Thanks. That goes along with what I'm thinking as well. I had asked on Lemmy Support and many comments seemed to point out the same things.

Notice there is a “crosspost to” and a “crosspost from”. When users of Alexandrite or Lemmy clients initiate a crosspost, a link to the parent post is auto-generated and dumped in the body of the text tagged as “crosspost from”. We can edit that, and sometimes I do. AFAIK, there is no way to form that link to refer to the copy on the reader’s instance. The best we can do on that is to add the !<community>@<node> reference to the community, along with a title to search for.

The “crosspost to” line is not supplied or controlled by the author. It must be added by the reader’s server. In your case, lemmy.zip editorializes by adding that line when possible. The lemmy.ca and sh.itjust.works examples show that the url points to locally hosted posts. Only lemmy.ca can know about the lemmy.ca link. Lemmy servers are not sophisticated enough to find matching posts based on the body, and the title would not be reliable. So I believe the “crosspost to” line is only generated when a post makes use of the URL field. Since I referenced no URL in my post, there was nothing to compare for generating a “crosspost to” line.

Huh, weird. I just happened to run into another post with weird cross-post links. This one happens to have both styles of cross-post links: https://sh.itjust.works/post/64304718

I have no idea what's going on here. I'll ask this question in the appropriate community for Lemmy questions to see if anyone knows.

I see. Perhaps it's what you mentioned about Lemmy handling cross-posts of different types of posts a little differently. I seem to recall someone else mentioning that before.

If you wanted to see the post I'm referring to, here's a link to the native URL of my cross-post: https://lemmy.ca/post/68531648

If that still doesn't work, you can also search for that lemmy.ca URL above in your own instance (slrpnk.net) and the search should show you the local copy of that post on your instance.

Thanks!

I can’t reach your example link because lemmy.zip is a tor-hostile node in Cloudflare’s walled-garden. So I am blocked. But what you’re saying suggests you may be experiencing a feature of the server. Sometimes I post a thread that uses the URL field, and the URL I am sharing was already shared by someone else earlier (often unwitting to me). In that case, some clients (or servers) automatically see that multiple threads reference the same URL. In that case, the list of all threads referencing the same URL is presented but it has nothing to do with anything the author posted in the msg body. I wonder if that’s what you are seeing.

I eat like you because I just can't stand the though of food going to waste. Never thought about it in terms of nutrition but im not exactly great about eathing healthy.

In my experience, when I cross-post using the built-in Lemmy cross-post function (the two little squares between the star and dots menu below the post header), it shows up like what is in this example post. In other words, it shows a relative link to the cross-post on both the original article and the cross-post. The cross-post link on this article where we are currently discussing this shows me "cross-posted from: [a hard-coded link to original post on solarpnk.net]", and the original post doesn't mention that it's been cross-posted elsewhere.

I'm not complaining, by the way, I'm just curious what causes this because I have seen both styles for a while now. I had previously assumed that people were manually cross-posting and adding a link to the original, but then I just realized that that's probably not the case because those types of cross-post look very consistent.

I have multiple Lemmy accounts on different instances, some of which default to the stock Lemmy client. The accounts that use the stock Lemmy client create the same kind of links to parents of crossposts as Alexandrite. From there, I’m not even aware of a way to link to a post or comment in a generic or indirect way that can be done without knowing the host of the reader who will visit it. I’ve only noticed that links to communties can have a host-neutral syntax. Perhaps the nodes I use that run stock clients are out of date. The latest version I’ve checked this on is 0.19.20.

Worth noting that the smarter behaviour you have experienced may not be related to the OP’s client, but rather your own server or client, and perhaps the software on your side of this does not recognise !zerowaste@slrpnk.net as a subscribed community by which there exists a local copy of posts to replace the link with.

Interesting, thanks. I wonder if it's that client that does it then. Maybe they wrote the functionality before Lemmy had it natively.

I use the default client for slrpnk.net, which is Alexandrite (which is not the stock Lemmy client).

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/40923742

I'm curious about what creates this style of cross-post, which is different from the normal Lemmy style of cross-post. This one posts a link to a hardcoded URL, not the relative URL on my own instance which causes me a lot of extra work if I wanted to interact with the cross-post.

Sorry to not comment on the contents of the post itself. I've been curious about this and I finally decided to ask now that I saw the poster of the original post cross-post this unusual way. Thanks.

You should be keeping active yeast in the fridge

Well, I just opened it today. I bought it on the shelf. The brewery smell was well emitted despite still being sealed from the shop. It says “keep cool” on the pkging without giving a temp. Guess I’ll keep it in the fridge.

You should be keeping active yeast in the fridge, unless it's stored in foil lined packets. Your yeast may be dead. You can test this by putting some of it in 110°F water (just over body temp, the water should feel slightly warm to the touch, if you don't have a thermometer) along with 2 teaspoons of sugar. If it foams after ten minutes, it's alive!! Otherwise, RIP yeast.

I've never seen recipes call for active yeast as a flavor component, nor French toast call for nooch, but the latter isn't unimaginable. The former is very bizarre to me. Unless it's used in the rising of the actual bread used for French toast. Tangentially, that should be challah, in my opinion. Stale challah makes for the best French toast.

My pantry smells like a brewery now that I bought the stuff. I suppose this limits what I can do with it. The french toast w/active yeast wasn't bad but it's not as good as what I recall tasting with nooch.

Active yeast does not taste like nutritional yeast so you're recipe will taste different when it's complete. Active yeast has a sort of malty flavor to it while nutritional yeast has a flavor reminiscent of cheese, which is probably why it's being called for in your recipe. I often see it used in vegan dairy replacements (this is where I mostly use it, with soaked blended cashews and some apple cider vinegar for a pseudo sour cream I call nooch'n'nut), but it can also just add some extra flavor complexity to any number of dishes.

I'm not sure if there's any harm in eating active yeast, but I know it certainly won't taste very good...

I usually cook with nutritional yeast. Exceptionally, I’ve garnished popcorn with it, but I was not thrilled about the taste. Anyway, I appreciate the feedback. Maybe it makes sense to buy both nooch and active yeast, and use the nooch just for uncooked food.

If you are heating up the batter with the yeast it turns inactive. In both cases you are consuming an inactive form of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It would only make a difference if you consumed the yeast while still active, so without cooking it before - but I think that's not your plan?

I'm confused by people who downvote and then write a thoughtful comment; how do you expect the conversation to go if you engage in hostility from the start?

Heart disease isn’t a death sentence?

It is. The sentence is saying that lower nutrient intakes moderately change an individuals risk factor for disease. The "not a death sentence" clause is referring to the inadequacy, not the outcomes. Not everyone who consumes inadequate nutrients will develop a disease from that condition, it's a change in risk factors.

Would not having a diet more rich in bioavailable iron avoid the deficiency even in these scenarios?

Not in this instance. As stated later in the text, the digestive system has an upper limit on how much iron it can absorb. Pushing more iron into that system doesn't necessarily result in improved iron intake.

The top soil crisis never even factors into their 2500 word blog. Surely soil, and fertilizer are factors that are likely to change in the near future and to say they won’t have a impact on nutrient density is bold.

Again, as stated, fertilizer applications have plateaued since the 90s. What I'm saying is that, due to the plateauing of input use growth in developed agricultural regions, we shouldn't see an increase in dilution from those sources since conditions crops are being grown under have been consistent for around 3 decades. There's no reason to expect a sudden surge in fertilizer use in developed nations, thus no more dilution from added fertilizer use should be expected.

minerals are the only nutrient class with a plausible soil-based mechanism for their decline. Agriculturally driven declines in organic matter and the soil biological activity, and agricultural practices like fertilizer use and monocropping, could be tied to human health and the degradation of our food’s nutritional contents.

Could is doing a lot of work in that sentence

these inadequacies are not a death sentence or an acute crisis, but moderately increase an individuals chances of contracting various chronic illnesses, like osteoporosis or heart disease

Heart disease isn't a death sentence?

numerous micronutrient deficiencies are simply not associated with diet. Iron deficiency, for instance, is often caused by heavy menstruation or pregnancy (Sholzberg et al., 2025)

Would not having a diet more rich in bioavailable iron avoid the deficiency even in these scenarios?

Improving the iron densities of kale will not fix these issues.

Kale has poor bioavailability

possibility of future declines in nutrient density seem unlikely. Fertilizer applications have plateaued in both grain and produce crops, and the adoption of yield-maximizing varieties hit its ceiling decades ago

The top soil crisis never even factors into their 2500 word blog. Surely soil, and fertilizer are factors that are likely to change in the near future and to say they won't have a impact on nutrient density is bold.

essential to emphasize that, if you eat the recommended volumes of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, barring some extenuating circumstances, you will receive adequate levels of nutrients.

What if we could do the same by eating less, surely that is what the goal of agriculture should be

Follow the MyPlate guidelines and you should be good.

That's really dated, even the people who came up with myplate are not promoting myplate anymore.

the most effective public health responses to micronutrient deficiencies do not lie in the soil or the field, but on our dinner plates. That fact that nobody is eating whole grains or vegetable is by far a greater driver of undernutrition than marginal changes in crop nutrient densities.

Strong opinion, could it be the lack of animal sourced foods in the standard diet? The author doesn't consider it.

the core issue is that people are not eating nutrient-dense foods at the necessary rates

I find myself forced to agree, though I'd add bioavailability into that statement

U regularly do a vegan diet for a bit, get variety. The cheese was the worst. Like congealed oil of a grill pan.

I can finally have pizza again