Best By dates are not expiration dates, expiration dates are estimates.
That said, my wife has no concept of expiration until something is obviously covered in mold, and says some wild stuff. “Oh that’s got lemon juice in it, it doesn’t expire” like babe, lemon juice isn’t some timeless magic spell.
I dropped this /s
It’s called a dialectic.
Real answer is probably that they’d be used in addition to trees, designed to fit in places unsuitable for a tree.
Even Trocken is still sweeter than I’d associate with a Sauvignon Blanc, and if they’re just calling it “Riesling” it’s probably a Spatlese or something.
They’re at opposite sides of the sweetness spectrum, they should be distinguishable by sugar content alone.
Not from Cali, not a programmer (though honestly I could be).
Greedy sociopaths are a fact of humanity, they will always exist and will always be drawn to positions of power. The fitness of any system to avoid authoritarianism is based solely upon the effectiveness of the obstacles it erects to oppose aspiring dictators.
Materialism isn’t just about base economic principles, it’s about ensuring that your systems are suitable to actual reality, rather than just utopian hypotheticals. Anyone can design an idealistic democratic system of government that works perfectly when everyone is kind, reasonable, and cooperative, but such a system is useless. Lasting success requires a system which fulfills the necessities of government efficiently without being exploitable by greedy sociopaths.
Every system has limitations and flaws. The trick is tailoring your system elements to serve your use case.
Fuck French toast because it is decadent but usually entirely to much.
Marry waffles because they are perfect and precious.
Kill pancakes.
You didn’t?
Not me, we. Stop trying to weasel out of your mess.
Which is different from you how exactly? All I see are failures.
deleted by creator
Keep up the “I’m rubber you’re glue” act buddy, it’s age appropriate. I wanted Trump to lose, you wanted Harris to lose. You got your wish, this is on you. Or keep blaming everyone else who tried to warn you that it was a stupid idea, how dare they point out the glaring flaws in your strategy. Let’s see if that makes a leftist plan materialize.
Flagrant hypocrisy! This was your plan, not mine. How’s it working? Did a third party win? Did we end the genocide in Gaza yet? Don’t equate your plan’s failure with our recognition that it failed. You gambled, and this is what we get. Own it, maybe learn something about implementation.
A bunch of shortsighted cosplayers with no sense of praxis or political literacy protested the do-nothing Dems and we got the freewheeling fascism MAGAs. How’s that working out for you? How’s the glorious revolution coming?
Up until the moment we have enough confirmed support for a progressive movement, status quo is a hell of a lot better than accelerated fascism; if only to buy more time to build the aforementioned progressive support. I’m all for actual leftward movement, but gambling on unconfirmed support is stupid. Even the liberals understand that, in their sports-team monkey brain.
The left has no plan sufficient to deal with this. I hear vague rumblings about strikes and revolutions and the power of the working class united, but the working class isn’t united yet. There is no organized, validated plan to effect that revolution. There’s no leftist Project 2025. That’s a natural consequence of the commendable independence of leftists, but it has the unfortunate consequence of being tactically untenable. The right uniform under the banner of their dictator, the left squabbles about trivialities.
It’s not that I wish it to be so; I would vastly prefer the left to have a functional plan to secure power. But it is the reality; I see neither such a plan, nor the necessary organization to implement such a plan. That’s why we vote lesser evil. We strive for the stationary phase of the ratchet to avoid the freewheeling phase, because we don’t yet have the organized strength to break the pawl from its housing.
Once we have that organized strength, and not sooner, we can break the pawl. Sooner, and the ratchet spins freely to the right.
They have two kinds of poop: the little cocoa pebble ones, and soft wet ones that look like grape clusters, called cecotropes. The cecotropes are partly digested, and they eat them to extract more nutrients the second go round.
There’s a sticking point that no one’s been able to explain to me:
If you’re in the minority, revolution is against the democratic will of the people.
If you’re in the majority, you have the votes to actually accomplish something with reform. It’s not like we live in a monarchy, reform is possible under our system.
If reform isn’t working to bring about your goals, either your goals aren’t popular enough, or they are popular but the people lack the will and organization to vote for them.
If the people lack the will and organization to vote effectively, they certainly lack the will and organization to topple the government.
My area of expertise is managing complex systems and change implementation. I sincerely don’t understand how revolution is supposed to work where reform doesn’t. No one has been able to give me an answer that doesn’t bill down to idealistic hope. How is this revolution supposed to be implemented, and why can’t we build the foundation for revolution while simultaneously using the tools we have for reform? Wouldn’t widespread support for reform be the best possible proof of consensus?