• 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2023

help-circle



  • PaintedSnail@lemmy.worldtoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldNevar Forget
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    16 days ago

    You know, at first I was thinking that this is a really bad take. But then I realized something: this is a classic trolley problem.

    Sparing the details because you probably already know them, it comes down to a choice: you can do nothing and five people will die, or you can actively perform an action and only one person will die. The only choice you have is to do nothing or do something.

    So the problem becomes: which is the morally correct choice? On one hand, does doing nothing absolve you of the five deaths you could have avoided? On the other, does actively participating make you responsible for the one death even if it was to save five?

    Back in the real world, you have the same choice. Since voting for a third party that has no chance of winning is functionally equivalent to not voting, it plays out the same way. You can do nothing and the genocide gets worse, or you can actively participate and try to reduce the damage. Which is the moral choice? Which will help you sleep at night?

    That is a question philosophers have struggled with for centuries, and there’s no good answer. From my personal perspective, doing nothing IS a choice, so no matter what I do I’m still an active participant. Therefore I will choose to minimize the damage.

    Yes, it’s bullshit that the current administration hasn’t takes a tougher stance on the conflict. But it will be worse under Trump, as demonstrated by both his words and his actions when he was last in office. So the question is: which will help you sleep at night: doing nothing and telling yourself that you are not responsible when Trump wins, or doing something even though you know it won’t be enough?

    As powerless members of the masses, it’s the best we can do.



  • Yeah, the side quests are rather unimaginative in their tasks. For the most part they’re not worth doing unless you want a bit more of a dive into the world lore. (A few give unique rewards, though.) Even some story quests are “player does menial chores for good karma with the locals because the devs need to pad things out a bit.”

    Shadowbringers is worth it, though. It’s my personal favorite story arc. Endwalker, the one after, is my second favorite.








  • I’m not saying planned obsolescence isn’t a thing (because it is), but that’s not the only reason. Making phones smaller, lighter, faster, and more feature-dense all mean that the phone has to be built with tighter manufacturing and operating tolerances. Faster chips are more prone to heat and vibration damage. Higher power requirements means the battery has a larger charge/discharge cycle. And unfortunately, tighter operating tolerances mean that they can fall out of those tolerances much more easily.

    They get dropped, shaken, exposed to large environmental temperature swings, charged in wonky ways, exposed to hand oils and other kinds of dirt, and a slew of other evils. Older phones that didn’t have such tight tolerances could handle all that better. Old Nokia phones weren’t built to be indestructible, they are just such simple phones that there isn’t much to break; but there’s a reason people don’t use them much anymore. You can still get simple feature phones, but the fact remains that they don’t sell well, so not many are made, and the ones that are made don’t have a lot of time and money invested in them.

    Now Voyager is an extremely simple computer, made with technology that has huge tolerances, in an environment that is mostly consistent and known ahead of time so the design can deliberately account for it, had lots of testing, didn’t have to take mass production into its design consideration, didn’t have to make cost trade-offs, and has a dedicated engineering team to keep it going. It is still impressive that it has lasted this long, but that is more a testament to the incredible work that was and is being put into it than to the technology behind it.






  • Focusing on the general idea of the last statement of your first paragraph, I completely disagree. I would much rather have a smart evil person in charge over an evil idiot.

    A smart evil person will, at the very least, work for their own self-preservation. They can be negotiated with, even reasoned with, because they know that some give and take is required to meet their own goals.

    An evil idiot will just break everything and take everyone with them if they don’t get what they want simply because they don’t understand what it is they are breaking.


  • PaintedSnail@lemmy.worldtotumblr@lemmy.worldTyranny
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    That is a very drastic slippery slope fallacy. You’re claiming that if convicted criminals have rights, then crime will take over and run the country. You are incorrectly conflating the preservation of rights with the removal of deterrents.

    By the way, which South American countries are communist? If you are thinking of Cuba (which is not South American), then they actually use the criminal justice system to suppress rights, which is what this thread is claiming will happen if the rights of the convicted are removed.