It’s Vocaloid. They used software to make the song, same as we’ve been using software to make music at home for over two and a half decades. Some modern programs for doing this let you tell the software what to sing, and the vocals are made from a voice bank sourced from paid artists who signed up to make the voice bank because they wanted to. It’s not fucking. Autogenerated by chatgpt or something.
I’m pointing this out because “ai” means like sixteen different things and these days if you say something is AI everyone assumes it’s autogenerated dross created in the least ethical way they can think of. In this case, it just means they made a cool animation and wrote a cool song and happened to use a voice synthesiser for the song.
honestly thank you for this because i had not unmuted, i just thought this was an annotated chess demo that went hard
I just watched this on mute and it’s hilarious because without the song there is absolutely no context for why the visuals go that hard
in my opinion it is essential to make a “right to garden” law that means no one can stop you from growing whatever you want in your yard.
I think it should even apply to renters so a landlord is required to allow you to have a garden
And I think this can become a reality
If it begins in a few towns and cities it can spread more and more and more
I think we could do it
I disagree. There should always be restricted species lists, noxious weed lists, and environmental hazard lists from council to try and prevent intentional spread and propogation of ecologically damaging species.
Likewise, not planting certain species in and/or clearing fire coridoors are super important.
I mean, sure, there are exceptions in areas of extreme fire danger or things like that?
But most of the generic landscaping trees, ornamental plants and lawn grasses in the ecologically barren suburbs, cities and towns where people aren’t allowed to garden are already invasive. In the United States (where this is an issue) virtually every “lawn” grass is invasive.
The current state of affairs is that people are basically mandated to cultivate invasive species. Giving people the right to grow what they want almost can’t possibly make it worse
A plant in someone else’s garden that has a strong smell is not a “hazard.” It’s their garden. You don’t have to (literally) stick your nose in someone else’s business. Sensory sensitivities can get rubbed the wrong way by someone else living their life, it happens, but people still get to live their life and do things that are well within their rights to do, like have a garden on their own land that they live on
mint is a vigorous plant but it’s literally a normal herb that people grow in their gardens. It’s not the devil, it’s not evil, it’s not even really invasive in the sense that it has negative ecological impacts. It’s mint, a common herb that people grow and eat all the time.
it’s not reasonable for no one to be “allowed” to grow their own herb garden because some random other person might happen to not like it. That’s what the post is about.
Hey, I’ve been offline for like 4 years. But I’m coming back to tell you, if my neighbour decided to plant mint – highly invasive, spreads like crazy – I would have to move. Plant literally anything other than a common allergen Would you plant peanuts? Evicting not your neighbours of colour but your allergic neighbours? I think that counts as ableism. You went from racism to ableism. Great job.
Everyone is free to do as they please, until it hurts others. A different example would be dancing. Dancing is fun. Dancing with a knife in each hand is dangerous.
Now think again, thank you.
I think you are just so disconnected from the concept of gardening and the concept of having neighbors that you have made up in your head some kind of bizarre scenario where gardening is so dangerous it can’t possibly be allowed in human society
this is literally why i think allowing restrictions on what people can plant is a slippery slope. Mint is not invasive in the ecological sense, it’s just aggressive in a garden setting. If laws can forbid you from planting something that could be considered “too aggressive,” that forbids basically every plant the landlord or HOA doesn’t like and we’re back at square one.
If you forbid all plants that can cause allergies, that likewise could exclude literally anything.
Everything is now illegal except literal bare dirt that’s under 24/7 surveillance to make sure nothing grows there.
Y’all this post is hurting me psychologically. Multiple people have said “no this is bad because invasive species, for example, bamboo is sooooo invasive in the states”
Meanwhile my irl work is focused on growing and educating people about our native bamboo that is becoming super rare and declining steeply
There should be projects in place to manage actually invasive species – for example, Himalayan Balsam and Japanese Knotweed are both serious ecological threats in the UK – but beyond that like,,, the government and HOAs are already too invested in micromanaging your private life, why would you want legislation about what you’re allowed to plant in your own garden???
The thing about invasive species is that they’ve probably already planted themselves without needing anyone to plant them.
Bradford pears are virulently invasive where I live, I have to pull up like 50 of them every spring, but this isn’t going to be made better or worse by what my neighbors plant because Pandora’s box is already open.
Amur honeysuckle is in basically every person’s yard in Kentucky. There is no need to plant it, it will show up whether you like it or not.
If we want to stop invasive species we have to educate people about them, we have to encourage planting a diversity of native alternatives, and on the legal side of things we have to target the big nurseries and garden centers that are selling and marketing non-natives as ornamentals, and housing developments and corporate landscaping that plant non-natives on a massive scale in new construction. Laws nitpicking what individuals can plant won’t do anything but discourage people from gardening.
My guys, lawn grass is a common allergen. Being near lawns being mowed can give some folks hives. It also spreads like wildfire, puts seeds everywhere, and will choke out almost any native plant in an open field. The short list of “lawn weeds” are a very small handful of plants that are tough and aggressive enough to survive in a strong turf grass monoculture.
I get that folks are trying to figure out how a “right to garden” could be used to screw over certain populations, but I promise you that every way you can think of, turf grass is already doing. You just see it as an omnipresent “filler” plant so you don’t really notice it.
Hang on a minute. I see a US state labelled LA, which I assumed was Los Angeles, but there is also a city on the coast labelled Los Angeles. So what is the LA state? (I don’t know US abbreviations).
Louisiana, the state New Orleans is in. Swamps and good food and jazz and vampires
All this time when people talk about “living in LA” or “going to LA” I just assumed they meant Los Angeles
people almost never call Lousiana “LA” except when addressing mail or filling out tax forms.
if someone says they moved to LA, they *definitely* mean Los Angeles
BUT WHY WOULD
Okay I’m gonna bow out now while I’m still at Minimum Confusion. This is why sensible countries have only eight states and territories. Keeps the number of names down.
Every state has a two-letter abbreviation that is used solely for postal codes and filling out forms. Nobody ever says them out loud. You don’t say “I’m from MN,” you say “I’m from Minnesota.” They’re only used to make writing things down faster. People started abbreviating state names on the addresses of their letters in the early 19th Century. The Post Office tried to prevent it and require people to write the full state name out, eventually they gave up and standardized it with the two-letter abbreviations we use today. (I think we had to learn them in elementary school? Not memorize all of them, but it was part of learning about writing letters.)
For the most part, state codes are pretty intuitive (because they came from what people were already doing). So a state with two words in the name gets the first letter of each word–North Dakota is ND, West Virginia is WV, New York is NY. For states with one word, the second letter is usually either the second letter of the name (Oregon is OR, Alabama is AL), or the most important sound in the middle of the word. So Kansas is KS, Minnesota is MN, Louisianna is LA.
I have no idea why Los Angeles is the only city in the US that regularly gets abbreviated to its initials. We don’t do it with other two-word cities, not even other two-word cities where the name comes from Spanish. (San Diego is never SD, for example.) Town and city names are usually not abbreviated, in either speech or writing. LA (the city) is just weird.
However, it’s not something that is generally very confusing. When someone says LA, they always mean the city, because the state abbreviations are only used for writing. And even in writing, it’s usually pretty easy to tell when they mean the state because 99% of the time, you’re either writing out an address on a letter, or filling in a form with a box for “State”, or using a drop-down box on a web page to select the correct state.
Also, to add to the things that confuse non-Americans but are perfectly comprehensible to US people, Washington the state and Washington DC are completely separate places on opposite sides of the country. Washington DC is the only place in the continental US that is not part of a state, it’s part of the District of Columbia (that’s what DC stands for) and is purposefully not part of a state so that no state could claim the political clout of having the capital city be part of it. In postal abbreviations, Washington DC is DC, and Washington the state is WA. Washington DC is the exception to “nobody ever says postal codes aloud” and gets referred to as DC all the time, and it is, in fact, far more common to call it DC than Washington. If you just say Washington, you usually mean the state. If you mean the nation’s capital, you usually either say Washington DC or just DC.
so (asking as a brit) if you see NY does that always refer to the state and not the city? we know people write NYC for the city but it sometimes feels like NY is referring to the city?
Yep, NY is the state of New York. NYC is New York City.
I’d also like to point out that Pennsylvania actually IS sometimes called PA because it’s a cumbersome name, and PA is actually a very easy couple of letters to say.
Also, an addendum to the DC thing: Washington is the name of the state on the west coast, and the city in the District of Colombia. It often gets called “Washington DC” like it’s one name, but technically Washington is the only city in the District of Colombia, and the two just so happen to have the same borders.
If it feels like NY is refering to the city, not the state, it’s because people often forget that New York, New York isn’t a Washington, DC situation, and there’s a whole entire state to the north of the city. Sometimes people call the state that is outside the city “Upstate New York,” but it’s extremely subjective and locally contentious what is and is not included in “Upstate.”
