Thorham

It's about the mentality. We should hold ourselves to higher standards. The way we treat other humans and non-humans is very bad, and needs to change. Note: I'm not vegan.

If reducing non-human suffering isn't enough, then you just don't give a damn.

Indeed, but so are some of the meat-head replies. You get them on EVERY forum where you post about veganism. Every last one of them (except vegan and vegetarian forums).

I wasn't talking about not doing anything about it, I was talking about pointless speculation.

Indeed.

Oh well, whatever. You don't want to be vegan? Fine. No one's forcing you to be.

It's less than twenty characters for Shogi.

I'm not going to speculate about possible changes that can occur over thousands of years. Really? What don't you understand, then?

What's there to discuss? That things can change? We all know that. What we don't know is how things will change. Oh, come on! If your diet requires only vitamin B12 supplements because you don't want dirt on your vegetables, then I say it's not a bad diet. Also, veganism isn't a diet. Once we master growing meat, this whole issue goes away.

When living in the wild, no, it makes no sense at all. Being an omnivore species is of great benefit, because we have more food options. Ignoring evolutionary advantages in the wild is plain dumb. Not to mention that veganism requires land cultivation. That said, I don't live in nature, I live in a city with a supermarket around the corner. This means I have a choice (and no, I'm not vegan at this time).

Yes, they exist: https://www.google.nl/search?q=international+shogi+pieces&client=firefox-b&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnmOH-1dbUAhVJbFAKHXhCCVQQ_AUICigB&biw=1024&bih=699 However, why not just learn the handful of Chinese characters required to read the pieces? It's not hard.

If there's more than the physical world, then perhaps it is possible.

No, veganism won't help end world hunger. Making sure that everyone has access to all available food will.

If everyone always thought that about everything, then nothing would ever change. You don't know that. Things can change radically over a couple of thousand years. Vitamin B12 is produced by bacteria, not animals, and is therefore very easy to get from supplements.

Only 50 million years? Lol

What gave you the idea that I assume that? I think that absolute nothingness never existed.

Could it even be observed? The problem is knowing that what you're looking at is absolute nothingness. A good example is virtual particles seemingly pooping into existence out of nothing. Is a human made vacuum really absolute nothingness? Blindly assuming anything is absurd.

I did say 'seems', not that it's simply so. I don't believe it's absurd, I find it logically reasonable that it's absurd. Big difference. None, but I don't think it's possible to get any evidence that points either way. I might be wrong of course. Think about it. You have absolutely nothing. Pure void. Absolute nothingness. How can something come from that? It just doesn't seem to make any sense.

They're written in other programming languages.

It's easy, because there's nothing to understand, it simply is. Also, infinities aren't necessarily hard to understand.

Absolute nothingness is simply a total lack of anything,

Seems easy enough: Something has always existed.

Except that things physically popping into existence out of absolute nothingness seems absurd. It's pretty safe to say that something has always existed and simply didn't come from anywhere.

Just checked a few more. According to some, computer science is a science, and according to others it isn't, if you purely go by their definitions of science. Nice mess

According to the dictionary definition of science, computer science is a science, so it's a science. Seems a bit pointless to debate the meaning of well defined words.