![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
But what about all the real valuable assets these companies would have these days? Like the multitude of 5 year old PCs, 1990s era Hermann-Miller office furniture, the buildings and land they lease… /s
But what about all the real valuable assets these companies would have these days? Like the multitude of 5 year old PCs, 1990s era Hermann-Miller office furniture, the buildings and land they lease… /s
Because it’s tldr: did the article say why muskrat would be subject to brazilian laws?
Didn’t forget, that just isn’t relevant to the assertion that “plastic can’t be recycled”. The second use of the plastic doesn’t have to be a form which requires the exact same properties as the initial use. The remains of a bottle don’t have to be remade into another bottle. There are still nearly infinite possible uses for the plastic.
hardly any plastic is actually recyclable
Almost every thermoplastic is recyclable easily, though not necessarily profitably (because the new materials are so cheap).
Recycling that PET bottle into a different usable object would involve cleaning it, cutting it into a shape appropriate for your chosen remanufacturing process (filament or flakes), heating it to melted but not too hot, then forming (fdm, molding, etc.).
My guess would be that getting a durable graphic printed on PET is more difficult since we don’t see that, and adhesive or wrapped labels are almost certainly more expensive than printing would be if it were easy.
Edit to add: I agree that more responsibility needs to be on the manufacturer, but don’t buy into the misinformation that plastic can’t be recycled. Make it more expensive to use new plastic than recycled material.
I’m not sure, but your comment seems to imply an assumption that the foam was designed to be external to the air path and is getting unintentionally sucked in? That’s not the case, the foam is literally only inside an “air chamber” that the air directly travels through.
I could send you a Cease and Decist notice on my finest letterhead insisting that you stop being a stupid overreaching authoritarian. That doesn’t mean a court would uphold it. C&D isn’t proof of anything.
Which comment in the issue thread leads you to believe that?
The developer’s closing comment is that it wouldn’t be worth it to implement that feature in Lemmy.
One way would be by implementing features the Lemmy devs have no interest in such as better interoperability with other fediverse platforms. If any added feature turns out to be well received and in demand, it would pressure the others to implement similar.
Copied cars. Copying is not theft or stealing.
Copying is not theft or stealing.
FYI, a fork is being carried on by interested parties: https://community.mycroft.ai/t/faq-ovos-neon-and-the-future-of-the-mycroft-voice-assistant/13496
Defederation means they consume all of the data from ActivityPub, you consume none of theirs.
It’s not that simple.
Their instance will be sent the data only if the post originates on an instance/community that is still federated with their instance. If a new post or comment is made in a community who’s instance isn’t federated with their instance, it will not be sent via ActivityPub. A more detailed explanation of how that works is in this post.
Yeah, that dude’s take reads just like climate science denial and flat earth conspiracies.
Or maybe one of these?
as we know bandwidth is extremely expensive
No. You very obviously don’t know how bandwidth is handled for large providers. They don’t pay per gb, and instead have peering agreements with other networks. Google generally doesn’t have to pay these other networks, as Google has the web applications that the other networks’ customers expect to be able to use.
Which part was dickish? Was it the ellipsis?