nalinna
@nalinna@lemmy.world
- Comment on Disappointed 3 weeks ago:
Yep. Certainly wouldn’t be the first time that something is made to seem altruistic but ultimately gets used in questionably-ethical ways.
- Comment on Disappointed 3 weeks ago:
Yes. It’s utterly useless now (and they aren’t being introduced into existing ecosystem to my knowledge). They view it as a proof of concept for more recently extinct species as well as a potential tool for restoring species to ecosystems in the future as extinction events pick up speed.
However, it should be noted that extinction events are a symptom, not the core problem, so I’m not sure exactly where we’d restore extinct species to, since human use of the land is the root cause of most ecosystem collapses, and it’s unlikely that they can rebuild populations in the places they died out of (and the land probably won’t be yielded back anyway).
Super cool stuff that they did regardless, but can’t figure out how it’s going to accomplish what they seem to want to accomplish.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
That’s a fantastic point I hadn’t considered. Thank you!
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
Pure conjecture here, but I certainly do wonder if the number of lawsuits would decrease if healthcare wasn’t cost-prohibitive to people. I don’t expect they’d go away entirely (legitimate grievances, greed, etc), but I imagine they’d probably go down quite a bit if people didn’t have to wonder how to pay rent and pay to have their broken leg treated.
- Comment on The new Hulu Subscriber agreement just dropped - Don't like ads too bad. 2 months ago:
Yep. Worked there for a bit. They’re contractually obligated to show ads on certain content. Doesn’t matter what tier you’re on. As a paying customer (a rather long time ago), my partner became so incensed at the ads that played even though he paid for ad-free that he rage-cancelled his membership.