And I didn’t realize you could edit images on Lemmy. Neat!

Does that console have solitaire?

“Animals that people consume were killed as babies or toddlers, relative to their natural lifespan.”

Well human life expectancy is 70 years, so:
Cow - 17.5
Sheep - 2.3
Pig - 2.3
Turkey - 1.2
Duck - 5.3
Chicken - 13.1

So that holds for most of the animals listed, but not cows or chickens.

Anyways, fact checking time. Quick googling^[1] says that the life expectancy of these animals is actually:

Cow - 20
Sheep - 12
Pig - 12
Turkey - 10
Duck - 12
Chicken - 7

So that would make the human-scaled ages be:
Cow - 17.5
Sheep - 3.9
Pig - 2.9
Turkey - 1.2
Duck - 4.4
Chicken - 15.0

Hope this helps anyone curious about the data.

Your message could have been more efficient:

• “who say” already implies people, so you could have said “those who say” to be less redundant.
• “do so” is needlessly making a reference to exactly what you just said. Try “They say ‘tuna fish’ because”.
• “someone else” is redundant because the only person that’s not “else” is the person in question, and they wouldn’t have heard it from themselves.
• “the kind of people to” is redundant because you already established that they’re people. “the kind who” would be more efficient.
• “blindy follow others” doesn’t need to say “others” because it’s obvious that they’d be following someone other than themselves.
• “neither of those redundancies” is also a tad redundant, referring back to the established redundancies and then calling them redundancies again.

So a less redundant version of your message:

They say “tuna fish” because they heard someone say it, and are the kind who blindly follows rather than engage in critical inquiry and actively eliminate redundancy.

Intelligent people say neither redundancy.

Of course, I’m just poking fun. I don’t expect anyone to eliminate all redundancy from their speaking; some of it has use, especially in verbal communication. For example, saying “datil pepper” even though datil also refers to the pepper is useful because someone may not recognize that a datil is a pepper upon hearing it (though you’d be hard pressed to find that scenario with tuna outside of ESL.)

Ah, no worries. I guess I just have one of those faces. Have a better day.

Yeah, I did, I’m just saying that unless you have a class of diligent students (in which case good on ya,) a good chunk of them will choose to ignore it and just read the easy version. It’s hard enough to get kids to read what’s assigned, it’ll be harder to get them to read two versions of the same thing.

I’m not upset, I’m just genuinely confused that you implied that “real literature” and “for entertainment” are separate categories. I always thought of these books as being intended for entertainment, just in an artsier/more intellectual way than Marvel movies and bideo bames. Your comment made me think you thought of them as something for intellectual enrichment rather than enjoyment.

I’m also confused why you interpreted my comment in such a hostile way, but that’s another conversation probably not worth turning into an argument.

EDIT: Oh, did you think I was saying they’re not for entertainment?

Sounds to me like it will get a lot of kids reading only the easy version even if they’re capable of more. You’re basically giving them the cliffnotes.

I see what you mean, but sometimes you want a particular story, not just something on your level.

These books aren’t for entertainment?

We do what we must because we can, for the good of all of us (except the ones who are dead.)