6 ms·

Perfect is the enemy of the good. Let's start somewhere and build on it rather than throwing a perfectly actionable plan away just because it doesn't solve lit

Perfect is the enemy of the good. Let's start somewhere and build on it rather than throwing a perfectly actionable plan away just because it doesn't solve literally all problems.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
> just because it doesn't solve literally all problems. one would be nice. But I'm ignorant on how many untrained experts are de-humanaizing (de-crustationizing?) crabs to begin with.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- thebooktocome 3y ago
  I just watched a youtube chef mangle and torture a live lobster the other day, all while claiming to be informed on how to humanely kill them.
  - bena 3y ago
    I'm reminded of an episode of Masterchef where the cooks are given live crabs to prepare a dish with (as part of the meal, not as an assistant). Most contestants left the crab alone until it was time to boil them. One starts ripping the crab apart. Gordon Ramsay had to come up to her and explain that the crab was alive and what she was doing constituted torture.
    - drsnow 3y ago
      >(as part of the meal, not as an assistant) Did that really need to be said?
  - uh_uh 3y ago
    Sometimes I wonder how future generations will judge our meat industry practices once they figure out artificial meat production and also have a more accurate picture of consciousness/sentience and hence the suffering we cause. It's quite plausible that their judgement will be just as harsh, if not hasher, as how present day humans look at "savages" of the past.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      I wouldn't be surprised if the next big division among generations is vegan vs. carnivores. Meat substitutes are getting better, and when/if the political subsidies for live farms ends and makes real meat cheaper then we'll see a lot of restaurants shift to those substitutes being the default. so real meat will become some sort of delicacy to have on very special occasions, for those don't simply forgo it altogether. But then again, by then we'll be the metaphorical boomers, and a lot of our generation eats meat very casually. We may not see such reform in our lifetime as zoomers/millennials start to become the main body forming law. But probably some shifts in that direction.
      - ornornor 3y ago
        On top of all the suffering, our habit of killing animals to eat them generates a lot of pollution (emissions), unnecessary land use, and water waste. any metric you use other than the selfish “but it tastes good” shows that this is an absurdly negative thing we keep on doing casually and defending.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    So is the issue lack of education on how to humanely kill, or youtube allowing that to be broadcast and/or monitized? Neither seem to be resolved with this new law.
- krisoft 3y ago
  > one would be be nice. Stops grocery stores from selling live crabs to home cooks. That is one. Stops kitchens from boiling lobsters alive without stunning. That is two. Stops the practice of destroying the eyestalks of female shrimp. That is three. If you belive that they can experience pain any of these is terrible.
  - stephc_int13 3y ago
    The reason why crabs and lobsters are sold alive is that their quality deteriorate extremely quickly once they are dead (30 minutes and they start smelling funky and tasting weird) I've quite a bit of experience on the subject. I've caught and cooked crabs and lobsters since I was a teen. I generally don't trust the quality of pre-cooked crustaceans. And while I agree that it is best to reduce the overall suffering of animals, I don't think that boiling is the worst part. They die in less than two seconds.
    - yafbum 3y ago
      My understanding is that precooked crustacean meat is a byproduct of shipping loss (sh*t this crab looks like it's not going to make it, let's cook it before it dies). So yeah, not the freshest.
    - brigandish 3y ago
      What is the worst part then?
      - stephc_int13 3y ago
        The worst part is the agony, slowly dying and then be thrown away or hastily cooked to be sold cheaper. The humane way would be to avoid eating crabs and lobsters off-season. Killing with a knife or boiling water really is quick, unless you really don't know what you're doing.
        brigandish 3y ago
        > The worst part is the agony, slowly dying and then be thrown away or hastily cooked to be sold cheaper. Certainly, that is worse. There seems to be some uncertainty over the speed at which boiling will kill. From [1]: > Scientists have found that it can take lobsters between 35 – 45 seconds to die when plunged into a pot of boiling water — and if they are dismembered their nervous system can still function for up to an hour. This wasn't the only one, another claimed hours (and it wasn't an animal welfare page either). Difficult to track down the source of any claims though. [1] https://cookchefgirl.com/boil/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-lobster-to-die-in-boiling-water.html https://cookchefgirl.com/boil/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-lo...
JoeAltmaier 3y ago
But some of those problems are millions of times worse than others. Solving the trivial ones constitutes some sort of theatre.
- standardUser 3y ago
  When you solve part of a problem, and it is minuscule in scope, you have still solved part of the problem. Why let that demotivate you from wanting so solve more of the problem?
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    Nobody is motivated to solve the bigger problem. This theatre is masking an unwillingness to face global issues. It's a political gambit. "We did something! So quit bothering us until next session."
    - standardUser 3y ago
      I remain motivated. I applaud all of the work that has been done so far and I also demand much more. Not only do I think this is a useful perspective, I think it's the only realistic path forward. To take the alternative perspective - that anything other than massive change is worthless - is a far more effective way to demotivate people and get them to give up and clock out.
    - twixfel 3y ago
      The problem then is not doing something, it's people not caring because they've done something. So I still don't understand why you take issue with this.
- ljm 3y ago
  This lays down the foundations that can be used to tackle the larger problems while gradually tightening the restrictions. Implementing radical change overnight without the mechanism to enforce it will guarantee failure.
- LeifCarrotson 3y ago
makeitdouble 3y ago
Parent is probably advocating for parrallel/independant actions. It's not like this specific group of researchers has to tackle all the animal issues in the world one by one, and has to set priorities on their agenda.

Perfect is the enemy of the good. Let's start somewhere and build on it rather than throwing a perfectly actionable plan away just because it doesn't solve literally all problems.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

> just because it doesn't solve literally all problems. one would be nice. But I'm ignorant on how many untrained experts are de-humanaizing (de-crustationizing?) crabs to begin with.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
thebooktocome 3y ago
I just watched a youtube chef mangle and torture a live lobster the other day, all while claiming to be informed on how to humanely kill them.
- bena 3y ago
  I'm reminded of an episode of Masterchef where the cooks are given live crabs to prepare a dish with (as part of the meal, not as an assistant). Most contestants left the crab alone until it was time to boil them. One starts ripping the crab apart. Gordon Ramsay had to come up to her and explain that the crab was alive and what she was doing constituted torture.
  - drsnow 3y ago
    >(as part of the meal, not as an assistant) Did that really need to be said?
- uh_uh 3y ago
  Sometimes I wonder how future generations will judge our meat industry practices once they figure out artificial meat production and also have a more accurate picture of consciousness/sentience and hence the suffering we cause. It's quite plausible that their judgement will be just as harsh, if not hasher, as how present day humans look at "savages" of the past.
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised if the next big division among generations is vegan vs. carnivores. Meat substitutes are getting better, and when/if the political subsidies for live farms ends and makes real meat cheaper then we'll see a lot of restaurants shift to those substitutes being the default. so real meat will become some sort of delicacy to have on very special occasions, for those don't simply forgo it altogether. But then again, by then we'll be the metaphorical boomers, and a lot of our generation eats meat very casually. We may not see such reform in our lifetime as zoomers/millennials start to become the main body forming law. But probably some shifts in that direction.
    - ornornor 3y ago
      On top of all the suffering, our habit of killing animals to eat them generates a lot of pollution (emissions), unnecessary land use, and water waste. any metric you use other than the selfish “but it tastes good” shows that this is an absurdly negative thing we keep on doing casually and defending.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  So is the issue lack of education on how to humanely kill, or youtube allowing that to be broadcast and/or monitized? Neither seem to be resolved with this new law.
krisoft 3y ago
> one would be be nice. Stops grocery stores from selling live crabs to home cooks. That is one. Stops kitchens from boiling lobsters alive without stunning. That is two. Stops the practice of destroying the eyestalks of female shrimp. That is three. If you belive that they can experience pain any of these is terrible.
- stephc_int13 3y ago
  The reason why crabs and lobsters are sold alive is that their quality deteriorate extremely quickly once they are dead (30 minutes and they start smelling funky and tasting weird) I've quite a bit of experience on the subject. I've caught and cooked crabs and lobsters since I was a teen. I generally don't trust the quality of pre-cooked crustaceans. And while I agree that it is best to reduce the overall suffering of animals, I don't think that boiling is the worst part. They die in less than two seconds.
  - yafbum 3y ago
    My understanding is that precooked crustacean meat is a byproduct of shipping loss (sh*t this crab looks like it's not going to make it, let's cook it before it dies). So yeah, not the freshest.
  - brigandish 3y ago
    What is the worst part then?
    - stephc_int13 3y ago
      The worst part is the agony, slowly dying and then be thrown away or hastily cooked to be sold cheaper. The humane way would be to avoid eating crabs and lobsters off-season. Killing with a knife or boiling water really is quick, unless you really don't know what you're doing.
      - brigandish 3y ago
        > The worst part is the agony, slowly dying and then be thrown away or hastily cooked to be sold cheaper. Certainly, that is worse. There seems to be some uncertainty over the speed at which boiling will kill. From [1]: > Scientists have found that it can take lobsters between 35 – 45 seconds to die when plunged into a pot of boiling water — and if they are dismembered their nervous system can still function for up to an hour. This wasn't the only one, another claimed hours (and it wasn't an animal welfare page either). Difficult to track down the source of any claims though. [1] https://cookchefgirl.com/boil/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-lobster-to-die-in-boiling-water.html https://cookchefgirl.com/boil/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-lo...

JoeAltmaier 3y ago

But some of those problems are millions of times worse than others. Solving the trivial ones constitutes some sort of theatre.

standardUser 3y ago
When you solve part of a problem, and it is minuscule in scope, you have still solved part of the problem. Why let that demotivate you from wanting so solve more of the problem?
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  Nobody is motivated to solve the bigger problem. This theatre is masking an unwillingness to face global issues. It's a political gambit. "We did something! So quit bothering us until next session."
  - standardUser 3y ago
    I remain motivated. I applaud all of the work that has been done so far and I also demand much more. Not only do I think this is a useful perspective, I think it's the only realistic path forward. To take the alternative perspective - that anything other than massive change is worthless - is a far more effective way to demotivate people and get them to give up and clock out.
  - twixfel 3y ago
    The problem then is not doing something, it's people not caring because they've done something. So I still don't understand why you take issue with this.
ljm 3y ago
This lays down the foundations that can be used to tackle the larger problems while gradually tightening the restrictions. Implementing radical change overnight without the mechanism to enforce it will guarantee failure.
LeifCarrotson 3y ago

makeitdouble 3y ago

Parent is probably advocating for parrallel/independant actions. It's not like this specific group of researchers has to tackle all the animal issues in the world one by one, and has to set priorities on their agenda.