You still need to know where to point that spy satellite’s camera at. If you take picture that covers hundreds of square kilometers then you don’t have enough resolution to spot the ship but you can’t zoom in much either because you don’t know where to zoom.

It’s different with buildings because you know where they are.

You seem to have plenty of time for moral grandstanding, but the second someone asks you to make a coherent argument, time’s suddenly up.

“Disgusting, you’re probably a pedophile, I don’t care that there’s no victim, it’s obvious so I don’t need to explain it” has been your entire contribution so far. If you don’t care about trying to change anyone’s mind, then I don’t know what you’re even doing here besides just making noise.

Adult men having sex with adult women is fine with me.

Adult men having sex with another men? Hell no. Engaging in that is the thin end of the wedge in my view.

Why is this not a valid reason to ban homosexuality but it’s good enough to ban sex dolls?

Having sex with a doll also only involves grown adults.

You justified the ban with it being disgusting so I repeat the question: Why not ban scat fetish then as well?

is absolutely disgusting

Why not ban scat fetish then as well?

So much confusion could be avoided if people didn’t use the same words to mean different things.

Your body can synthesize all the carbohydrates it needs through gluconeogenesis. There are no “essential carbs” the way there are essential fatty acids and amino acids. You can absolutely live on a diet of just fats and protein - and plenty of people do. The Inuit mostly did, and so do folks on carnivore diets today.

It might not be the healthiest long-term option, but it won’t kill you from a lack of carbs. You’re probably thinking of “rabbit starvation” which happens when you eat too much protein and not enough fat.

Cost isn’t the only issue but it plays a big factor and this is a well established fact I didn’t think I’d even need to debate.

High calorie and low nutrition food (processed snacks, sugary drinks, fast food, refined carbs, and added fats/sugars) are cheaper per calorie than their nutrient-dense higher quality counterparts (fresh vegetables, fruits, lean proteins, whole grains, etc.).

Yeah because poor people are famously known for switching to home cooked vegan meals which naturally decreases their calorie intake.

3 euros worth of vegetables almost definitely doesn’t have the same calorie content than 3 euros worth of any junk food. This is true independent of where you live in the western world.

Food isn’t expensive - high quality food is. Junk is cheap which is why obesity is especially issue with low-income families. Nobody is starving.

Lemmy logic on full display again. A user merely mentions that almost half the world’s population is overweight and could stand to lose some weight - and the response is “stupid take, losing weight too fast can destroy your organs.”

And people are actually upvoting that. Great. Just great. Good job, guys.

undercalculated the needed amount of calories and macronutrients like carbs

What’s the needed amount of carbs? Proteins and fats are essential nutrients. Carbohydrates are not.

If they’re so smart then why do they have issues that my dumb dash cam doesn’t?

This particular user is a special kind of one. Once you make the wrong noises about something they don’t like, they make it their personal mission to start digging for anything even remotely looking like dirt that they can sling your way - as they’re now demonstrating below.

Been enough for me.

It’s a pleasure to meet you! The only thing exceeding my level of wisdom is my modesty.

I don’t necessarily even disagree with this feature but I can’t help but imagine the outrage if that was almost literally any other group of people.

I’m not arguing against piracy here. I partake in it myself too.

I don’t really see that difference there. Of course the difference in scale is massive when you compare a multi-billion company doing it to an individual, but what about the harm when everyone does it as individuals versus one big company doing it? I don’t think the difference matters anymore at that point.

Doing something morally wrong can’t be justified just because only a small number of people are doing it. You wouldn’t use that defense for any other immoral behavior either. Me dumping my car’s old motor oil into the woods is still bad even if I’m the only one in my country who does it - and if I then go ahead criticizing a drilling company for causing an oil spill, I’d be just as much of a hypocrite.