World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#181

Post by bbarn » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

shalmanese wrote: post #158

OscarCunningham wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Egg laying hens are bred for different traits than the ones for meat. So the male chicks of egg laying hens would probably grow more slowly and to a smaller size than ones bred for meat. Thus their meat would be more expensive.

I've always wondered if you could market this as "vegetarian chicken" under the rationale that eating it doesn't cause an increase in net animal death. It may be more expensive but plenty of things are sold as more expensive for the ethical version. At the end of the day, my suspicion is even most vegetarians don't like being confronted with the realities of egg production.

> "vegetarian chicken" under the rationale that eating it doesn't cause an increase in net animal death

wat

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#182

Post by Falling3 » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

kempbellt wrote: post #121

netrus wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's such a strange way to argue. We use heuristics all the time. As I said elsewhere, the farmer is not a slave, that changes the equation. If all salads were made by slaves, beef might be the ethical superior choice. But it isn't. If you find someone who wants you do eat them: I guess that's fine? You cannot li ve 100% without harming animals - so it is cognitive dissonance to call for ending 95% of animal suffer…

The cognitive dissonance is the perfectionist idealism of veganism, and the assumed "ethical superiority" that constantly gets thrown around while taking zero constructive criticism that the people promoting it are in fact, living at complete odds with it. It's like beating your children to try and instill core values that abuse is bad. "Don't hit, Timmy. Hitting is bad! I'm going to spank you to get my point across.…

The OP did not make a good point - they made a Nirvana Fallacy. And your analogy in no way captures that argument anyway.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#183

Post by romanoderoma » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

throwaway2245 wrote: post #92

romanoderoma wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's 180,000 tons. Which would still feed 18,000,000 million people in Africa for a year.

why "in Africa"? Global waste meats can't in practice all be shipped to Africa; and this seems a little bit like you think Africans should eat waste products.

> why "in Africa"?

Because, as I wrote a couple posts before "an average (meta consumption) in North and Central Africa of 10kg/person/year which is optimistic for some of the countries there"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_meat_cons...

- Congo - 100 million people - 5.3kg/person/year

- Eritrea - 110 million people - 7.7kg/person/year

- Mozambique - 30 million people - 7.8kg/person/year

- etc. etc.

In Africa many countries don't have enough to feed their children and it's worst on average then in the rest of the World.

I don't think that chicken is waste (it is in fact the main type of meat they eat in Africa), I think feeding pythons in some western home with chicken is a waste.

They could feed them with mice they breed in their garages.

At least that's what my friend who own reptiles do

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#184

Post by golergka » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

mbil wrote: post #179

golergka wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything profitable is ethical? I never made this claim, as ethics in this case is subjective: some things are ethical in some eyes and unethical in others, and profitability is the mechanism of reaching consensus between these views. Your point about transparency is valid, I have to admit. However, I don't think that it applies in the case of food production: most meat and animal products consumers are well-awar…

> I never made this claim Sorry, you're right. That's what I took away from your claim that profit encodes a signal for ethicality. I still am not sure I agree with the idea that profit represents a consensus for whether or not something is ethical. Specifically _because_ money is involved it seems like the equation is muddied. In the food production case, more ethical choices often come with a higher price tag. E.g.…

That's why I said that profitability represents not only what's ethical, but how important it is for people in their particular circumstances.

Also, isn't ethics always dependent on circumstances you're in? For example, stealing is wrong - but many would argue that stealing to save you or your kids from hunger is ethical. That's the same kind of choice you're making when you choose to buy cheaper eggs when you can't afford cage-free.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#185

Post by romanoderoma » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:11 PM UTC

jononor wrote: post #75

romanoderoma wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's 180,000 tons. Which would still feed 18,000,000 million people in Africa for a year.

A million too much in there, I think.

6,000,000,000 (chicks) * 0.03 (weight of a chick in kg at birth) = 180,000,000 kg

180,000,000 kg / 10 (average meat consumption in North and Central Africa) = 18,000,000 people that could eat for a year.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#186

Post by overboard2 » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:11 PM UTC

the_gastropod wrote: post #111

balabaster wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empathy is great, but unfortunately it's not a fix. There's only so much empathy we can have for the environment around us without giving away everything and getting nothing in return. Having empathy for the needs of your fellow human beings is still empathy, even if it comes at the cost of empathy for animals. Empathy for animals at the cost of empathy for your fellow humans is no more a solution than the other way…

That's a false dichotomy. Who's advocating for less empathy for humans?

The people who want humans to live with as limited a footprint as possible, their standard of living be dammed

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#187

Post by bbarn » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

ChrisRR wrote: post #15

I've seen the videos of the male chickens who go straight into the grinder on hatching, but what happens then? Does it get turns into feed or some other useful product?

Nothing in industry to that scale goes to waste. It makes money, whether in pet feed, animal feed, or stock as someone below mentioned (that's news to me). It may seem unsavory to some but if there were a more profitable use of the chick, it would be used for that.

It always amazes me the mental gymnastics people will go through to justify just enough harm in their minds to get what they want (in this case, meat to eat and eggs to eat). Just accept that these things are bred for fuel, and move on, or don't, and be a vegan. Both of those are fine, but to sit in the middle and pick and choose which you kill and justify it to yourself based on cuteness or anthropomorphizing it is silly.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#188

Post by cute_boi » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:14 PM UTC

slothtrop wrote: post #60

difosfor wrote: post #59

I suppose it's slightly more animal friendly. On the other hand it just seems like another step into the direction of turning the chickens into optimized food machines. Would be more interested in seeing more means of producing tasty food without using animals and at reduced costs to the environment. Working towards one final giant culling of all unnaturally engineered animals and just continuing on with a small numb…

Nothing's ever enough for vegans. > Would be more interested in seeing more means of producing tasty food without using animals and at reduced costs to the environment. There is increasingly more of that all the time. > On the other hand it just seems like another step into the direction of turning the chickens into optimized food machines. Another step? They aren't getting any more optimized, if anything new availab…

> "You're free to consume whatever you want."

Most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life.

You're not free to consume whatever you want. It may be legal but not ethical.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#189

Post by bbarn » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

jansan wrote: post #16

I am by far not an animal rights activst and enjoy my daily portion of meat and dairy, but shreddering millions of male chicks always struck me als plain wrong, even by my carnivorian standards. This is progress that I fully support and I would not mind paying a little(!) extra to make sure that for my scrambled eggs no male chicken are shreddered.

Why is it wrong? If the end stage of that chick is an adult that costs more to feed than it's worth, causes a price increase to consumers, and it still ends up killed and processed in some way, why not just humanely kill it instantly? Industrial grinding is gross but not particularly cruel in practice. It's fast and effective and doesn't cause undue stress before killing the animal.

Re: World's first no-kill eggs go on sale in Berlin (2018)

#190

Post by leetcrew » Wed, Nov 25, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #106

slothtrop wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need people on the extremes After 2020, I'd like to see more in the middle. I think extremes are overrepresented.

Human nature is very hard to change. What we really need is a societal mechanism that somehow forces (or persuades) those on the extremes to compromise. The U.S. Constitution was designed to be such a mechanism, but it doesn't seem to be standing up well to new technologies.

seems to me the constitution is pretty much working as designed. during polarized times, it makes it very difficult to change things. if you believe all the terrible things written about trump in the news (I do, with some reservations), it's sort of remarkable how little damage he managed to do. we (probably) just elected joe biden, who is almost the definition of a compromise candidate.