False accusations should have strong punishments, but that doesn't mean every accusation should result in either the accuser or the accused being punished. Not being able to prove someone is telling the truth does not mean you can prove they are lying, especially when the confidence threshold is proof beyond reasonable doubt.
I personally think that false accusations should theoretically be covered already as perjury and libel, but I don't think that actually happens often.
Covid definitely had a strong immediate negative impact on kids' education, but the trend of children struggling more in school over time is older than that. Until recent decades, there was an observed increase in children's IQ over later generations, called the Flynn effect. Children were on average expected to be 3-5 points higher in measured IQ than those born a decade earlier. But we have reversed that trend after peaking somewhere around the 80s. There are likely a lot of contributing factors, but they should all be environmental rather than genetic. So hopefully later generations will be able to reverse the trend again and support their kids' development in ways their own parents had neglected.
That's rough. I hope you are able to find something more flexible.
I'm a software developer, so there's a lot of WFH positions at least compared to other fields. But unless you have particularly good connections you would probably need to get a related degree if you wanted a job at most places. I've also heard it's not a good time to be applying unfortunately. You might be able to try for some WFH consulting work related to your current job. Big software companies will hire contractors for temporary work too I guess, but they would probably still want experienced candidates. For me, this was just a position I applied to a few years ago and was lucky enough to get an offer. I don't think there's a secret to it, sorry.
I'm vegan but really missed ice cream so I started getting Ben and Jerry's almond milk version when it's on sale. It irks me that they charge for a pint what I could get a gallon of the dairy ice cream for, but there isn't much selection for dairy-free. For whatever reason vegan versions of foods are pretty much always priced like premium brands. I'd be happy to buy generic brands of stuff in bulk, but instead I look at the price of something and often decide I don't need it after all.
Yes. I have worked at both and I feel much more comfortable at home. It gives you a level of flexibility that is hard to describe. I can start my day early, take a break for an hour, and resume it when I feel I can give it the proper level of attention. When I was in office, there was a pressure to look like you're working all the time. It felt hard to concentrate when the expectation was on dedicating the expected time to work rather than getting something done. With WFH, it's more about getting your tasks done and generally no one cares when you do it. And I can slouch and prop my feet up and have videos/music/audiobooks playing and whatever else I want without anyone knowing, let alone caring. I don't need to worry about a commute, and all my food and comforts are available when I want them. I can easily handle things like being at home for a package delivery or a technician repairing something or walking the dog or just doing laundry.
That being said, I will admit it is considerably harder to get help with a task in office. You can't just have someone pop by to look at something for example. You can still do a call or message, but it's a bigger barrier to overcome. With WFH, collusion for a group more often needs to be scheduled, and you don't have an analogue for water cooler talk.
Many places that offer work from home also have an office somewhere, so I would recommend new employees go in while learning the ropes, then switch as they become more independent. And some people like having different locations to help switch between work and relaxation mentalities. And it can be nice to get out of the house too. But overall, WFH is much better for me.
Well said, and I'm sorry if I made you feel like you needed to go through that whole explanation. I can imagine objections someone intent on arguing could make, but I think it's fair to assume that since plants don't have nerves, they cannot suffer as animals can. Damage may impair their ability to live, but it doesn't cause actual displeasure. There could always be some secret unmeasurable pain mechanism that was developed with no evolutionary benefit, but it is so unlikely that it is not worth considering. If someone will not grant this assumption, I would then assume they are not engaging in good faith.
Yeah I realize it came across as critical unintentionally. The side plot episodes aren't bad, they provide balance.
PTB. Remembering someone and linking back to an earlier conversation is hardly stalking or harassment, particularly if it's on a similar topic. It's natural to start recognizing the usernames of people that engage in the same spaces as you on a platform as small as Lemmy. And as you pointed out, they replied to your comment, so if anything it would have been them following you around. And while I could see people finding this argument annoying, it's certainly still civil. No one should have been subject to mod action here imo.
In the pictured comment chain, the quote text asked OP to prove the absence of something (sentience in plants). Then Commie later admitted that it was impossible to do so. And from the start, the claim that plants are sentient is likely one that no one involved actually believes. I cannot think why you would make such an objection other than to exhaust someone and waste their time.
And even if plants were somehow sentient, it would still be less harmful to eat them directly than raising animals to eat due to the massive calorie loss from going up the food chain. Having animals be a middle man for humanity's consumption would result in more plants being killed, not fewer. OP touched on this briefly in their replies. Meaning that even if it was intended to object to veganism, the argument only adds an additional reason to adopt it.
OP did imply an objection to the plant sentience claim disproved it, which is the wrong response, but only because they should have rejected it out of hand as something unfalsifiable. Commie chose to be pedantic that it could still be true.
There's not enough here to judge Commie as a troll, but they did support a spurious argument much more than OP.
Yeah a lot of these shows started out with a monster-of-the-week format before focussing more on longer arcs over time. It makes sense to keep audiences invested, since otherwise things become predictable and low stakes. The detours from that kinda take the role of filler episodes.
What should happen is that some people shift to continued support, and some move to a new project. If a company really needs workers only for a short time, they should hire contractors who can then move to something else afterwards. Treating employees as disposable like this is not just super disrespectful, it's also a poor use of resources strategically.