[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Fruit is mostly sugar and water. That's the food. The cellulose is just the container; you don't need to digest that, you just shit it with the seeds.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

Still made of undigestable cellulose, toxins, and whatever chemical horrors we've sprayed on top to kill any insect that has managed to evolve a resistance to said toxins.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Cows have four stomachs and rechew their food for hours for a reason. Leafy greens are not proper food. (Plus, they're full of toxins, both from pesticides and from the plants trying to kill anything that eats them, and tasting as horrible as possible to dissuade animals from eating them.)

The only edible parts of the plant are fruits, which are intended for animals to eat them so that they'll spread the seeds.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Maybe they were referring to Kelsey..?

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

No, no, they've got a point: if every citizen has enough guns to be entirely covered in them, the bullets won't be able to get through!

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

And Connect for Lemmy.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm sure we can find volunteers willing to kill themselves once they're done with the killing. 🤷‍♂️

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, probably, though computers take space, and electricity... though, admittedly, these days you can probably run a mail server on a raspberry pi (if you can get your hands on one) powered by a potato... 🤔

The plan sort of was to eventually (once I can afford a new machine) move everything to VMs, with GPU pass through for the gaming one (I can't afford a dedicated gaming machine — nor have the space for it — and I want something I can easily reset to a clean installation in case of Denuvo and similar malware without messing with my work software), but moving the servers and firewall to a small dedicated machine might indeed be a more realistic (and maybe even cheaper) approach...

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean... as someone who's had to port some .NET framework software to .NET 6... yes... but.

20 years old .NET framework code will keep working, sure, as long as you can find and install the correct .NET framework runtime, but maintaining it might be a different matter... you can code .NET with notepad, if you feel like it, but for .NET framework code you will need Visual Studio, with the proper SDKs... which might not be available in the latest version of Visual Studio (on occasion I've had to install VS 2019 so I could compile old .NET framework code in VS 2022).

And when you get it to compile you still might have to deal with third party tools (Crystal Reports, for instance) that don't work in modern .NET or later versions of Visual Studio...

And of course then you want to add something new to the code, which is why you went through all that trouble to begin with... but the tools for what you want to do are only available in modern .NET, or as nuget packages that won't work with framework... and you'll have to migrate the whole thing to the latest long term support version of .NET... which sure, is several orders of magnitude less work than rewriting the whole thing in some other language, and heavily automated... but is still a whole process.

But then of course there's the bits of .NET framework that got deprecated during the transition (or in later updates), or the third party libraries that never got updated... and you'll have to find or implement replacements for those...

But yeah, once you've done all that your refurbished 20 year old code will still work today, and significantly better than it did before... and if it isn't too ridden with windows dependencies (WPF and the like) it might even be portable to Linux or Mac, or whatever. And it'll probably still work (and do it even better) 20 years from now.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No one says no to some extra vitamins, but by that same reasoning cows (who'll happily eat the occasional small bird or rodent if given the opportunity) would be omnivores too. Dogs eat grass occasionally, sure (though mostly because it helps them puke the indigestible crap they've swallowed while you weren't looking), but an awful lot of what a real omnivore would consider food is literal poison to a dog.

Dogs are stunted and inbred wolves, and ~15-30,000 years of artificial selection, while enough to cosmetically and mentally deform a species into hundreds of more or less fubared breeds, is not enough to turn a carnivore into an omnivore; that kind of thing takes millions of years.

[-] leftzero@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dogs seek "human" food, dog food, cat food, inedible garbage, their own (and other animals') shit and puke, that unidentifiable dead thing in the ditch, aww, look at the cute liddle bunny wabbit NO! Fenton! Drop it! Fenton! Bad dog! pukes Fenton drops what's left of the rabbit and inhales the puke in one slurp. Haks a few times, pukes it, the rabbit's entrails, that thing from the ditch, and what looks suspiciously like a used condom. Proceeds to swallow the whole mix again with gusto. Dogs want to eat everything and most of what they want to eat isn't really good for them, or is outright poisonous.

Dogs, despite their brains being so fubared by domestication and inbreeding that they'll try to eat anything even if it kills them, are carnivores not omnivores.

We are omnivores evolved to be able to eat all kinds of crap (we call several poisons plants have evolved over millions of years to defend themselves from predators "spices" and "recreational drugs"), dogs are not.

If you feed "human" food to your dog (or, more likely, if your dog eats it off the table or the garbage can despite you yelling at it not to), make very sure that dogs' methabolism considers it food and not deadly poison, because the dog's brain certainly can't tell the difference, nor would it care to if it could..

view more: ‹ prev next ›

leftzero

joined 1 year ago