Scipitie

Yes

The"single cell pet" gets me even more... Like isn't that a tad specific? Dogs? No prob! Rabbits? Be my guest. Amoeba? Fuck off, weirdo!

Not Op here, from what I've read is that the answer to that question is unknown but he showed a significant tolerance for some. Does that make it himself fine? In my book: yes.

For me personally it was enoughto leave the project behind as it's so closely tied to the person.

That's a call everyone needs to do for themselves though if course

Im not familiar with British law, anyone care to explain why this is capped at 90%? Kinda unintuitive to me.

Oh. That would explain the hashtags. I'll edit my comment to point out yours!

Thanks!

Hypothesis: the message seems to imply that the cliche nature lover needs to trample and destroy said nature to be close to it.

This seems the most likely explanation to me.

And I find it neither funny nor insightful.

Edit: I can't manage to copy paste usernames on mobile but please check out the refinement by the comment to this post. Highly valuable edition. Tldr of it: not "nature lovers" in general but social media invasive nature lovers.

Lemmy.world is blocked by beehaw as well...

How about "what I want is beyond my comprehension"?

That's quite often my default...

For me it's very simple: NSFW can't have a general acceptable definition because it depends on culture, background and personal beliefs. There is no way for a collection of communities to have a common definition and even if they would have: enforcement and interpretation is still done by volunteers.

Therefore All is never safe for work unless I know that my tolerance is lower than all communities within lemmy AND I'm fine with an accidental penis or breast due to human error.

I don't hate that much but I don't watch him because of the shady selling business hr often does and apparent sponsored content which is not always disclosed (been a while but his channel misrepresented graphics cards benchmarks for example).

It's like the British yellow press for me: his face alone is enough to discredit the quality of the source. Could it be good? Sure! Will I ever find out? Not anymore.

Wow thanks a lot for that!

At least in Germany it's the same. It gets ignored in the discussions concerning nuclear exit but it's actually the main reason why I'm not aggressively against it: we have save areas for nuclear storage but those fight bitterly to not have it. The areas which are currently used are... Not good. Paying someone else (such as Finland) is out of budget for both state and energy companies. The latter anyway want to do the running but not the maintenance and the building, state should pay for that.

It's really white sad for me. The (true) statement that the dangerous waste needs to be stored carefully got corrupted to "it can't be stored".