Flumpkin @ Flumpkin @slrpnk.net

Posts

0

Comments

305

Joined

1 yr. ago

It's the first time I'm ashamed of my country and I hate my government and the press in my country for supporting this genocide. And the Israelis speak openly about their genocidal intentions.

The ICJ ruled that there is plausible risk of genocide and ordered to stop killing palestinians and give humanitarian aid. Instead Israel puts out accusations without evidence and the western "civilized" countries cut off humanitarian aid. It's aiding in genocide. They are making my country complicit in genocide.

The atrocities started long before Okt.7 and I just don't care about it, they have killed 30 times as many civilians at least now. And they mutilated and traumatized many times more than that. There is no justification. Especially not if you're the vastly more powerful side.

The cynical view would be that a big part of US democracy is the media spectacle and election extravaganza to make people think they have a meaningful impact.

Back in My Day people weren't complaining when the emergency exit door ripped off in the middle of the flight!

The Rules for Rulers

Cunk on Earth Trailer - BBC

think Taylor is incredibly hypocritical for not practicing exactly what she preaches

And I think this is genocidal propaganda and misogyny drafted by FOX news. Yeah that's grossly exaggerated and over the top, but hear me out:

First of all she's not very political. At least not as far as I can tell, her opinions are rather mild basic human decency level stuff, but I don't know much about her. This to your charge that she "preaches".

Second, society being what it is you CAN'T practice what you believe, because our economy is build a certain way. She can't do her job without a private jet, so even though there is some valid criticism there you'd also have to put the emissions her business use creates on the concert goers or consumers. It goes on their CO2 budget no hers. She even bought CO2 offsets which are BS of course.

Third, she's being singled out, possibly because she's supposed to be this white madonna. It's apparently true that she uses her jet for private and "frivolous" purposes. But with all the jet setting going on, it's at least suspicious that people want her to be the symbol of all evil. Some very clever sociopaths crafted this strategy because she's the perfect symbol for it.

Lastly, even if all the criticism of her was justified it's a distraction from the monumental and systemic issues preventing any meaningful action on climate change: Land reform, veganism, election reform, wealth redistribution, redesigning how we live and work, patents preventing adoption of improvements, planned vs free economy. Those are topics that nobody wants you to talk about. So instead it's advantageous to blame her.

Afaik this all started with FOX news bashing her jet and the joke was "why is CO2 bad FOX news?". But it WORKED!!! They have successfully disseminated a conspiracy theory that 20% of voters believe now and memes like this are trending.

Sorry about the rant, I really don't mean to accuse anyone seriously of this, but this is the PR mechanisms I see working behind this stuff.

He's an autodidact. Not sure why it matters, but I just thought "of course he is".

Interesting, I haven't heard his name. I do like Nick Bostrom though. I started reading about this Effective Altruism, on paper it sounds all very nice, but this OOP materialist nonsense bodes very bad for any ethical AI lol. It also seems to be focused on donating and solving everything with billionaire money instead of on governance. Do you have a link to some good critique of this EA stuff?

EDIT: Never mind, found lots of it lol !sneerclub@awful.systems. These extremes growing out of longtermism and TESCREAL should be a laughing matter but apparently they are well funded gaining access. A good article summing this up.

I'm very much aligned with these sci-fi ideas except the first thing we should teach an AGI is to love (see my book recommendation). Which seems something OOP has little capability for. Extinction might not be the worst case scenario with these guys at the helm lol.

We're not that incredibly far away from rejuvenation: Anti-aging pill for senior dogs is now in clinical trials.

There is an interesting bit in this channel 5 video. People all over the world have this false image of the US as a paradise and prosperity and freedom, but the lived experience of immigrants is quite harsh in recent years.

The Culture series novel, my favorite optimistic and hard sci fi that includes artificial intelligence (minds that have giant ships or habitats for bodies and humanoid avatars to interact with people).

They basically never live on planets because they are inefficient and "inelegant". They live on gigantic ring orbitals that have a fraction of the mass of a planet but multiple times the surface area. No big take-off energy needed either. They also live on gigantic ships that endlessly cruise the milky way. Highly recommend!

Another thought about "colonizing planets" would be that it's basically a form of genocide. Imagine someone had colonized earth half a billion years ago or just a few million years ago. Humanity would never have existed. Just stepping foot on a planet like they do on star trek is basically ecocide - with the introduction of completely foreign and possibly incredibly disruptive micro organisms. Besides the ethical aspect there would also be the loss of information - if you imagine a pristine planet to be a bio computer creating countless unique and new genetic variations and new forms of chemistry. Quite possible not something that can be covered with a computer. Or observing primitive planets as a source of entertainment. There are lots of reasons why outside of a few "home planets" advanced civilizations would never terraform existing biological systems, and would find artificial habitats far more efficient or practical.

Recliner TV armchair. Gaming chairs are for noobs!

My guess is that some companies will greatly benefit from this regulation because they can somewhat monopolize the market. I also wouldn't be surprised if those were the ones who lobbied for this.

If you're curious about an alternative view, I suggest The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm. Relationships are about growing your own and the others natural abilities, something you do and not about trading something you have. The OP post is a materialistic view and a belief in inequality. YMMV.