This is a public service announcement for anyone who supports Majorkill. It seems he discontinued the lifetime access option. By that I mean not only did he stop offering it on his site, but he no longer gives access to new STLs to those who bought it in the past. I'm not a lawyer, but this seems super sketchy. Could he also block access to individual STL files people buy as well? Who knows? Either way, he needs to be held accountable. DO NOT support him in any way until this is resolved.

Update: Apparently he changed his brand from Majorkill Minis to Major Minis, presumably to specifically discontinue the lifetime access option. SUPER shady. I'll never support him ever again, and I suggest nobody here does either.

Yes, this is a post discrediting NOT Loreen’s song, but the people who are voting for it. I know, simply let people vote on what they feel like. In any case, I’m letting you know this beforehand, just so if you don’t want any amount of shaking to your view - you can ignore or downvote this before anything else, and then go on with your scrolling.

[Quite a long (!) read. Only start if you have some free time lol.]

‘Clickbaity’ title, apologies!

But I wanted to get this opinion out there, which I believe is just as valid as the ones defending this song. If you want to get angry at my view, you’re also free to do so, of course.

I profoundly despise this entry. Don’t get me wrong, I like the song, it’s a competent ‘ballady’ pop song, easy on the ear, which we all know Sweden does so well. A solid representation of Sweden’s strength in this genre, at the European scope. But as an Eurovision entry, I see so many things wrong with it.

I don’t want to get into the fact that it is a repeating competitor. Morally, one could argue it’s playing dirty, going for the fan-factor, radio-factor, etc., but since we’ve seen many instances of this, it’s an argument that people will simply discredit. Even though, morally, it could very much be questioned. Not doing it here, however.

Right, so; ‘Tattoo’ is a safe entry that for some reason gathered a lot of backing. By giving her an(other) Eurovision win, the competition would be set back 10 years. The moment ‘Euphoria’ won, Europe’s attitude towards music changed. And massively, at that. We went modern and significantly dropped our historic roots. The EDM scene properly exploded in Northern Europe, we bettered our ability to control music digitally. Honestly? A revolutionary win that positively evolved Europe’s music scene. Very much deserved and well appreciated.

Ten years later, we go back to it again. With a less impactful music too! What did all these years mean?

We’re at a point in time where I feel embracing the history, the tradition, the culture that a continent such as Europe has would be beautiful. Combining the newly acquired dominance of modern sounds and incorporating the elements that define (if not the!) one of the most diverse continents in this world.

Can you imagine the possibilities?

Learning a new aspect about every country year in and year out, with the modern interpretation we’re capable of doing now! The reason why the festival came to be, to showcase our identity, but this time, we can not only do it in Europe - we can use the concepts we learned and showcase it to the world. They’ll feel familiarity and be able to enjoy our sounds now more naturally.

But no.

Here we are. Voting for a song that could come from any place in the world. A pop song without any particularity tying it to Europe. How is this all Eurovision is nowadays?

This is getting too long and I won’t really prepare a TLDR, as I wouldn’t even know how to summarise this - so I should think about wrapping this up.

Essentially, it’s a song that makes me sad for Europe, more than anything. Again, people can identify with it and there’s that, that’s what Europe has become - so it’d still be representative. Maybe that’s all it means and I’m diving too deeply into this. It’s just a song after all and we’re all dying in the end.

But it’s the message that passes, you know? That a soulless (not literally, she seems to pour a lot of her soul into it, but you get it lol) pop song is the play. With certain nations trying to erase others’ culture, throughout the world - not only the one your head thought of - this could be an opportunity to keep them alive, in yet another front.

Celebrating them. There is no other moment to do so in Europe. We can and will keep on listening to our favourite pop songs all year round. But the possibilities of what we could be doing in Eurovision make me so hopeful.

‘But this represents the European culture of today!’

Well, does it? It’s true that cultures evolve, we don’t have to be conservative and always go back to the past. However, a main characteristic of any culture is that they tie you to a place. If you told me this entry was from South Korea, the US or Norway, you’d have just tricked me three times lol.

If Loreen wins, it’ll incentivise countries to select this style, if they want to realistically have a shot at winning - when we could be making another revolutionary transition towards integrating the best of both worlds. And the truth is that some songs this year have already tried to do that! It’s not like we have no alternatives.

For that reason, I hope this year’s Eurovision winner can feel European, more than anything… and ‘Tattoo’ is unfortunately not the answer.

EDIT: lol, one of you guys has flagged me resources for suicide watch. i guess some can get pretty radically passionate about seemingly harmless topics.

No matter if Nightfalls, Lost Sectors or Neomuna. The constant disadvantage in nearly every activity feels just aweful. It destroys the whole powerfantasy of the game and discourage new players

I think the user base has been pretty understanding throughout these on going server issues dating back to the multi-day outage, but these outages are really starting to pile up.

A one day membership didn’t really do anything for those of us with reccurring yearly memberships.

A guardian’s gift would cost the company nothing, but the base would love it. It would be a great gesture to the base, and seems like a win win for Jagex. Just my two cents.

Basically the title. Clover point and the Dallas waterfront are the absolute gems of Victoria. The most primo parkland in the area. Why do dogs and dog fencing and dog owners get to dominate this whole area? I mean how many fucking layers of fencing do we need in this space?

I understand that people with dogs love their dogs and want to walk them but why do they get to take over the best spot and ruin it for everyone else?

Rant over

PS, dogs being walked on leash is fine with me. It’s giving free range on them all the best land that is ridiculous.

I'm noticing a rise in people using pics of their avatars to create AI art. No matter your opinion on the ethics of AI art, it's fundamentally low effort content. A single person can pump out hundreds of AI art images in minutes and easily flood the sub. Compare that to someone taking a few hours to draw art to post here. Other subs like r/DnD have realized this and banned AI art, citing that it's low effort. I'd recommend we do the same thing here before it gets out of hand.

Edit: Alright. I'll be sure to cite this exact post in about 4-5 months when other users ask for AI art to be banned here after the sub starts getting spammed. Enjoy your day :)

According to The Vegan Society:

"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."

1. Ethics

1.1 Sentience of Animals

I care about other human beings because I know that they are having a subjective experience. I know that, like me, they can be happy, anxious, angry or upset. I generally don't want them to die (outside of euthanasia), both because of the pain involved and because their subjective experience will end, precluding further happiness. Their subjective experience is also why I treat them with respect them as individuals, such as seeking their consent for sex and leaving them free from arbitrary physical pain and mental abuse. Our society has enshrined these concepts into legal rights, but like me, I doubt your appreciation for these rights stems from their legality, but rather because of their effect (their benefit) on us as people.

Many non-human animals also seem to be having subjective experiences, and care for one another just like humans do. It's easy to find videos of vertebrates playing with one another, showing concern, or grieving loss. Humans have understood that animals are sentient for centuries. We've come to the point that laws are being passed acknowledging that fact. Even invertebrates can feel pain. In one experiment, fruit flies learned to avoid odours associated with electric shocks. In another, they were given an analgesic which let them pass through a heated tube, which they had previously avoided. Some invertebrates show hallmarks of emotional states, such as honeybees, which can develop a pessimistic cognitive bias.

If you've had pets, you know that they have a personality. My old cat was lazy but friendly. My current cat is inquisitive and playful. In the sense that they have a personality, they are persons. Animals are people. Most of us learn not to arbitrarily hurt other people for our own whims, and when we find out we have hurt someone, we feel shame and guilt. We should be vegan for the same reason we shouldn't kill and eat human beings: all sentient animals, including humans, are having a subjective experience and can feel pain, enjoy happiness and fear death. Ending that subjective experience is wrong. Intentionally hurting that sentient being is wrong. Paying someone else to do it for you doesn't make it better.

1.2 The Brutalisation of Society

There are about 8 billion human beings on the planet. Every year, our society breeds, exploits and kills about 70 billion land animals. The number of marine animals isn't tracked (it's measured by weight - 100 billion tons per year), but it's likely in the trillions. Those are animals that are sexually assaulted to cause them to reproduce, kept in horrendous conditions, and then gased to death or stabbed in the throat or thrown on a conveyor belt and blended with a macerator.

It's hard to quantify what this system does to humans. We know abusing animals is a predictor of anti-social personality disorder. Dehumanising opponents and subaltern peoples by comparing them to animals has a long history in racist propaganda, and especially in war propaganda. The hierarchies of nation, race and gender are complemented by the hierarchy of species. If humans were more compassionate to all kinds of sentient life, I'd hope that murder, racism and war would be more difficult for a normal person to conceive of doing. I think that treating species as a hierarchy, with life at the bottom of that hierarchy treated as a commodity, makes our society more brutal. I want a compassionate society.

To justify the abuse of sentient beings by appealing to the pleasure we get from eating them seems to me like a kind of socially acceptable psychopathy. We can and should do better.

2. Environment

2.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

A 2013 study found that animal agriculture is responsible for the emission 7.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, or 14.5% of human emissions.

A 2021 study increased that estimate to 9.8 gigatonnes, or 21% of human emissions.

This is why the individual emissions figures for animal vs plant foods are so stark, ranging from 60kg of CO2 equivalent for a kilo of beef, down to 300g for a kilo of nuts.

To limit global warming to 1.5 degrees by 2100, humanity needs to reduce its emissions by 45% by 2030, and become net zero by 2050.

Imagine if we achieve this goal by lowering emissions from everything else, but continue to kill and eat animals for our pleasure. That means we will have to find some way to suck carbon and methane out of the air to the tune of 14.5-21% of our current annual emissions (which is projected to increase as China and India increase their wealth and pick up the Standard American Diet). We will need to do this while still dedicating vast quantities of our land to growing crops and pastures for animals to feed on. Currently, 77% of the world's agricultural land is used for animal agriculture. So instead of freeing up that land to grow trees, sucking carbon out of the air, and making our task easier, we would instead choose to make our already hard task even harder.

2.2 Pollution

Runoff from farms (some for animals, others using animal manure as fertiliser) is destroying the ecosystems of many rivers, lakes and coastlines.

I'm sure you've seen aerial and satellite photographs of horrific pigshit lagoons, coloured green and pink from the bacteria growing in them. When the farms flood, such as during hurricanes, that pig slurry spills over and infects whole regions with salmonella and listeria. Of course, even without hurricanes, animal manure is the main source of such bacteria in plant foods.

2.3 Water and Land Use

No food system can overcome the laws of thermodynamics. Feeding plants to an animal will produce fewer calories for humans than eating plants directly (this is called 'trophic levels'). The ratio varies from 3% efficiency for cattle, to 9% for pigs, to 13% for chickens, to 17% for dairy and eggs.

This inefficiency makes the previously mentioned 77% of arable land used for animal agriculture very troubling. 10% of the world was food insecure in 2020, up from 8.4% in 2019. Humanity is still experiencing population growth, so food insecurity will get worse in the future. We need to replace animal food with plant food just to stop people in the global periphery starving to death. Remember that food is a global commodity, so increased demand for soya-fed beef cattle in Brazil means increased costs around the world for beef, soya, and things that could have been grown in place of the soya.

Water resources are already becoming strained, even in developed countries like America, Britain and Germany. Like in the Soviet Union with the Aral Sea, America is actually causing some lakes, like the Great Salt Lake in Utah, to dry up due to agricultural irrigation. Rather than for cotton as with the Aral Sea, this is mostly for the sake of animal feed. 86.6% of irrigated water in Utah goes to alfalfa, pasture land and grass hay. A cloud of toxic dust kicked up from the dry lake bed will eventually envelop Salt Lake City, for the sake of an industry only worth 3% of the state's GDP.

Comparisons of water footprints for animal vs plant foods are gobsmacking, because pastures and feed crops take up so much space. As water resources become more scarce in the future thanks to the depletion of acquifers and changing weather patterns, human civilisation will have to choose either to use its water to produce more efficient plant foods, or eat a luxury that causes needless suffering for all involved.

3. Health

3.1 Carcinogens, Cholesterol and Saturated Fat in Animal Products

In 2015, the World Health Organisation reviewed 800 studies, and concluded that red meat is a Group 2A carcinogen, while processed meat is a Group 1 carcinogen. The cause is things like salts and other preservatives in processed meat, and the heme iron present in all meat, which causes oxidative stress.

Cholesterol and saturated fat from animal foods have been known to cause heart disease for half a century, dating back to studies like the LA Veterans Trial in 1969, and the North Karelia Project in 1972. Heart disease killed 700,000 Americans in 2020, almost twice as many as died from Covid-19.

3.2 Antimicrobial Resistance

A majority of antimicrobials sold globally are fed to livestock, with America using about 80% for this purpose. The UN has declared antimicrobial resistance to be one of the 10 top global public health threats facing humanity, and a major cause of AMR is overuse.

3.3 Zoonotic Spillover

Intensive animal farming has been called a "petri dish for pathogens" with potential to "spark the next pandemic". Pathogens that have recently spilled over from animals to humans include:

1996 and 2013 avian flu

2003 SARS

2009 swine flu

2019 Covid-19,

3.4 Worker Health

Killing a neverending stream of terrified, screaming sentient beings is the stuff of nightmares. After their first kill, slaugherhouse workers report suffering from increased levels of: trauma, intense shock, paranoia, fear, anxiety, guilt, and shame.

Besides wrecking their mental health, it can also wreck their physical health. In 2007, 24 slaugherhouse workers in Minnesota began suffering from an autoimmune disease caused by inhaling aerosolised pig brains. Pig brains were lodged in the workers' lungs. Because pig and human brains are so similar, the workers' immune systems began attacking their own nervous systems.

The psychopathic animal agriculture industry is not beyond exploiting children and even slaves.

You don’t need mass stuffed skincare products in the bathroom cabinet.

You actually only need 3-4 products/steps.

• A gentle cleanser
• A anti-aging treatment, can be AHA, Vitamin C or tretinoin.
• A moisturizer
• A sunscreen

You don’t need separate products such as niacinamide, HA and etc when most moisturizer have already in it.

I see that many people always looking for new products to take in into their regime. Waste of money while many products doesn’t even work. Save your money for real medical treatments such as laser treatments, microneedling etc..

​

https://preview.redd.it/kygv4cgws5pa1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=cd9b182ce8d7123f04850542fe3a7a2adb7487b3