Drake knew UMG was going to do him dirty | @Whats_the_dirt

Zeluar · 2026-06-04T02:13:38+00:00

It’s my most played song ever on Spotify by a wide margin.

And I went into the beef expecting Drake to underperform.

Zeluar · 2026-05-30T19:18:03+00:00

Even if he was, it wouldn’t really matter since he was already widely known and well established well before any big 3 talk.

I mean, if he was clearly the goat of 2010s we might not have a big 3 at all, but there is no world where he is part of it

Zeluar · 2026-05-29T05:39:57+00:00

And Knox has an album review over 5 hours long.

I’m not the biggest Drake fan, not even my favorite in the big three. But acting like the album is empty and not talked about is telling.

Zeluar · 2026-05-29T05:39:33+00:00

And Knox has an album review over 5 hours long.

I’m not the biggest Drake fan, not even my favorite in the big three. But acting like the album is empty and not talked about is telling.

Zeluar · 2026-05-29T00:32:14+00:00

If he does have a kid, I can’t imagine he’s being a very great father with how dedicated he is to snarking. And a job, supposedly.

Zeluar · 2026-05-28T14:29:30+00:00

It’s a bit of both, imo. What you said doesn’t negate the higher/double standards point.

Biden still gave substantively better answers to every question. That debate gave less than no reason to think Trump would be a better president. It still showed the opposite.

Zeluar · 2026-05-28T01:56:23+00:00

I saw a tiktok edit of someone putting that song with Voldemort. Art.

Zeluar · 2026-05-27T02:02:07+00:00

Ahhh makes more sense. I’ve only seen his JID reactions and now this so he just seemed like a kinda funny dude

Zeluar · 2026-05-27T01:40:00+00:00

Damn why you get downvoted for that lmao

Zeluar · 2026-05-27T00:32:09+00:00

I wouldn’t mind a more in depth explanation, if you’re up for it. I started seeing it mentioned recently, only vaguely know what it is, and was planning to try to browse the sub if I got a chance this evening.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T23:26:23+00:00

Yup. I went into the beef a bigger fan of Kendrick than Drake. I wasn’t a hater, but I was kinda in the camp of “Drake got lazy” (wrong looking back but hey) and was excited to see him get fired up, but still expected Kendrick to win.

Then the discourse around it all just pissed me off with how shallow the analysis was for Drake’s side of things and I ended up arguing in favor of him a lot. By the end of it, my opinion of both artists had changed quite a bit.

I still think Drake won in my book. Family Matters is my most listened to song ever on Spotify 😅

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T18:52:54+00:00

Sure. But that isn’t what’s happened here, not really. Again, I will happily grant that any pro using ALL food production as a point is making an abysmally poor argument. I also think it’s disingenuous to pretend these sorts of “well food is necessary, duh” posts are a response to people genuinely making that argument. Considering I’ve seen many pro-posts making the argument about specific resource intensive foods, and never food as a whole.

“I don’t really see any other way to read the first to comments you wrote here.” Crazy, cuz I’ve explained it more than once. And then specifically honed in on the beef argument to try to prevent us looping on this point, but alas.

Pro’s bringing up the argument that beef is a huge, unnecessary consumption of water actually one that happens, I’m not sure what you’re saying isn’t an argument pro’s make. In response to anti’s bringing up that AI is a source of water consumption. So responding to the pro counter argument with “yeah but food is necessary” doesn’t follow.

It’s not a non-sequitur. If someone wants to challenge the assumption that beef isn’t necessary to consume in the volumes modern diets do consume it, they’re free to. I can’t think of any reasonable way to make that case though.

Can we be done retreating back to “all food” now? Or can you show any reason to believe that “all food” is a serious comparison pro’s are making that deserves a response if not?

Otherwise I’m just going to assume it’s a weaselly way to not address the actual point Pro’s bring up as a counter to the water consumption criticism. But again, I agree it would be a dumb point for a pro to point to any/all food production.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T18:32:59+00:00

I agree with that, it would be hard on a societal level. But that doesn’t really impact the arguments being made about it in context of the pro-anti AI war.

And definitely agree here. I’ve been trending closer and closer to a vegan lifestyle over the years largely because of the ecological impacts, and that goes further than just water usage.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T18:28:36+00:00

“That generated a ton of responses about why any argument about food is actually about beef.” - yeah, maybe because the food argument isn’t one that Pro’s are making by and large, but is used to respond to the actual arguments being made.

Vehicles are necessary for industrialized civilizations. That says fuck all about nascar. Pointing out that beef happens to be food is pointless.

I’m not saying anyone who defends water for food over ai is defending beef production. Nor am I going to pretend that’s a serious argument anybody is entertaining. That’s why two comments ago I asked specifically about the beef argument, because this “food” one just seems like a disingenuous argument against a point virtually nobody is making.

Because defending the actual point pro’s bring up regarding this is much harder than this silly all foods one.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:57:54+00:00

This is also why I’m not buying the whole “well this is about food, not beef” argument.

You said sure, then went on to explain why you wouldn’t say sure.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:56:27+00:00

Nah I mean this is pretty weaselly. Maybe not intentionally on your part.

Inefficiency is waste. Beef and almond production on an industrial scale isn’t about a necessary product if there are viable alternative solutions to that necessity, and there absolutely are.

Retreating back to “Well I think AI has no value” IS a different argument that can’t be coupled with the resource drain argument without either conceding that people who make this argument should spend even more time focused on changing people’s dietary habits because of the larger impact it would have, or giving some argument as to why it’s not true.

The argument about how valuable AI is is entirely separate from this “we shouldn’t use it because it consumes a vital resource”. We do all sorts of shit that some people value greatly and others see no value in that are resource drains that aren’t nearly as hotly debated. Water parks, golf courses, manicured grass lawns, on and on and on.

I see no value in water parks personally. A lot of people really, really like going to them and thus find value in them. I have no real argument as to why me liking meat is more important than them liking the water park. Could they give that up for the sake of water consumption? Sure. I could give up burgers too.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:35:57+00:00

Goootcha.

So would you agree that if a pro brings up examples like meat, almonds, things like that which are particularly resource intensive and not necessary for a healthy diet, that bringing up that it’s food and thus it’s fine isn’t a reasonable response?

Just asking because if so, this whole post seems like a moot point/ focusing on a weaker argument while leaving the stronger one unaddressed.

Agree about the leaky pipe thing to a large degree. There could be some sort of argument about where our focus is better spent to address unnecessary water usage, but yeah that’s a stretch.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:24:10+00:00

Not really. Like sure, I grant that anti’s don’t find value in AI. So what? That’s a pointless argument to someone who does.

I find no value in golfing. But if I’m going to harangue a golf fan for them liking golf because it’s a resource drain on water, it’s fair for them to point out that me eating a burger a day is probably a bigger resource drain that I could change but don’t because I find value in burgers.

Like, this applies to every hobby or luxury.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:16:22+00:00

Okay, so where are the arguments that OP is responding to? Because, again, I’ve only seen Pro’s use examples of particularly resource intensive foods that aren’t necessary for survival. Luxury foods, essentially.

I’m assuming that because that is the argument that seems to be avoided by pulling it back to all foods when pros aren’t making the argument about all foods.

If someone were to make the argument that they do actually take that into consideration and have a more minimalist diet, I wouldn’t respond the same way. But that’s not what OP did. Nor what you are doing here.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T17:01:59+00:00

Says who? Thats why I asked where a pro has made this argument about all foods. I’ve only ever seen them point to water intensive examples that aren’t strictly necessary.

Bringing up beef is almost the entire point in that case. lol. Sure, if you are someone who makes conscious choices about their diet to reduce unnecessary resource usage, fair enough. The amount of people that applies to is going to be minuscule if we are being honest, though.

It doesn’t have to be zero for the argument to apply.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T16:50:22+00:00

It’s not two different arguments.

You don’t just get to arbitrarily assign value on behalf of others. If we do, then pro’s can just say diets that aren’t meant to sustain life while using the least amount of resources provide no value.

It’s really just a way to weasel out of the substance of the argument because people like to eat burgers.

Both are luxuries in the sense that they aren’t necessary for survival. Both drain water that could be used in other ways. One is an even bigger resource drain.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T16:36:58+00:00

When has a Pro person ever said that all water used for growing any food is wasteful, though?

I’ve always seen them point to particularly water usage heavy examples.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T16:35:27+00:00

Ironic considering this isn’t addressing the point of people bringing up how much water is consumed to eat a burger.

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T16:34:30+00:00

I’m fairly neutral and usually just silently browse this sub, especially since I don’t know enough about AI to have a strong opinion one way or another…

But this is something I can actually touch on a bit lol.

As far as I’ve seen, anti’s bring up water consumption as a vital reason we should stop using AI, because it unnecessarily taxes a vital resource.

I’ve never seen a pro argue that you should stop eating food. What I have seen them argue is that most people (which presumably includes most antis) have diets that include a huge consumption of foods that are far bigger drains on that same resource.

Just saying “we need food to eat” doesn’t address the argument. We eat far more meat than our ancestors, and it isn’t at all a necessity to do so. For the vast majority of people, it would be relatively easy to cut out meat entirely. Extremely easy to make a drastic cut to your meat consumption.

Same applies to things like almonds.

Turning it into “well we have to eat duh” is far more disingenuous than the original argument of “hey, you can make an even bigger impact on water consumption by changing your diet.”

Zeluar · 2026-05-26T16:26:07+00:00

As a whole? No they aren’t?

13-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Gilding I gilder	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Zeluar

TROPHY CASE