He’s being criticized too. Everyone that showed up in something other than black is a narcissistic dumbfuck.

Sorry, I’ll make it easy: just 3 little things to know:

1. Your study doesn’t prove what you say.
2. This is tricky, not just good or bad.
3. You need help; this is too hard for you.

Version for anyone reading this with at least average analytic capabilities:

I’m sorry, I seem to keep overestimating your analytic capabilities. I’m boiling it down to 3 simple points:

1. Your study - even while showing some bias - does not support your claims.
2. This - like most cases - is not a black and white one.
3. You are out of your depth - not only in this thread. Get help.

If you read the conclusion it does say it would be better to keep your cats indoors because of all the associated risks.

Except the conclusion does not state that - regardless of how much you want it to. Please have someone explain that to you.

You really need a study to say to you that thousands of years ago cars weren’t as much of a risk?

Did you even try to read that study you linked? There are more risks than cars and their severity depends on time and location. Is it to hard a concept that in former times e.g. the risk of predation, disease , and other accidents combined with lack of access to veterinarians pose a higher risk?

But there’s such a strong emotional aspect to it that I just can’t understand …

Similar to this snippet all of your replies seem to be motivated by emotion only - so much that it impairs your ability to assess your own sources. Just because you want your source to agree with you it doesn’t mean it really does.

… to accept the obvious conclusion.

Again, there is no obvious conclusion. There are no absolutes here - there are pros and cons related to both. How big they are varies by location (see e.g. #2.2 paragraph of the study you linked). I’d like to add that the character of the cat also plays a very massive role - This is missing in this particular study though. Again, have someone explain it to you. Alternatively you could feed it to an AI (see below).

I’d guess most cat owners would prefer their cat|s stay indoors, at least in cities (me being one of them tbh). Some cats don’t accept being locked up though - regardless of the amount of entertainment provided.

(AI) E.g. here is what mistral.ai answers to “does this study say you should only keep cats indoors?”

The study does not explicitly state that cats should only be kept indoors. Instead, it presents a balanced review of the risks and benefits associated with outdoor access for cats. The study discusses various welfare concerns related to uncontrolled outdoor access, such as increased risks of disease, parasites, injury, and predation, as well as negative impacts on wildlife and human neighbors. However, it also acknowledges the welfare benefits of outdoor access, including the opportunity for cats to engage in natural behaviors like hunting, exploring, and climbing, which can improve their physical and mental well-being.

Overall, the study emphasizes the need for further research to better understand the impacts of different housing and enrichment strategies on cat welfare, as well as the attitudes and practices of cat owners regarding outdoor access.

Assuming you have noone explaining complicted stuff to you or you being unwilling to listen to advice: Feed the study to an AI with reasoning engine (e.g. deepseek) and ask some questions about it. Make sure to ask whether the study is biased and whether (obvious) factors have been omitted. You can learn somehting there as the analytic capacity of AI with reasoning engine is vastly superiout to yours.

The study weighs the pros and cons of outdoor and indoor keeping. It also offers some ideas how to mitigate the cons. It’s an interesting study, you should ask someone to explain it to you.

The study mentions that risk factors of outdoor keeping vary by location. There is no mention of historic risk and therefore no assessment how these may have evolved.

Please elaborate your claims about past and present dangers for pets, I’m curious about specifics.

Also how are you mitigating the risk of “such dangers” for pets and children?

wtf. Where was that?

Date & location please.

As a cat owner I approve using a a super soaker. I use a mini-soaker on my own cats in rare cases (being bengals they love water but despise being sprayed) - they probably catch on quickly and should bolt when they see you reaching for it soon.

That being said throwing a whole cup at a cat or making it soaking wet is not ok.

It’s also how house cats have been living for about 10000 years.

Even the studies most friendly to your position put the conglomerate that cats are counted it in 4th place - e.g.:

1. Habitat Loss & Degradation (40-50%)
2. Climate Change (20-30%)
3. Pesticides & Chemical Pollution (10-15%)
4. Predation by Domestic & Invasive Species (5-10%)
5. Collisions (5-10%)
6. Disease & Parasites (1-5%)
7. Illegal Hunting & Trapping (1-3%)
8. Light Pollution (<1-2%)

Let’s be very generous and concede cats could contribute 5% (sorry magpies, crows, etc pp. - you contribte almost nothing)

I don’t argue this point because I am way to fond of cats. I don’t even agree with the above scale - at least when it comes to (formerly) common birds such as house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and common blackbird (Turdus merula). Their main problems are Usutu virus and loss of insect biomass.

I am shit-scared about the loss of insect biomass. I am old and observant enough to have recognized the Windshield phenomenon by myself. I concur with the Danish study hinting at a 80% decrease from 1997 until 2017 (I actually think it is higher now). I live in major city with nice parks - the decrease is observable here too.

If the food supply of songbirds has declined by at least 80% that is your biggest problem right there - and it does not only affect songbirds and not only insectivores.

Over-emphasizing cats in this situation is a smoke screen/ red herring akin to BP pushing the carbon footprint of the common man.

The current problem of insectivores is a massive massive lack of insects, not cats.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-remove-dells-superfish-2-0-root-certificate-permanently/

It’s actually called eDellRoot, not Superfish though.

You can safely assume that probably every manufacturer did or still does similar thing - whether they’re caught is another story though.

Dell did the same thing - in the same year too.

You should always clean install your OS. Let the guys wanting to spy on you put some effort in.

This has to be the most toxic employer in Germany. I had some shit jobs, especially when I was younger, but this is insane.

I respect your position but have to disagree.

Trump, Musk ,and probably most of their circle come from families that have a strong inclination towards psychopathy. While there surely are ecological causes for this the probability of genetic causes supporting this are high.

Capitalism and before that feudalism has positively selected psychopaths for centuries. It’s time we stopped breeding people incapable of empathy.

That’s such a weird, freak incident. Do you have a link to a news story?

I recall them being caught of being in the possession of recordings they shouldn’t have had.

On top of this the option of not sending recordings to the cloud is being removed just now - so they stopped pretending to respect your privacy.

For real? My tweaking days ended when floppy came out for the C64.

Maybe the C64 datasette never got the upgrade?

A flathead is still a screwdriver, is it not?

It was a Philips screw IIRC. You can also use a flathead screwdriver on them but you shouldn’t IMHO.

Dude would just walk up to the tape drive, masterfully tweak the screw for a second, and it’d work.

Me too! For some reason I was the only guy in school who could do that. Fun times. 😊

Because I had a floppy drive and that’s what I obviously preferred to use.

In the beginning these were not available. Also I remember them costing the same as the C64 itself. As soon as I could afford one I got one obviously.

I just another item that could a generational riddle: the hole-punch that made your one-sided floppy two-sided.