries actually sat together and made the Kyoto contracts the USA steped in and fucks up the whole idea. Thanks Bush you little Oil-fucker!
Considering that you could say humanity is fucked and humans are at fault. And if you look at it the people voting are at fault too, falling for company and other proparganda and voting for a government that fucks them even harder.
I would say humanity as we know it won’t exist anymore in 200 years. War, droughts, floods and shit will get us. Even if we would act now the whole planet would need to cooperate. No Chance!
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the actual power in the world lies in the hand of just a fraction of percent of the people. Those asshole ruin it for everyone else.
Yeah, I know! But do you see anybody care about that? Do the votes for political parties show anything that would mean they don’t like those corrupted bastards?
No! Most people don’t care or think voting for the same parties will change sth.
I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone who didn’t care about this besides the one-off sociopaths you encounter on the internet (though I’m fairly convinced that they also care but just feel powerless to change things). The problem is that the priority for most people is not starving to death within the next month, and that makes it impossible to devote time and energy into solving more long term problems.
The thing is the same people who fuck the planet are responsible for your nonexisting social safety net.
I know people only care about politics when they have nothing else to do, but this is the problem. Most people won’t make a well informed decision when voting, because they don’t have time to do that. I mean most countries you can’t even go vote on sunday
Worse, the average human is self absorbed and apathetic. This enables all of the truly evil to assert itself. Humanity is the sum of its choices and look where that leads. If it’s a battle of best vs worst natures, it’s become clear what side has prevailed.
Dog Im on social media because Im the shit in the hole. When Im not on social media Im overall a pretty worthwhile person. Causation not correlation etc.
I mean, as a dude, I damn sure would feel safest around lesbians if I was worried about that.
Idk what like the girl animal “equivalent” of a bear would be, except one that I am not quite sure if it is offensive or not.
Fucking queer is super accepted now, but then I watch my daughter, who has dated women before, and is not shy or ashamed, and I do believe is still fine with doing so in the future, call her brother or someone on YouTube gay as an insult.
A tree isn’t going to use those emotions you shared when your were feeling down against you when she gets mad that you forgot to unload the dishwasher two months later 🤷🏻♂️
I’m bi and call stuff I don’t like ‘gay’ all the time. I also call stuff I like ‘gay’. I don’t think that the use of a term by those it applies to can really be negative as its more of an empowerment thing abt takibg the word back for the community. It’s like getting mad at people that call each other the n-word (especially if you aren’t black yourself).
That’s because it wasn’t meant to be a debate, it was meant to illustrate a point.
People who didn’t get it and people who did get it but didn’t like it (i.e. misogynists) turned it into a debate. The latter also proved that point with the large number of rape and death threats.
Yeah, god forbid people get angry when others make sexist remarks! They must be real misogynists for not liking sexism!
If you replaced the “man” with “black man” or “black person”, or if someone said this with immigrants, it wouldn’t need to be explained to you or anyone why this is a pretty fucked up thing to say, but for some reason when it’s just “man” it’s okay and anyone who disagrees is a misogynist, according to you. If I made a general frustrated remark about women, plenty of people would take issue with it, and I don’t think you’d would be saying “it wasn’t meant to be a debate, it was meant to illustrate a point”, would you?
How about just stop using sexist rhetoric? There are a lot of people on your side who would agree with you if you just dropped the needlessly sexist and divisive rhetoric.
And before you get there - and if not you then I’m sure someone will think of saying it - yes, it’s true that the world and system we live in isn’t as hostile to men as women, black people, and immigrants, but progressive spaces definitely tend to be the opposite. And believe it or not, that actually has an effect with pushing younger men into the arms of the alt right; you can insult them and just call them fascists if you like, but that doesn’t change the reality that young hormonal men going into progressive spaces and seeing this kind of rhetoric will feel excluded, pushed out, and like the world is against them.
Should be pretty clear if you actually bothered to read it, but I’ll spell it out for you: P-R-O-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E-S; and overall people who acknowledge the experiences of women that this is supposed to highlight. And I am also on that side, I just think you’re doing an absolute shit job of it, being needlessly discriminating, and creating division - as I already explained.
By just highlighting the experiences of women in the society we live in, and all the sexual violence they fall victims to, and how much violence is specifically directed at women - without resorting to cheap inflammatory “memes” (*). And as another way to a solution, we can also just try to be and create good role models for young men.
(*)And saying that has actually reminded me, that’s usually exactly how the far right likes to act and spread their message too: inflammatory rhetoric that can make a catchy sound bite that will reach a lot of people, but which has no real depth to it. I’d rather not those tactics and actually try having real conversations.
What are you talking about? When did I even say anything like that? Of course they will still get threats, the point is what is the best way to move forward, raise attention to these issues to bring about a better society, instead of making the situation worse, which is what I think your behavior does.
I’m really not sure if you’re even engaging in good faith and I’m not gonna spend all day on this, so this will be the final thing I’ll say:
I think that meme is unnecessarily divisive and will cause the average man (at least young man/teenager) who stumbles into it to feel attacked, and even more so when accused of either “not getting it” or “being a misogynist”; and in a time when they are just a couple clicks away of falling into and alt-right pipeline that will acknowledge their feelings and tell them the left/progressives have it out for them, it’s really unproductive to use rhetoric like that, which can make them feel “othered” and part of an out group.
I’m sorry, but if a “debate” like this is all it takes to turn someone into a redpilled incel, they were going to become one anyway and we have much bigger problems.
The fact is that women get attacked just existing in an online space and a scary amount of men feel threatened any time a woman speaks up for herself. Because that’s patriarchy. When the power structure is threatened in any way, No matter what example a woman gives, no matter how hard she attempts to not be divisive, there are still a bunch of men who feel threatened by her suggesting that any man may possibly pose a threat to a woman because they take it personally.
And they will feel ‘othered’ because the patriarchy has raised them to believe they are the superior humans because of their gender and any suggestion that some men may do the wrong thing where women are concerned is an explicit threat to them personally. And the whole point of this is that a woman doesn’t know whether the strange man she encounters in the woods will do the wrong thing. There’s just no way to know whether or not a man will assault her. People can claim that’s true about strange women as well, but, again, that’s missing the whole fucking point. Again, though, the point will be missed no matter how diplomatically it is put because it challenges the patriarchy.
Okay, this comment was the best so far and actually seemed to care to make a point/converse, so I’ll make just one final reply.
Your first sentence might be true for older men, or men who are already “allies” to put it simply, but it’s simply not true for younger men, and again it’s also just unhelpful and pushes people away. Overall, it makes you sound like you care more about being angry and being right, than actually helping to make society better. Not that I don’t understand that feeling by the way, I’m just saying it’s unhelpful and not constructive.
And yeah, off course there will always be some men who will feel threatened anyway when people raise the issue, but the question is how many feel threatened and “othered” in one situation versus in the other situation. I mean, I’d hate to fall from a ladder, but I’d rather fall from a short ladder than a tall one; does that make sense? I’d rather you go with the option that will push less young men into the arms of people like Andrew Tate, rather than the one that will push the most just because you’re angry and want to make your point in the most brutish way possible.
And they will feel ‘othered’ because the patriarchy has raised them to believe they are the superior humans because of their gender and any suggestion that some men may do the wrong thing where women are concerned is an explicit threat to them personally.
They feel “othered” because the meme is inherently sexist, and if they complain they get called sexist. Again, imagine if instead of “men” this is talking about a marginalized group and the problem becomes explicit. Just because men are not a marginalized group in society, does not mean that the same feelings are not evoked in them when confronted with such rhetoric.
You make a lot of good points, but where I am stuck on is the idea of blaming these videos (especially the initial ones, not all the reactions) for people falling off that ladder and becoming an incel. That takes years of grooming and if they were at that point, something was going to push them over sooner or later.
Also, maybe it is sexist for all of those women to find strange men more threatening, but it doesn’t change the fact that a large number of women do feel that way and maybe it should be explored why instead of criticizing them for it.
You should look into the origin of the word meme. It’s not terribly old and you clearly don’t understand it. You’ve also gone and thrown away your benefit of the doubt by arguing semantics on what’s clearly meant to be a lighthearted and hyperbolic comparison. Propping up random ideas and putting them, as words, in someone else’s mouth is dumb as hell. Pretty sure there’s hundreds of places online where you can argue with other people who don’t know the difference between socratic and aristotelean logic.
It did say that it reduces particle spread by 30-60% though, yet with qualifiers too.
My natural intuitive thought is that the lid down surely limits the spreading, i.e. the left side of this picture, especially as compared with the right side:
Also, I want to (half jokingly) complain that they treat the MS2 bacteriophage like one of the bad guys there, as if killing the E. coili wouldn’t make it one of our allies in that fight:-). (I say jokingly bc most people reading such an article would know that, but also what they really used it for was a detection vector, probably bc the protein wrapping eases sample collection by reducing degradation.)
It would be neat if someone developed a product where like you could spray a mist into the air, or I guess pour a liquid into the bowl, turn off the lights, flush the toilet and then watch as it glows where all the “stuff” spreads:-). But for now, at least these studies are better than nothing.:-D
I mean you could kinda do that yourself with UV ink and an appropriate flashlight. Put some in the bowl and some in the tank, maybe even different colors to see which portion contributes more.
There is no product on the market I could find (with a normal price that isn’t some $15,000 super toilet) that will open and close the lid and then flush for you. There are automatic seats, but they are timed such that it’s completely unreasonable to stand and wait for them to close before flushing.
Crazy to think they’re are no hands free options available.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.