Rediphile @ Rediphile @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

386

Joined

2 yr. ago

I just don't understand why they lie about it at all? To avoid losing long term customers?

Raising the price of goods to increase profits isn't illegal. It's just risky for the business if they lose customers to other places with lower prices.

So then the bombing of Dresden was genocide?

A good while back we had no working model for a heliocentric solar system nor any solid indication of it...until we did. But I'm pretty sure the earth was going around the sun even before we realized it, and even before we existed at all.

A Brief History of Time was great! I'd also definitely recommend it to all.

The same way we assure people consenting to anything at all are not being forced to. We try our best basically. And sometimes we'll probably get it wrong and need to improve. I'm completely ok with that when the alternative is guaranteed preventable suffering. Just like I'm ok with people using power of attorney to protect the finances of people with dementia, even if sometimes it gets misapplied.

I'm much more worried about a future where we would not be willing to repeat doing whatever is required to stop a fundamentally evil empire that is actively committing actual genocide.

What would have been a better course of action for the Allies that wouldn't result in greater death and suffering? I can't think of anything myself... but perhaps you have some ideas beyond surrendering?

By this definition nearly everything the Allies did in WWII was genocide. To name just a few:

-firebombing of German cities (such as Dresden)

-unrestricted submarine warfare

-bombing of Tokyo

-Hiroshima/Nagasaki

Doesn't seem vastly different from the firebombing of German cities by the Allies.

War is horrible. But it isn't always genocide.

Don't even need to go to the bar. Just get drunk while driving around the neighborhood until you pass out.

We don't need to know for it to be deterministic.

I'm confident you strongly support allowing it as I have never met someone who witnessed a loved one suffer like that and does not support lessening their suffering.

So since you support allowing people to end their own lives in that context, you understand that people can indeed consent to death. So perhaps consenting to death should be permitted in other contexts too. That's the only point I was making.

It's not arbitrary. Really try to think about the problem at hand. The 'why' is quite apparent. Ask yourself why did they go with 99+1+98+2... in the first place? And why is that the same as 101+101...? What was the benefit of simplifying it to that? How did it save the student time?

You can deduce this yourself and literally no memorization is involved to figure this out. No formulas needed either.

you can sign a contract to allow me to bludgeon you to death, but it's still murder regardless of your consent

I agree this is the current law. But I certainly don't agree with this law. Do you?

I feel people should absolutely be allowed to consent to death, or potential death. And I mean, we already can in various other contexts like skiing in avalanche terrain, ordering too many big macs, or medically assisted suicide to prevent suffering from incurable conditions (at least in a few civilized places).

Sure I guess. I have also pitched a tent in a forest before so didn't have to deal with for-profit housing in some instances too.

The issue is the vast majority of instances are for profit. And it would be impossible for the vast majority in modern urban society to grow/hunt their own food or pitch a tent in the woods.

Sounds to me like we lack the understanding as to why there are different outcomes in what we perceive as identical circumstances.

A dice roll appears random too, but it isn't if one understands all of the inputs and variables precisely.

Nope, not really. But even if we did have 2 completely different solved sets of physical rules for minuscule quantum stuff versus everything else, all events would still be casual. It wouldn't change anything.

All things, including human life experiences, are absolutely and completely predetermined as part of a chain of causal events.

Sort of like food should be for eating, not profit making.

But all the food I have ever bought has been within a for profit system.

I used to live a 10 hour drive from the closest McDonald's. I think there was a lot of demand for the city that was in between.

Yes, sort of like gummy bears versus fentanyl.

The way it stands right now, where base wages are not sufficient, is specifically because of tipping. Until people stop tipping, employers will continue to use it to subsidize wages that they should be paying. Whereas if people stopped tipping, the employers could not do that.