Didn’t know that “owls, hawks, falcons, snakes, skunks, etc.” all live inside of buildings.

Adult bobcats are also 2-3 times as big as adult domestic cats.

Bobcats generally weigh between 15 and 30 pounds. Males are larger than the females. Their body length is 20 to 50 inches.
Source: https://www.desertmuseum.org/kids/oz/long-fact-sheets/Bob-cat.php?print=y

Most domestic cats should weigh about 10 pounds, though that can vary by breed and frame. A Siamese cat may weigh as few as 5 pounds, while a Maine Coon can be 25 pounds and healthy.
Source: https://www.webmd.com/pets/cats/features/healthy-weight-for-your-cat

So depending on the cat breed… virtually no difference at all. The larger of the 2 cats that we feed (shed cat, remember “feral”)… is 20-22 pounds (the smaller brother is 16-17 lbs). He is just as heavy as an average bobcat. Though admittedly less “stocky”. But my point is that they’re similar, “virtually the same” or “barely different”. I never claimed 1:1. But if they’re 99% the same… then it’s the same. Marginally larger is not sufficient argument that they’re different. Bob cats are not like mountain lions. They’re not “huge”.

Domestic cats tend to live in colonies and do in fact decimate bird populations.

Check the graph of your own source…https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380/figures/2 It shows that normal owned domestic cats are not the issue, which is exactly what the comic is pointing “fun” at. The “owner” that feeds the cat and lets them outside from time to time are nowhere near the problem. You’re context switching between “Feral” and owned and claiming that everything is bad when it’s only one category or the other. This is literal bad faith argument.

Further… No, domestic cats don’t “tend” to live in colonies. They only do so only due to food issues and will arguably NEVER create social group unless it’s required.

Feral cats (cats which live without help from man) can and will form small colonies based around available food sources. This does not inevitably happen […] However, they develop neither a social survival strategy nor a pack mentality and they continue to be solitary hunters. Thus cats are not ‘pack’ animals but have the ability to adapt to form social groups.
source: https://icatcare.org/advice/the-social-structure-of-cat-life/

Cats are wildly solitary… even domestic ones (even the ones that form prides!). There’s a reason why it’s a pain in the ass to get them to get along when you get a new kitten in the house. And even then they never really get along… More accurately just tolerating each other. The only cats I’ve ever seen truly “get along” are siblings from the same litter… And even then it looks more like a “we tolerate each other a lot” more than proactively working together as a pack/colony.

Bobcats breed less frequently (usually once, but sometimes twice a year) whereas domestic cats tend to have more than one litter a year (1.4 on average)

I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news… But 1.4 is between 1 and sometimes 2 a year. No idea where you’re getting this stat from, but the way you present it… you’ve basically presented the same exact number twice, in two different ways and claimed that it’s different. If “1 to sometimes 2 times” actually means 1.2 as an average… 1.2 and 1.4 isn’t that far apart.

The thing is, you don’t get feral cats without people letting their unfixed house cats roam free.

Cool. Then this comic doesn’t apply to a very large subset of owners who do the right thing and virtually all cats that make it to any human system at all. Now you can fuck off with pushing it onto everyone which is what OP is doing in half of their posts in this thread. Especially since non-altered cats tend to do shit like spray. If that cat is EVER indoors, they’re probably fixed. That makes the comic fucking stupid. It makes the OP a jackass for targeting a group of people who aren’t the problem. And makes you an accomplice for shilling it as well by conflating the two groups of problem as if they’re the same. Domestic cats that are indoor pets are not the problem… even when they go outside. It’s the feral cats… which has nothing to do with the guy portrayed in the comic.

Where did I say that? Felis catus aka the domestic cat would not be in North America.

Domestic cats are BARELY different from Bobcats… which are indeed native. Correct without humans cats as we specifically know them wouldn’t exist. But other cats do exist. They are native.

Same can be said for mice though… mice as they exist in large cities wouldn’t exist as they are now without human interaction. Are they now invasive and non-native? We don’t tend to think of it that way. But it’s just as accurate as cats are here…

They hunt rabbits (and other rodents) and medium to large birds. Domestic cats hunt small rodents and birds, but live in much smaller areas with much higher numbers packed into that small area.

This is simply a size thing… Juvenile Bobcats act more or less exactly like domestic cats in this respect.

I don’t think anyone saying you should not let your cats outside is saying anything besides that.

And yet… OP is in the thread judging everyone for ANY cat being outside Not talking about “feral” at all and specifically goes out of their way to include ALL domestic cats period. So yes… there are people out there claiming much more than that.

Edit: Keep in mind the thread’s title is “Indoor/Outdoor Cats”… So definitionally NOT the feral cats you’re talking about.

Agreed. The “feral” (shed cats) that we take care of (and fixed)… They’ve killed all of maybe 12 animals in the past 8 years that we know of (maybe 10x that for shit they’ve killed that we didn’t know about). The correct answer is that number would be thousands of critters… but isn’t because we give them cat food that’s available to them at will. It also stops them from roaming outside of the “local” area.

The large population of cats together can do a bunch of damage. Feral cats likely do a hell of a lot damage. But claiming that letting a single cat be outside is the end of the world for the local critters is crazy.

i guess, if you enjoy being a menace to your local ecology. Then go off, king.

The guy mentions “destruction of the local mouse population” and this is your answer? So you think those mice are native? They’d exist if humans weren’t here?

They are the same issue as cats… They’re only here and only thriving because we accidentally give them too much safety/places to live/food. They would also be invasive.

In their native habitat, not in North America

So you think that mountain lions, cougars, pumas, etc… never existed in the Americas? You think that there are NO native cat populations here at all? Shit man… The bob cat I found under my trailer in my back yard must have been a figment of my imagination.

While “domestic” cats are invasive… Cats exist literally in EVERY STATE I’VE EVER LIVED IN. (New York, AZ, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia.) And I’ve SEEN native cats in literally EVERY one of those states.

The actual problem here isn’t the “native-ness” of “domestic” cats… but that their population is inflated because we cater to them and create what amount to an unlimited food supply for them. “domestic” cats are barely domesticated.

Edit: And because I know it’s going to happen. No… I don’t have “indoor” cats. I do feed the “shed cats” (feral-ish). Which should actually stop them from eating wildlife… or at least stop it significantly. They are friendly with us… Not with much of anyone else. I actually don’t really agree with having animals in the house at all… I just find the premise that cats wouldn’t exist here as quite a silly concept.

Edit2: and the ones we take “care” of are fixed.

Works fine in GrapheneOS…

Nah. It would be easy and probably responsible for google to ban site’s that are malicious like that from poisoning their AI. I think the blame rests squarely on google.

and seeding seems to work for me.

You can only seed to people who have ports open. At least one side of the connection needs to be reachable.

It’s people like me who keep ports available that are able to seed to you.

Each one of these events is easily shown to have good merits for being public record. Even ignoring the obvious case of “we want to track what the police/courts were actually doing”.

Traffic accidents

Occurs in front of your property and cause some amount of damage to your stuff that officers didn’t outline in any reports. You want to be able to figure out who did it so you can send them the bill/sue them. Hiding these records doesn’t make sense. Other obvious uses would be to find out where someone went/is missing, eg if someone died.

traffic citations

You’re attempting to hire someone for a job, part of that job is some amount of driving. Being able to lookup if they have any record of driving poorly would be due diligence you’d expect a company to do. Hell getting into an Uber or Lyft… You might want to lookup your driver. You could be surprised.

bankruptcies

Hire someone to do something related to finances in your company? Or to file your taxes? Might want to actually double check they’re not idiots on their own dime either. Someone asks you for a loan, or any other financial related stuff. Records of them defaulting are important.

buying a house

Your dog ran up to me and bit me, then ran away. Being able to get the property details can be highly important.

getting divorced

Can trigger a number of things. If divorce has any kid related issues… and one parent no longer has rights to the child… Schools/doctors can validate that one parent no longer has those rights without just blindly trusting random documents one parent provides.

But editing code running on your computer should be protected as well… I’m personally pretty torn on this one. Ultimately I think that server-side is the only real answer.

You wouldn’t “already” have it.

You’ve missed the point. Simply having something on your harddrive is already something the law does care about. It simply depends on the something.

Well I’ve read some copyright laws

So have I. Because I had access to an exception under it in my prior job. Seems like we’re still on the same page here. Not sure why you’d feel the need to call out someone else’s knowledge on a topic that you have no idea about.

However, Wayback Machine making read-only copies of websites has for now never been disputed successfully.

Except it has. That’s why administrators can exclude domains from it. DMCA notices also can yield complete removals.

Well… No offense… but duh? It’s not like OP can migrate his spouses “Spouse@gmail.com” address to his mail server.

I was under the assumption (and I could be wrong) that OP owns the domain… And wants to run their mailboxes. If she wants to keep her own mailbox and use it, just forward it to her gmail if that’s what she wants. I’m also not insinuating forcing someone into something.

I own my domain(you guessed correctly) and host my own emails. My spouse does use an inbox on my server(actually a few)… If she didn’t want to anymore she can open a mailbox where-ever she wants… and I’ll even forward whatever I get to her. That’s it. Wouldn’t stop me from running my own inbox on my own server. And I’m not forcing her to do anything at all. She can use it or not.

This is the mentality I have when I made the previous comments. Just forward her stuff off, she can go wherever she wants.

Until the basement floods and the server goes offline for a few days

That’s what backups are for.

or botched upgrade that’s failing quietly;

See above

over zealous spam assassin configuration;

That’s an assumption that you’re using this specific product.

What’s funny is you think that all of this can’t happen to your stuff on Google’s servers either for some reason… Say the wrong thing in a Youtube comment? Boom whole google profile banned. All your emails are gone too.

Or random software that interfaces poorly with each other (https://support.google.com/mail/thread/142335843/all-of-my-emails-have-disappeared-how-can-i-recover-them?hl=en)

SMTP is stupidly forgiving. You’re not going to magically lose singular emails.

But one thing is for sure, my wife won’t have any of it. She’s a total backwards thinking give me windows or I’ll jump kind of Gal.

So… forward her inbox to her personal gmail account? Keep your mail server as it was for you?

Some people believe the world is flat. That doesn’t make the statement true. They provided no clear example of how any of it could be doing what they claim it would do. So that random statement starting with “some democrats”… is meaningless.

By changing the language from “all citizens”, it sets up opportunities to selectively disenfranchise those citizens who are able and registered to vote.

No it doesn’t because the verbiage is “ONLY citizens” as the replacement. It’s still VERY clear that citizens are to vote. What it clears up is any argument that non-citizens should also be allowed to vote.

Can you provide the ruling?

As far as I understand it was simply an “agreement”. Not a legal decision/ruling. Nothing stops M$ from appealing it regardless with this new information. And pointing to MacOS and Android and asking why they’re not being enforced the same way.

And just because a current ruling OR agreement is in place. Doesn’t mean they don’t want to do it. They can easily just make the process harder for those that want Kernel access which could still have the same effect.

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters

Please quote where it says that. I see no such statement.

What’s on the ballot?

Republican-led legislatures in eight states have proposed constitutional amendments on their November ballots declaring that only citizens can vote.

Proposals in Iowa, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wisconsin would replace existing constitutional provisions stating that “every” citizen or “all” citizens can vote with new wording saying “only” citizens can vote. Supporters contend the current wording does not necessarily bar noncitizens from voting.

In Idaho and Kentucky, the proposed amendments would explicitly state: “No person who is not a citizen of the United States” can vote. Similar wording won approval from Louisiana voters two years ago.

Voters in North Dakota, Colorado, Alabama, Florida and Ohio passed amendments between 2018 and 2022 restricting voting to “only” citizens.

What about changing verbiage to be clear is “Disenfranchise”?

the content is on my private machine already, how can any law be relevant or exerted upon what I do there?

So child porn is okay then? You would already have it on your system and got it for free on your private machine!

I doubt you’re writing this comment on the basis of your knowledge of copyright law.

I doubt you are either. Yet we’re both here.

you seem to be saying that Wayback Machine is also committing theft

It does… on paper… A lot. https://time.com/6266147/internet-archive-copyright-infringement-books-lawsuit/ To the point it’s losing lawsuits over exactly that.