Skip Navigation

Posts
7
Comments
148
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • Just verified that it does work for me with Tampermonkey/Firefox on lemmy.one

    I'll have to look into why Violentmonkey is different, this is the first I'm hearing of that extension

  • I'm a big fan of plant based burgers, but the reality is that telling people "just eat plants" is not going to result in any change. They've long ago decided that the inconvenience of switching protein sources is greater than the climate impact ignoring that choice makes, so the only way we're ever going to see change is to either ban cows or provide an alternative that the masses can/will adopt.

  • I'll give violentmonkey a try, also using Firefox on Linux, though that shouldn't be the thing that makes a difference.

  • I think it’s a bit silly to have megathreads just because some users can’t scroll past posts that doesnt interest them.

    The problem is there are so goddamn many, to the extent that I'm working on a userscript that lets me entire hide posts that contain keywords. Checking my frontpage using Subscribed/Active, 5 of the first 20 posts are about this "news". And that's a full day after it happened, yesterday was far worse

    Edit: The userscript is ready!

  • Is the subjective experience the thing that defines what is the most palatable form of this?

    If that's the case then as someone else suggested they could simply remove the memory of the experience up until right before you walk out the other end. For all you knew it was incredibly excruciating but you're none the wiser. Would the lack of that memory negate the experience?

  • Assuming you're referring to lab-grown meat, I think that's also a great alternative. We should be exploring any and all options that can get us to stop relying on cows for protein.

  • Exactly, if you are not annihilated then that means two identical versions of an entity that thinks it's you exist simultaneously, and now one of them has to be killed to maintain the illusion of this being transport rather than cloning.

  • Now I want to see a dystopian fiction where the original instances of a person are taken away and used as slave labor while the clones come out the other side thinking they're the only copy.

  • Let's assume the machine works one of two ways. It either destroys the original as it's read into the machine and reconstructing on the other end, or it's not destroying the original and simply reading and copying simultaneously.

    In the first case there are zero complete copies of you in existence as you're undergoing a phase of removing information from place and reconstructing it in another, I'd call that death and cloning.

    In the second case there are two identical copies of you in existence until they destroy the original, I'd call that a clone.

  • Quantum entanglement would mean that while it reads your initial state and encodes the new state there are two copies of you in existence, that is cloning, then the initial state dies. Unless the process of reading that state is destructive, then you just die and are cloned.

    The method between the two you suggested also means you die momentarily and then are recreated. For the period of time it takes to encode your atoms into a method of transport and then reassemble them at your destination, you no longer exist in complete form.

  • This question all comes down to your opinion of what makes a person a person, whether that means we have something greater than the collection of our atoms, or whether we are simply the emergent outcome of the complex arrangement of atoms. If you subscribe to the former then you also need to believe that this machine is somehow capable of either transporting/transplanting that "soul" for lack of a better expression. Where if you subscribe to the latter than this is most certainly a suicide cloning machine.

    I personally subscribe to the idea that consciousness is an emergent property of complexity. Given a sufficiently large enough series of inputs you can observe new and unexpected outputs that appear to be on higher orders of complexity than their inputs. This response is an example of that, from electrons flowing through transistors we end up with operating systems, hardware IO, web browsers, networking protocols, ASCII standards, font rendering, etc. All of that complexity emerges from a massive amount of on/off switches arranged in patterns over time.

    Following this chain of reasoning I believe that making an exact duplicate of me down to the state of each atom is no different than that entity being me, however as a conscious being with human ethics and morals I put value in the singularity of my existence, and so a plurality of Zetaphor is something I find undesirable as it fundamentally challenges my perception of what it means to be myself.

    So assuming the entity leaving the transporter is me, there's two ways to approach the way a machine like this could operate:

    • It reads my state in its entirety and then destroys (or encodes for transport) that state
    • Or it's creating the new instance of me bit by bit as it reads my current state

    That means one of two things, either there is a brief moment of time where two identical copies of me are in the universe, or there is a period of time where zero complete copies of me exist in the universe. So either I stopped existing momentarily and then was recreated from scratch (death and clone birth), or I existed in two places at once and then died in one (cloning and suicide).

  • If all I experience is being one place one moment and another place the next, then it’s me

    If I make an exact molecular copy of you and set that copy free into the world thinking it had just successfully transported, but then I take the original you that entered the transporter and lock them up in a basement somewhere, how is that any different? From the perspective of the conscious being that came out the other end their continuity is uninterrupted. They will think they are the only version of themselves to have ever existed and that they simply moved from one place to another, as opposed to being a duplicate of the original entity, and that the original entity may be dead or in this case locked in a basement.

  • Not sure what to take from this other than it being a really bad take. Insect protein is orders of magnitude more sustainable and eco-friendly than beef. We could replace all the land we destroyed that is used to have cows standing around in their own shit and for a fraction of the acreage produce the same number of protein and calories without massively contributing to climate change.

  • Yes, you were describing it as a call to arms, I'm saying it's an inevitability and nothing in this forum will result in systemic change. I'm not going to keep discussing the issue further because I've already had one comment removed by a mod. If you think you can change things then go forth, I'm just trying to live my life without being told it's good for me to pay attention to rich assholes.

  • It was not a call to arms, it was an explanation of why I think the demand to get riled up on an internet forum is futile πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

  • Having to constantly see what dumb bullshit Elon is saying or doing isn't going to change anything in this world except the quality of my mental health. Some of us are just tired

  • Static pages with hyperlinks have evolved into a certain horror we all know.

    Why couldn't this just be a webring of sites following a specific design philosophy?

    This is a neat idea, but the requirement of installing a whole new piece of software just to decide if it's worth exploring is already a non-starter.

  • Sure you could make the argument that HTML has too much going on, but you don't have to use all of that. It is still at its core just as capable of rendering plaintext and hyperlinks as it was the day it was originally conceived.

    Why couldn't this just be a webring of sites that are following a specific design philosophy. I don't understand the requirement of an entirely new language, protocol, and client. You're not executing the goal in any way than what is already possible, and you're cutting yourself off from being accessible by the vast majority of people by requiring them to install a whole new piece of software just to see if this idea is worth exploring.

  • How is this website so wrong?

    I don't have a static IP. I'm not in the United States. I'm not even in North America...

    I'm literally on another continent which can be very easily verified using nothing more than a geoIP lookup, but they somehow place me somewhere 3,000+ miles away. And no, I'm not using a VPN.