Post #2868562

2025-04-29 20:43 UTC

@simon@fedi.simonwillison.net @dalke@toots.nu exactly that. Just a small note, though: using weight or eating habits as a comparison can unintentionally come across as fat-shaming. We can discuss better choices for the planet without making people feel bad about their bodies. (I'm going to assume you meant well here.) Outside of the drive-by reply, I didn't realize how much online streaming's environmental footprint was.

Replies (2)

@Burn_this_@beige.party 2025-04-29 21:06

@webology@mastodon.social @simon@fedi.simonwillison.net @dalke@toots.nu "Unintentionally" fat shaming? I'm pretty sure it is absolutely intentional.

Open ##2868564
@dalke@toots.nu 2025-04-30 20:30

@webology@mastodon.social @simon@fedi.simonwillison.net The flip side is when people who need to lose weight for health reasons get shamed as fat-phobic. (Eg, https://medium.com/in-fitness-and-in-health/shamed-as-fatphobic-for-pursuing-better-health-d530ad30b1d behind a Medium wall but available elsewhere.) On the other hand, I want to make flyskam - "flight shame" - real and widespread. Discussing things nicely hasn't worked during the last 35 years. Re: online streaming, I wonder how much of that is from the media transfer, and how much for the ad system (user tracking, customized bids, etc.)

Open ##2868565