I’m not sure if agree with your conclusion. You might conclude that they put great value on the deliciousness of thier food, but the relationship is inverse: less delicious = greater value.

People of of two cultures might both place high value on decorations, but one culture might view another’s style as tacky.

I was picturing a culture for whom food was strictly for nutrition.

Well, at the risk of being pedantic, you literally said:

food is just nutrition

I understand now what you intended to communicate (which is strictly different than what you said)

I got excited when I read what you said, because i thought you actually had an example of a culture for whom food is just nutrition. It’s a sci-fi trope that i find interesting because it is truly alien, and I’ve always wondered if any real culture fit that.

Even in puritan cultures that intentionally eat plain food to shun “hedonism”, food becomes a vehicle for virtue signaling. The suffering is a ritual practice. Food, even then, plays a critical cultural role.

I understand what you mean now. I’m just disappointed.

Food has ceremonial and ritual value in all of those places, it is not merely a vehicle for nutrition.

You guys

People keep making this broad assertion and then not following up.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but if there are many cultures for whom food is merely nutrition, could you name one?

From an anthropological standpoint, I’d be fascinated.

Like, this thread is full of jokes about how some cultures have shitty food, but that subjective assessment is very different than the idea that food’s mere purpose is nutrition. It implies it has no ceremonial use.

So, of the many, just even tell us one.

Yeah, that “EAT_ROADKILL” fellow is far too serious.

The Weezer pork and beans video was actually fucking sweet

Ok

I think you’re missing what this is. They’re not adding sponsor segments.

They’re scanning the video, establishing where “free visual space” is, and then embedding advertising into that space. It becomes part of the video, not an intermission. You don’t cut a “time segment” to remove it, you have to cut a “space segment” to remove it. And then what do you fill it with?

There are certainly ways to mitigate it, but they’re not great.

https://xkcd.com/927/

Technically the post is reducing another culture to a form of therapy

My university residence floor graced me with the “Most likely to jump onto the tacks to save someone even if he knows he’ll be killed in the process”.

Yes this was it! Thank you!

It’s not mine. Literally look back through this comment thread.

The person you replied to said “steal” was a poor choice of words and you piped up to say it wasn’t. That was the moment you entered into a semantic argument.

Someone is gonna need to double check this, but I feel like it’s saw a documentary that said cheetahs are super anxious… in the doc I feel like a guy slept in a makeshift shelter with cheetahs in a thunderstorm to help chill them out.

It sounds so bizarre that im not actually convinced this wasn’t a dream, though…

Your disagreement with op about the definition of stealing IS the semantic argument. That’s what a semantic argument is.

You got into a semantic argument… and then started laying down incoherent definitions that you made up on the spot.

Yes, I agree, you are absolutely trolling.

You’re the one who invented a definition of “theft” that for reasons beyond my understanding consider the consuming organisms specific mechanism of utilization that also specifically considers if the organism has the ability to synthesize the structures independent of consumption and now also demands that the process be sustainable for an arbitrary (but not indefinite) amount of time AND the structures must meet an arbitrary bar of complexity (which you’ve proclaimed unilaterally is greater than fat) etc etc etc

I’m going to drive directly to my point now that hopefully you can see how your ever-expanding definition of “stealing” (which I promise you, I’m not even getting STARTED on pushing issues that would force you to continually expand) is just bad.

Counter Definition: Eating isn’t theft. The degree to which ingested materials must be broken down to be useful is interesting, but none of it is stealing. The article used a word that while amusing to read isn’t technically accurate.

Digestion begins before you swallow. I expect if I chewed up some salad, opened my mouth and aimed it at the sun, some percentage of what I’d just chewed on would have access to co2, h2o and 600nm EMR, and synthesize a glucose molecule two.

Since the genesis of this conversation was purely semantic (“why is eating a chrolorplast theft if eating anything else isn’t?”) I think it’s pretty fair game to point out that yes, technically I also can reap the benefits of photosynthesis in a very limited way for something im actively digesting.

Not really a point in getting into a semantic argument if you’re just gonna come out swinging about being anti-science.