Unethical life pro tip: get an apartment that isn’t at the end of a hallway and has floors above and below. In some cases, you can turn off your heat completely and simply steal heat from your neighbors, leeching off of them like some sort of thermal mosquito. It won’t be as warm as is comfortable without bundling up, but it may be warm enough to get by just by bundling up. Watch out for freezing pipes though!
For an added techno bonus: install a smart thermostat connected to a camera pointed at the door with facial recognition tech built in. If anyone other than the residents walk in, the thermostat is automatically reset to 72F/22C. That way if you DO burst a pipe, and the landlord walks in, they won’t have any proof you did it!
or… just set the heat only for 55 if the pipes are your only concern. You’ll still save a lot of money on heating, and you won’t have to deal with your stuff getting flooded.
I can confirm that this works. Outside temperatures are right around freezing right now. Indoors, we’re still hovering at around 23C and we have yet to turn on any heating. I wouldn’t call this unethical though. Homes are built this way by design so that you share the heating.
A smart thermostat would likely have record of the set and actual temperatures.
Yeah wouldn’t it also be like super cold inside from the temp not being 72F prior to them entering? I mean if it was cold enough to freeze the pipes and all, seems like just they’d be able to tell what’s what as soon as they open the door.
How is this unethical? I live in those conditions and if I turn my heat on I have to walk around naked, the hear from the neighbours is enough
good luck finding an apartment that A) will let you install a smart thermostat B) a camera and C) finding an apartment with a 3 pipe climate system as its usually 2 so you dont get to control if its heat or cooling year round.
my apartment is like this and it heats up to like 80°F without any thermostat setting even when it’s below freezing outside
Just embrace the cold and build up your brown fat which burns calories to keep you warm so you can eat pizza all day and stay skinny*.
- Not really but sorta
I live in a relatively warm part of Canada and let me tell you a sweater alone is not enough 😭
There are plenty of places in the USA Midwest and Europe that get colder.I live in Northern mn where it goes like -40f I don’t wear more then two sweatshirts all of winter I don’t do outside activities in the cold tho
In -40f, if you don’t have artificial heating in your house, your pipes will freeze.
Your pipes can freeze well before that.
Thanks for confirming their comment…
Thank you for the recognition. I could not have done this without my family and my friends. I accept your Thank You in honor of all who have been thanked before me.
Yeah, good luck with only a sweater in Newport VT.
Must be fun not to have any sensitivity issues and also live somewhere so south that a sweater is enough.
yeah unless you’re drying off the thermostat should never be above like 58 for heating. Layers fix everything else
A touque as well. You lose most of your heat through your head. It’s easy enough to take off and put in your pocket if you get too warm, then put back on if you feel like you’re getting cold.
Sadly not accurate, except about touques being sexy and convenient
If it helps, here is an article calling ur mom and the dude from Letterkenny dumb: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/body-heat-loss
Simpler to just model humans as nearly black bodies with known surface area and some heat lost through gas exchange.
Well, maybe my mom just told me that to make sure I wore a touque. ;)
I’m bald now, so it made sense.
Why is everyone in this thread Richard Byrd?
Most people I know wear t-shirts at home in winter and heat up the house to compensate, wasting energy. This meme is clearly aimed at them.
If you live in arctic conditions, then you probably already wear more than a shirt, even at home. If not, then feel adressed as well.
And to the many people who are currently raising their babies at home: Scandinavian practices be damned. I understand that it’s not too practical to regularly wrap up your baby so that they can withstand freezing conditions. Fine. Turn up the damn thermostat. You already have a screaming infant at your hands.
Everyone else: stfu.
Not all of us carry that much fat around ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How does that prevent you from wearing warm clothes?
I wish I had control of the thermostat. It would be 60° year round.
Edit: Forgot Europe exists 60°F = 15.56°C
Also does any one still call it centigrade?
That would be freezing to me, but we live in a place that rarely dips much below freezing and gets super hot with high humidity. Humidity + cold also sucks. We were like 23 today (70something) and have a number of days over 35 in the summer (with 90+ % humidity). I work outside in that heat so I’m much more acclimated to that
Bro said Europe as if the rest of the world uses shitty ass Fahrenheit
The United States, Liberia, Micronesia, Cayman Islands, and the Marshall Islands use Fahrenheit. It’s not just us. It’s mostly us.
I’ve heard some people say it in England but dunno if it’s actually common there. Was only a tourist.
Must be nice living somewhere where you don’t even know that pipes can freeze.
Okay, you can heat your house but only to 50 degrees.
Pipes can’t freeze if they’re halfway to boiling, I like your thinking
Everyone in the metric world:
50 degrees is half of sauna temp at best though.
Using what baseline? 50 degrees is half the boiling point of water, using the logical baseline of zero.
Exactly. And 100 degrees is what a good sauna should be. Maybe I could go as low as 80, but 50 is absolutely pointless.
Are we talking about the ambient temperature in the room or something else? Cause room temperature at 100c is immediately life threatening.
It isn’t. The air being 100 degrees and dry isn’t the same as pouring 100 degree water on yourself. You’re only sitting there for like 15-20 minutes. Ask any Finn and I guarantee you that 100 degrees is what you aim for.
why are they wearing towels?? freaks
I might get heatstroke but my lizard would be so excited. He could run around without his heat lamps.
based celsius moment
I usually only go for 20 degrees, but I guess a sauna would be fun
My dumbass old housemates would run the heater without closing the windows…
My old housemates were the opposite lol. We tried saving every penny on heating costs. In the winter, we taped the windows over with cardboard for better insulation (they are old single-pane windows), and fashioned an automatic door closer from an elastic cord to keep the door into the living room shut (our “warm zone”). Instead of using gas heating, we mined ETH with our gaming PC’s (this was before ethereum went proof-of-stake). Between the three of us, the total energy output was close to 2kW, so totally viable for keeping the living room warm. Pretty sure we ended up earning money from heating the house lol.
2 kW is a ton of power required to keep a single room warm assuming you ran that continuously.
I mean that’s just the theoretical power from adding up all of the PSU ratings. Actual power is less, since it’s just the video cards working, optimized for hashes per watt (i.e. not maximum power), and most of the time it would be two or one computer running, since the others would be away from their desk or playing games or doing something important
Maybe their house is just one huge room
OK, OP… where do you live that a sweater is “enough”?
Denver, CO checking in and I’ll take my central heat, thanks.
7200’ here, I’ll keep my furnace as well. I usually only keep it at 62°, unless I want a $600 gas bill. But, that the tradeoff of having mild awesome summers.
Guys if you keep heating your houses to 15°C or more you’re the cause for climate change and the corporations can’t blow petawatts on their AI data centers c’mon don’t be so selfish
Yeah how else will ChatGPT tell you how to distribute (a^2 +b2)(c2+d^2)? /s
I’m sorry, me heaters are set to 16°C 😢
In my defence they don’t go any lower than that for some reasonThat’s basically the minimum requirement to avoid structural decay. You should not be letting your place get any colder than that.
Some reason being that if you don’t maintain a certain temperature in your house you’ll get mildew problems.
True, but also let’s not just let ourself dash toward suicide. Society is not meant to sustain nudism in the middle of winter 24/7.
Just wear a sweater bro
> *buys new iPhone*
> *uses Google as primary search engine*
> *doesn’t use adblocker*
> *pays for youtube*
> *pays for spotify*
> *pays for netflix*
> *buys brand clothes*
> *doesn’t give a shit about monopolies, worker conditions, product origins, nothing*
> Guys, it’s the corporation’s fault for making all these products for me to buy!
I like how you put paying as the bad thing instead of just using
Using is bad, but sometimes forced. Paying is most often voluntary and worse as it gives them even more power than just use.
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism
I find that quite the platitude.
When is consumption ever “ethical”? Is hunting animals to survive ethical? Is killing plants to survive ethical? Is modification of the environment for survival ethical? Life itself is destructive because in order to survive, something else must die. In order to make life more enjoyable, even more must die and suffer. This is not limited to capitalism but any form of survival.
If we were 4 billion people on the planet without global trade, markets, businesses, advanced technology, and so on, we would still kill everything around us, go to war, enslave, rape, subjugate, and consume.
that phrase doesn’t really attempt to tackle the general idea of consumption, just the one under capitalism.
It’s a response to the phenomenon where seemingly no matter what you buy, no matter where you buy it, somewhere along the supply chain someone got hurt or got taken advantage of, and the environment was most likely hurt as well.
Ethical people (ignoring the definition of what that means as i’m not really feeling like writing an essay) usually want to avoid any products that cause someone or something to be harmed during production. But under capitalism that’d mean never buying technology again and having to quit society as having a smartphone is mandatory nowadays, though you’d probably starve first if your best friend isn’t a 100% eco friendly farmer (and even then that farmer probably uses a combine which is made out of quite a few parts, production of at least one or two definitely involved some form of abuse)
So the slogan “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” highlights the fact it’s not an individual’s fault, and the invidivual is not to blame, when they buy something that unknowingly (or knowingly but out of necessity) brought harm to the people or the environment involved in making the thing.
In the olden days you could feasibly survive by being a farmer who kills maybe a couple of his stock a year for meat. You knew exactly where your patatos came from (your field), you knew exactly where your clothes came from (your best friend is the town seamstress), you knew exactly where you furniture is from (the lumberjack who gets wood for the carpenter is your brother).
But then things got more complicated, and capitalism encourages cutting ethical corners in favour of profit
It’s a response to the phenomenon where seemingly no matter what you buy, no matter where you buy it, somewhere along the supply chain someone got hurt or got taken advantage of, and the environment was most likely hurt as well.
I call this the Doug Fawcett Principle
good name for it indeed! The Good Place is a fantastic show
that phrase doesn’t really attempt to tackle the general idea of consumption, just the one under capitalism.
Yes, exactly why I said it’s a platitude. It’s thoughtless and trite. I’m saying: consumption is not ethical, no matter which system. There is no ethical consumption.
So the slogan “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” highlights the fact it’s not an individual’s fault, and the invidivual is not to blame, when they buy something that unknowingly (or knowingly but out of necessity) brought harm to the people or the environment involved in making the thing.
That’s a cop out. It paints consumers as mere puppets or robots who are unable to make choices or decisions that could lead to a reduction of suffering.
In the olden days you could feasibly survive by being a farmer […]
The good ol’ days, how many times have I heard that one. In the good ol’ days there was often imperial rule. In the good ol’ days, slave trade was the norm. In the good older days, your little town or village could be overrun by wandering horde of Mongols or even just the next village over that had a different tribe. In the good ol’ days, if you were disabled you were fucked, if you had a different skin color you were fucked, if you were a woman you were figuratively and literally fucked, if you got sick any “incurable disease” you were not fucked, you were dead, if you couldn’t work anymore your offspring had to tend to you and if those didn’t exist or weren’t willing to you were fucked, and so on.
It’s nice to romanticise “simpler” days after watching “Gone With Wind”, but life back then was hard af. It was backbreaking. People died at much higher rates than now with little to show for it. People still live absolutely miserable lives, but the rate thereof is much lower in the countries exploiting others.
But then things got more complicated, and capitalism encourages cutting ethical corners in favour of profit
Capitalism doesn’t encourage anything. It’s one of the natural products of human greed. Any other system created by humans is flawed and infected the human disease, doomed to create suffering and torment. The only question is how much. Whether capitalism generates more than other systems is debatable, but to claim that there is “ethical consumption” in any other living system is wishful thinking. It doesn’t exist.
Yes, exactly why I said it’s a platitude. It’s thoughtless and trite. I’m saying: consumption is not ethical, no matter which system. There is no ethical consumption.
That’s a false dichotomy…even if we agreed with your definition of all consumption being unethical, it wouldn’t mean that there aren’t different levels of unethical practices used to produce those consumables.
All consumption being unethical does not mean that all forms of production are equally unethical. If that’s the case you wouldn’t really have a problem with sending the kids back to the mines.
It paints consumers as mere puppets or robots who are unable to make choices or decisions that could lead to a reduction of suffering.
Can you point to a time in history where a general boycott of a dangerous or harmful product was successful without the help of government intervention?
Any other system created by humans is flawed and infected the human disease, doomed to create suffering and torment.
And apparently that doesn’t happen under capitalism? Then what exactly are you bitching about plastic for?
“ethical consumption” in any other living system is wishful thinking. It doesn’t exist.
Again, your argument is based on a forced false dichotomy.
Not to mention that it seems like you are really just a libertarian angry at consumers for participating in the “free market”.
You can’t simultaneously believe that the free market is the best way to regulate the economy, but upset at the people for their consumption habits in a free market.
the other person’s reply is good so i won’t repeat their points,
but i also wanted to address the “romanticisation” of the “ol’ days”. Because i did not intend to do that, what i was trying to portray was that it was simpler in the context of the supply chain of your food and belongings. You knew exactly where all your things came from, and the process of creation and aquisition of goods was mostly contained within your village and the village nearby, with the occasional traveller looking to trade
So just die I guess?
That’s a pretty ridiculous take.
No, Maggot. Think before you consume.
Perhaps to you the saying is a platitude, but that seems subjective. To someone who hasn’t considered the impacts of their consumption habits, or the ways that different economic systems can serve to reward different patterns of human behavior, it can be a thought provoking statement.
There is no ethical consumption.
If you view ethics as a binary, then sure. If you view ethics as a complex and nuanced spectrum, well, not so much.
Capitalism doesn’t encourage anything.
What a reductionist take, especially considering the paragraph you’d written just above it.
Perhaps to you the saying is a platitude, but that seems subjective
Wow, everything is relative. Do you have any other wise things to say? It’s in the eye of the beholder maybe? There is no truth? There are no absolutes? Want to whip out some tautologies or falsely attribute some quotes to Einstein?
If you view ethics as a binary, then sure. If you view ethics as a complex and nuanced spectrum, well, not so much.
Again with the “everything is relative”. So actually, we’re living in paradise right now, because relative to 5B years ago, earth would be inhospitable. But we are also living in hell because things could be so much better.
Everything is nuanced. Of course it is. Which is why the phrase “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” is false. You’re just confirming it yourself with your “everything is relative” and “to the esteemed members of the ivory tower with completely formed and immensely folded brains, ethics is an intricate and nuanced spectrum”.
What a reductionist take, especially considering the paragraph you’d written just above it.
Yes, thank you for confirming that you understood nothing of what I wrote.
My flat grows mold if I leave it under 18C for too long and my landlord doesn’t care 🥴
Mmmm, mold.
I’m right with you on that though. Small basement apartment with a concrete floor that was built in the 1930s. Yep. Mold.
Both uses are a problem, one is just more unnecessary than the other.
Being comfortable is unnecessary. If you’re not suffering as much as this guy, you’re the problem with society.
Is there a limit to comfort?
For me it’s about two hands. That’s where I max out.
People can get injured if it’s too cold. They can lose sleep, which is a problem over time. With our level of technology, life doesn’t ever need to hurt.
Exactly. The usual context of “comfort” contains an unsaid word: “sufficient”.
Yep. With the understanding that sufficient is different for everyone.
Not that different
Well fuck the people not near the equator amirite?
Your landlord not providing heat? Just wear a sweater, stop being such a entitled tenant! /s
This meme brought to you by a child in California that doesn’t know what real winter is. It was 20 something here last night and this dipshit thinks a sweater is gonna keep you alive though that.
I live in Canada and tbh I’m with the Chad on this.
Not saying “turn off your furnace” but energy use (and cost) baloons exponentially based on how hot you have your thermostat set at. Lower your thermostat to the point where wearing a sweater indoors is enough and save money. It’s not even just about the money, it’sresponsible energy usage.
And I’d be happy to subsidize the first X GJ/mo to help people keep themselves from freezing, but if people want their apartment to be the tropics that’s gotta be on their dime.
Same with electricity. I’ll subsidize keeping your lights on but I’m not paying you to mine crypto.
Another possible approach is to keep your home cool (keep it above 50 to avoid pipes freezing because that just sucks to deal with regardless of responsibility) and use a small like 200w heater pointed at yourself to warm up some. I live in a century old farm house and do that because it’s drafty as heck in parts of the house and impractical to fully heat the entire house to a fully comfortable temperature once winter truly sets in and it’s consistently around 0F
20 something
Sweater wont keep you alive
Wait till you hear about the latest tech: two sweaters!
I’m wearing two sweaters even though it’s only 10C (50F) here. I’ve never lived somewhere where it gets very cold, so this is very cold to me.
I lived up in the mountains for many years, there are risks of frostbite, hypothermia, and death at some temps and no amount of wool will save you. You need heat, most of that time I had a fire place, when I was in a tenant situation the heat was maintained by the management company and we only paid electric, and it was natural gas heaters.
Two T-shirts, think thin layers
Just set your thermostat to 60 instead of 70
His entire point is no heat just sweaters.
I’m in the UK and have managed to get this far this year using just jumpers and the heat generated from folding at home on a couple PCs.
Nearly caved last week when temps dropped to around 0 but then i found my slippers
Right chilly today innit?
To be fair, you could wear winter gear 24/7. I lived like that for a bit. The real reasons we need heating are structural decay and pets. Pipes burst below 55 and pets don’t do well below 65.
There are real reasons to heat your house besides just wanting to be warm.
“Pipes burst below 55°” hahahahhah what now? “Pets don’t do well below 65°” what the crap is this nonsense. Pipes will burst after they freeze with water in them at a temp at or below 32°, the majority of breeds of dogs and cats will be just fine until it is freezing out, some dog breeds are okay below freezing.
Pipes are often in crawl-spaces or other outer extremities of structures indirectly heated by the warmth coming from the living spaces of the structure, so 55F is a good rule of thumb in some climates.
Not everyone has a husky or Maine Coone for a pet. You wanna see what happens to a tropical bird at 45F? It will literally stop eating and starve to death.
And the pipes aren’t getting 55 degrees of heat. They’re getting whatever bleeds into their space and whatever the water is doing.
This is basic adulting shit.
Even plenty of dogs do not do well in low temperatures. I have a half-chihuahua/half-dachshund. He doesn’t have a very thick coat and he hates wearing sweaters so much that he will literally lie there and refuse to move until we take it off. We’ve tried multiple times. We’ve waited like half an hour and he won’t move, he’ll just lay there and whine until we take it off.
I can’t force a dog to tolerate clothing and it’s not like I knew he would refuse to wear a sweater when I adopted him considering it was in the summer.
The pipes bursting below 55° rule of thumb is because cold water is at ground temperature (aka very cold in the winter) and the pipes tend to be at the edges of living spaces so will be much cooler than the living space. Additionally, it doesn’t need to fully freeze to burst, just enough to create a blockage temporarily.
Basically, you never know what bizarre choices were made in the utility layout of the home someone lives in so giving a rule of thumb that has a comfortable safety margin is the safest bet
Wait till you hear about infants. They are so tiny a human, they can’t deal with the low temps anywhere near as well as an adult, one of the kids that died in the TX freeze was 7. I’m sorry his family didn’t know about body heat and keeping children in the middle of adults to keep warm. I seriously feel grief over this specific loss of life. I just lived in very cold climates that you forget people who never had to learn how to live in extreme cold just don’t know about the basics. Don’t get too close to the fire, don’t sleep alone.
I walked to school uphill in the snow BOOOOTTHH WAAAYYYSSSS.
Ok cranky grandpa, go sit back by your space heater.
