Australians do. As do international companies selling to the Australian market.

The title is presumptuous and does not encourage a healthy debate.

Historically, etymologically, are bivalves vegan? No, they are obviously not. But are you vegan because you are a linguist? Or are you vegan because you want to minimise the harm that you cause while continuing to live and thrive as a moral person? Limiting veganism to simplistic, poorly considered ideas such as what kingdom of organism they fall into is lazy and ill-considered. Like every other word in the English language, veganism is not bound to its original meaning.

I researched bivalves some time ago and decided, personally, that there just wasn’t enough information (that I could interpret) available to me to determine whether they experienced pain, suffering, or any form of higher thought process. I decided that I would refrain from eating bivalves, as I just wasn’t sure.

However, there are plants out there that are more sophisticated, and seemingly more intelligent, than organisms in the Animalia kingdom (e.g. most jellyfish).

I don’t eat bivalves because I am unsure. I don’t eat jellyfish because they taste like nothing. I don’t eat honey, because bees clearly have some level of sentience. Idgaf about what some person in 1944 decided as the meaning of the word ‘vegan’ (though I respect the intent).

Many of the comments in this thread are criticising solely on the etymological basis of the word ‘vegan’ rather than the actual ethical consideration of the issue.

The question for these people, ‘are you vegan because you genuinely care about the impact you have, or do you care more about rigid definitions with little consideration of the actual meaning?’

I think I’ve reached my limit of drama here. I’m more interested in vegan recipes and vegan news than the clashing of egos between people who just so happen to be vegan. Reckon it’s high time to block this community.

This would be a good move in my books.

I haven’t played Final Fantasy Remake because they split the game into ‘parts’, made PC users wait over a year before they could play the game, then had the nerve to still try and charge full price when they eventually got around to releasing it for PC.

I was very interested in the game, but not that interested.

I agree with this order. TPS is a slog. It is almost entirely comprised of traveling across the map and then traveling back the way you came except everything just respawned. Over and over again.

The 3rd game makes item drops boring. ‘Legendary’ gear is ludicrously common which makes anything sub-Legendary pointless. There’s no excitement when a legendary item drops because they always drop. The story also does not compare with the second, which was awesome, or even the first, which was pretty good.

Borderlands 2 also has a pretty good VR port that I highly recommend.

I wonder how much of their income actually goes towards development. At a glance, it seems a great deal of unnecessary administrative bloat has been added to Mozilla.

I honestly don’t see why a browser company needs to be so large (>700 employees).

Not that I want people to lose their jobs, it just seems unnecessary.

A lot of outdated information. Looks like they’ve been open and closed source at different times. Most recent info I could find (from last month) states: “While Floorp wasn’t originally closed source, we plan to revert to an open-source license under the GNU definition.”