You could look into ESG and SRI funds. There’s no guarantee they will keep their value, but they are relatively easy to liquidate if you need the value converted to cash.

You can sink capital into community infrastructure to use it for good, but you might not be able to liquidate it easily (or at all). It can be still be considered an investment, if you actually to value the good that the infrastructure does more than you value the capital expended. If your value is only “cash value”, then it’s not an investment, but it still might do good.

Good luck finding something. I’m in various ESG funds until I hit “my number” and then I will start directing all the capital I have in excess of “the number” to “good” that’s not under my control, primarily through normal, no-strings-attached donations to local charities in my community.

Wikipedia doesn’t back me up. They say the playboy bunny outfits are stylized after the logo, and the logo was approved by Hef because: “The rabbit, the bunny, in America has a sexual meaning; and I chose it because it’s a fresh animal, shy, vivacious, jumping - sexy. First it smells you then it escapes, then it comes back, and you feel like caressing it, playing with it.”

I think the “sexual meaning” he’s referring to is the “breed like rabbits” idiom but … even in that case, there seems to be a little more to it.

Well, I think the general public probably is a bit confused about that. But, I think the disagreement is on the exposure of workers, and the practices around that.

IIRC, nuclear reactors for power have surprisingly high operating costs, even tho the fuel costs are quite low, and most of those costs are radiation controls. (And, no one is saying we need to eliminate controls, just dial them back a bit based on better science of how radiation affects humans.)

IIRC, the playboy “bunny” outfits weren’t to make people think about the look or practice of rabbits, but rather to have them think of the alleged promiscuity of rabbits.

There’s a current disagreement about radiation dosing policy right now, too. One side things the current approach is fine, the other believes that we are so overly conservative that we are wasting a lot of resources avoiding doses that are inconsequential. This is most relevant if we want to build and operate more nuclear reactors (e.g. for power), but it might also change some x-ray practices.

But, there are few things that are absolutely safe. You can slip, fall, and die in the shower; you can “poison” yourself by drinking too much water. When a medical professional requests an x-ray, they believe the risk is worth the reward.

‘Runaway’ by Sunstroke Project ?

I believe it is fake (or satire): https://lemmy.world/comment/24087259

Ping: @jaaake@lemmy.world

I was expecting the “Rick and Morty” bit where Rick uses complex conditions to slow down and stutter the simulation they (Rick and Jerry) are stuck in.

My ears heard “Careless Whisper”; what do you think he’s playing?

Wouldn’t the entire body is able to regenerate from a single part, without every tissue type present? I mean not much point in regeneration, if all it takes to disable you is removing both your eyes simultaneously.

I disagree that there “no point” if destroying the brain (not the eyes) is death.

I disagree that any part has to be able to regenerate, we lose cells all the time, and being able to cut off a toe and create a new person is, to me, a very different power from regeneration.

I agree that regeneration can create tissue types that are not present. The edges of the regeneration are probably the stem-iest of the stem cells and capable of “becoming” any other cell.

I think the “person” of Wolverine is most strongly embodied in the physical “shape” of the brain created through experience. New brain matter would would like not “contain” a Wolverine (at least initially). Parts that were only bones, tendons, ligaments, muscles, etc. might regenerate, but the don’t “contain” a Wolverine to grow into. But, we also know there are (at least) two thinking things inside each brain, one in each hemisphere, so I can imagine if the Wolverine brain is separated we might get multiple Wolverines – or we might get a Wolverine and some other things.

multiple wolverines

I can only imagine that some part of the brain has to be involved for the regeneration to produce a Wolverine. But, I could imagine at least two Wolverines, one non-verbal, regenerating from different parts of the brain.

The more you ask questions the more the unreality of the situation shows, so I guess it would depend on the writer.

You couldn’t normally cleave or smash an adamantium bone, so it would much harder to dismember Wolverine. You’d have to cut ligaments and tendons carefully to avoid the bones, while fighting the regeneration at the same time. But, I think if you figured out some way to separate part of the adamantium skeleton from Wolverine, when the a new part grew to replace the removed part, the new part would contain “normal” bones.

Yeah, I think trans Wolverine would be even more trapped by biology than other trans persons. She would need some cutting-edge gene-editing treatment to remove/replace the Y across much of the body. As a native CA person, I believe she’ll have quite the wait to get that treatment, and I don’t think there’s a DIY option that could work for her.

I think they do when they are bones. The adamantium doesn’t break, so it don’t need to regenerate.

Well, she glossed over the worst parts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwA1VeYpvaM

Yeah, even if they didn’t weight too much, you wouldn’t strap a CRT or 2 to your face due to the various emissions.

Let your kids sit as close to the 80" LED as they want, as long as they aren’t blocking your view. ;)

https://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm – ANYTHING less is denying the personhood of anyone that can get pregnant.

All felines understand the servant’s tongue. They simply do not deign to speak it.

thank mr skeltal

“I tell you, love your enemies” – Jesus https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A43-48&version=NIV

I’m engaging in the thread, the leader of which is a meme featuring Jesus, so it is more relevant what Jesus said than “claims about psychology and spirituality”.

I was raised Baptist, but I no longer adhere to it dogmatically.