The fact that the bad actions of only one of the sides is so widely broadcasted must be explicitly noted though.

We should not be living in some perpetual Gell-Mann Amnesia state where we just react to the current news report in whatever appropriate manner while forgetting all of the old news, history, and so on around it.

I mean that's clearly not the case. I'm swimming in anti-imperialist anti-US content.

That it doesn't lead to mass action and the end of the current state of the American regime is a domestic American population problem, not a missing information problem.

There is no poverty of information. The fact of the matter is a powerful section of the US population benefits from the current situation.

“There is no poverty of information.”

Quite the opposite, in fact. But there’s a difference between the information being present somewhere, and a reasonable way to get that information in front of people in an actionable form.

We’re drowning in “information,” at present. But the mass media narratives that are most readily available distort things quite a bit for a lot of reasons. (Ratings, owner bias/interference, format.)

There is no poverty of information depending on your news bubble.

Everything is a news bubble though. People incur bias from anywhere. Wikipedia just, in general, has less spin usually than some private media outlet.

See, from my perspective, that is exactly the problem. The people pushing said "anti-imperialist, anti-US" content are often the same people that defend Putin's invasion of Ukraine. The reality however, is that these are niche bubbles empowered by the internet. Once we realise how harmful they are, they'll be moderated or cut off.

That’s one aspect but he tried kettle heated water too and steaming the water produced better results according to the video. So most likely the air in the steamed water is what produces the better taste and texture.

And about the audiophile analogy upthread…some people don’t have good taste buds and other people have very sensitive tastebuds. One should have a bit of humility and not be the equivalent of a color blind person declaring that red and green are actually the same color and you must be imagining the difference.

> So most likely the air in the steamed water is what produces the better taste and texture.

Definitely possible given his reaction to the degassed americano later.

It's like how /r/steak is just dudes posting steak pictures, and there is some new cooking sub where it's just women posting food pictures and complaining about their significant others. Women be complaining.

> there is some new cooking sub where it's just women posting food pictures and complaining about their significant others

If you are referring to /r/girldinnerdiaries, that is not a cooking sub, nor is it intended to be. The whole point is pairing a photo of dinner with the situation and mood of the photographer.

It's right there in the name: Girl Dinner Diaries.

I'm not sure how serious you are about the dismissive "women be complaining" comment. A big part of your perception may be that women have more to 'complain' about; society is measurably unfair for women. Another part could be that when women voice their struggles it is called "complaining," and when men voice their struggles they are "being serious." Also, men get shot down for showing vulnerability and seeking support, so their struggles are internal. And this isn't always good for mental health.

My comment was descriptive, not normative. I’m not ascribing moral valence to it, just stating what’s happening and speculating why. For example, men probably complain less because men get shot down for showing vulnerability in public settings like online forums. Women probably complain more in public because they get sympathy. Whether one is good, or one is more mentally healthy, I don’t think either is healthier or unhealthier, but I don’t particularly care.

But when leftists says things like community support, it doesn't bring up images of traditional villages and extended families. It brings up images of communists saying things like abolish the family. Naturally, due to their history.

It's not like leftists are known for their traditional family values now or then, so why should it be taken that way?

Yes, when you intentionally take what leftists say in bad faith and stereotype them negatively, then the bad faith interpretation and negative stereotypes make sense. But normal people don't hear "communism" when leftists say "community support."

Also given how many people espousing "traditional family values" among the right turn out to be abusers, pedophiles, rapists, deadbeats, etc, what you might consider "traditional" values don't actually mapped to the left-right political axis at all.

And I assume you didn't bother reading my comment or this thread very hard and just wanted to dunk on the left, but the American nuclear family isn't "traditional family values" to begin with.

That would leave one remaining member lol. I guess it would be infinity percentage reduction according to his math.

I have both and most days I just go with the pourover. No waiting for the espresso machine to warm up lol.

Thank you lol. I don't understand the love for Moka pot at all. You are guaranteed to get bitter coffee brewing at close to 212F. If you want simplicity, get a pourover or french press!

He’s not making a might is right argument.

Yes he is. "Nothing more natural than one animal eating another" is might makes right. It's also an appeal to nature, but in this case it's both.

Weaker animals can eat stronger animals. Pack animals, carrion feeders, bugs, animals feeding their offspring, etc. So almost entirely an appeal to nature argument.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Carnivores need to eat other animals to live. If a living thing needs to do something to live, then almost all cases, there is a very defensible argument for it being moral.

And humans aren't obligate carnivores.

The argument is over whether a certain thing is moral or not. I argue that it is because carnivores need to do that to survive. Humans don't but does that affect whether that thing is moral or not?

Then you would have to argue that an omnivore eating meat is immoral while a carnivore eating meat is moral. I wouldn't enjoy defending that statement.

I don’t know what’s with tech people and their insistence that most people who use tech are mindless zombies.