this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2025
1515 points (97.0% liked)

Science Memes

12579 readers
3259 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1515
nets (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

they don't care whether you eat fish. they're throwing the nets regardless.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Common misconception. It's simple supply and demand. Do you think people would be destroying the seas if nobody would pay them for it?

[–] SciencesPoulet@piaille.fr -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@x00z @nsrxn

That's not so simple. Subsistence fishing is the sole means of livelihood and self-sustenance for a significant global population. It provides essential food security and supports local economies, particularly in coastal and island communities. This traditional practice ensures families have direct access to nutritious seafood, often using simple, low-cost methods. It is crucial for maintaining resilience in the face of environmental and economic challenges.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

There's only a very small amount of humans living off fishing. If those were the only ones, there would be no problems. These people do not justify any fishing for people who don't need fish to survive.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

supply and demand is a theory about price discovery. it has no bearing on this discussion.

[–] Lileath@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If no one ate fish anymore, would it still be profitable to fish in an industrial style?

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 day ago

I don't think that's likely to happen. do you have another method that might be effective?

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're claiming my choice has no impact, but it does because of supply and demand. It's very small, but it's still there.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

this is just handwaiving. supply and demand isn't a magic phrase that makes your actions have the desired effect.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's why I'm sharing the solution:

Don't contribute to the problem.

If we don't eat fish there would be close to no nets in the oceans.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah because there's too many people who are too stubborn to give it up.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

regardless of the excuses you want to make for your plan's ineffectiveness, I'm trying to find an effective solution

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe you can get people to stop eating fish, so fishermen lose their job of destroying the sea.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

that doesn't sound like a workable plan. good luck with it though.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I'm working on it.

Just a bit ago I posted it on Lemmy for people to have a thought about.

[–] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 21 hours ago

honestly, if you need x number of people, let me know when you are at x-1