This is a false equivalence; the answer is “neither”.

Veganism doesn’t seek to end all animal suffering, but not to exploit animals for humans’ sake. We don’t need animal products to survive, so we shouldn’t add to whatever misery already exists naturally.

In the case of livestock, we should just stop breeding them. No vegan is arguing for dumping all cattle in the savannah to be hunted by lions.

I’d already be very happy if everyone took your approach, but it’s not the entire story for veganism. Sustainability is an important factor for myself and many others, but so is animal welfare.

It’s a bummer that animal welfare is pretty much inversely correlated with emissions. Packing chickens together and making their lives miserable is much better for the environment than having them roam free.

Veganism happily aligns with environmental sustainability. But when you believe we shouldn’t exploit animals at all, just pushing to eat what’s sustainable ignores a lot of pain and cruelty.

On the other side of the spectrum, I really like Patrick H. Willem’s take on the best sequel ever: Mamma Mia 2.

Not the best movie that is also a sequel, but biggest improvement over the original.

In Europe, this is hardly a problem. I’ve recently been on the road more in the US, and it sucks. But I think it’s more so due to cars being ridiculously big and their lamps being way off the ground.

Whooo ooooh no.

Hotel California. I refuse to elaborate further.

Let’s gamble, try merging

Imagine you have a book that’s written in Korean. If you gave it to me and asked me to read it out loud, I wouldn’t be able to make sense out of it. If you gave it to a Korean person, however, they could read it perfectly fine.

The book itself hasn’t changed — just the person reading the book. And that person has a different set of skills (or instructions, if you will).

Seems to be Cyprus from the letterhead.

Macron is the president and head of state. He’s elected directly by the citizens of France.

Attal is (was) the prime minister and head of government. He’s elected by the members of parliament. He’s appointed by the president but needs majority support in parliament.

“To form a government” usually means that someone is tasked by the head of state (president or king) to come up with a group of people (cabinet) that has majority support in the house(s) of parliament. That’s easy for Starmer when Labour has a majority. In other countries like the Netherlands, Germany, or Italy, that usually requires a coalition.

That will now also be the case in France.

This is full of terrible advice. Password rotation is an outdated practice.

Don’t ever reuse passwords with “zones”, just use a password manager to generate long and secure passwords for every account. Then enable MFA wherever possible, and Passkeys where they have been implemented.

Then have a recovery method for the password manager stored in a secure place.

That’s what Passkeys are aiming to do.

Max seemed happier than he did after most of his own wins.

How does it compare with Kagi?

Do you have any skills you can use?

You can also sign up for medical trials.

I’m not saying there’s no incentive to perform well, I’m saying that’s it’s not too big an issue to come in last. At least financially speaking.

A quick search shows Haas made $60 million in prize money last year, while Sauber (AR) made $69 million. How much more does a team need to invest to climb up a place? If it’s more than $9 million, it’s not necessarily worth it for the lower teams.

So for the shareholders it becomes a question of whether investing is worth it. If the team is already making a profit under the cost cap, and the value of the team increases because supply is limited and the likes of Audi and Ford want to enter — is it really worth investing more?

But all of that is beside the point, because for the shareholders there’s one thing they surely don’t want: an extra competitor. All of a sudden you could come in 11th, decreasing the prize money you get for just showing up. And when you decide to sell the team, it’s worth less because the supply has increased.

We’ve wound up in a situation where the teams can decide against whom they want to compete. And commercial interests directly clash with fair, open competition. The email to spam is a bullshit story — if the FOM had wanted to make it work, they could’ve picked up the phone. It’s not like megadeals like this depend on one specific calendar invite.

The real reason is that with just ten teams, every team has a lot of inherent market value. A team like Haas can make a lot of money just by being on the grid — from a financial perspective it’s no issue that they l come in last.

But with extra teams, the prize money has to be split among more participants, the supply of ad space increases, and the value of already having a slot drops. Sauber was worth a lot to Audi because they were allowed to compete — if new teams can show up, the existing teams aren’t worth as much, which is bad for shareholders.

It’s all about money and it’s awful for the sport. It’s no wonder that the FIA already granted approval and it’s the FOM who are objecting.

A lot of people seem to agree with you, so I’ll reassess my stance on the shampoo.

As a person with a short cut, every run of the mill shampoo has done its job. But of course your hair needs to last longer when you grow it out; so adverse effects have more time to pile up.

Soap of any kind. It’s fine if you want a certain smell, but at the end of the day it all works the same. Goes for hand soap, shampoo, detergent, body wash, etc.

Fashion clothes

Better yet: buy long-lasting stuff that is ethically produced. Primark is notoriously bad in this regard — but most fast fashion stores are.