Shouldn’t be so frustrating in the first place.
Shouldn’t be so frustrating in the first place.
While that would indeed be awesome, that’s not the route they proposed. It’s more about slowing down the perception of time, rather than being able to actually do something peoductive during that.
Philosopher Rebecca Roache, who leads a team of scholars, explains two methods to this madness. The first involves psychotic drugs that distort a person’s sense of time.
With a simple pill or injection, prisoners may believe they’ve been incarcerated for much longer than any natural human life could allow.
The second approach Roach explains is a bit more complex. Option number two involves uploading human minds to computers (da f*ck?), and speeding up the rate at which the brain functions. On her blog, Roach writes: "[…] This would, obviously, be much cheaper for the taxpayer than extending criminals’ lifespans to enable them to serve 1,000 years in real time.”
https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/new-technology-could-make-inmates-feel-like-theyre-serving-a-1000-year-sentence-in-8-hours-scrol/
Despite thinking, “wow that’s a disgusting way to see and treat humans”, and some obvious moral concerns (like, social isolation for what feels like 1000 years, which will fuck up most people badly), which make this feel like a black mirror episode, the mind-upload issue is technically extremely tricky. Even if we had the technology to “upload” the human mind, it will be a copy, a clone, not you individually. And if we don’t have an option to download the copy back into your brain, it will just be a waste of energy.
More importantly, an intriguing question is raised: After such a download, will this be you? Or just a copy of a copy and thereby another being which just replaces another one.
Another thing I find important to ask here: what’s the point of penalties? These suggestions seem to me like psychological torture rather than measures to “correct” social behaviour. In no way resocialisation seems to matter here. So we just fuck people up by that and unleash them onto society afterwards. Doesn’t sound good to me.
Sorry for not keeping my reply focused on your idea. I had some time to spare and this kept me busy.
And that’s the problem, because everyone is coerced to do that if they want to survive. And those, who own the means of production, the capital, the companies, are those who have the power to exploit those who don’t. And they do.
We allow it to work though. And we regularly see what a terrible idea that usually is.
Come, visit Germany. Preferrably by train, and observe how good of an idea privatizing such things is.
Similar thing happened to German telecommunication infrastructure (for an industry nation our internet is notoriously bad in compatison to EU neighbours), happened to our public transport infrastructure, especially to our trains, and is currently happening to our hospitals.
Privatizing critical infrastructure has never been a good idea.
A lot of assumptions you make there. But go on and live in a world where you think Germans are still Nazis if it makes you sleep better. I’m not in the mood of trying to reason with you about that and get into the necessary details. If you’re smart enough, you can take a deep dive into current and recent German society and politics yourself.
Okay. Thanks for the useless explanation.
So? Did I miss something?
No.
No.
Those plebs are called terrorists now.
And another day of “let’s shove all people of group X into one drawer and judge them”.
We have all this information available through the internet. Can research even the most difficult topics by some mere hits on a keyboard and a click. And yet, there are still so many idiots. This is really mind-boggling.
Was it satisfying? How did it feel? Don’t be shy about details.
I’m… err… asking for a friend.
I like food.
One could even say it is fulfilling to me.
From what I briefly read, Maslow’s hierarchy is an oversimplification and academically disputed or even disproved.
Yupp. It’s by far more healthy, has an incredibly positive ecological impact (especially if sourced locally and organically) and for those who are concerned about ethical issues regarding the life and treatment of animals, this is also a win.
Why though? It’s not like you are building your own OS every time on assembler level, or do you?
Making software more convenient is one of the reasons for having software at all.
That doesn’t mean turning it into an “opaque box” where company interests will be pushed. Having a more user experience oriented design in Linux distros can save a lot of time and frustration as well as make it more attractive to average users. Even power users, who work with Linux professionally will benefit.
And it just might start with something as simple as proper documentation of a package.