bastion @ bastion @feddit.nl

Posts

0

Comments

694

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's not that we had enough power to guarantee we would make an impact. It's that we had enough power that we should have tried.

This is why centrists exist. We vote left currently, because of insane people on the right who take advantage of the weakness of partisan mentalities.

This is literally nostupidquestions.

OK, be annoyed with me then.

What I'm saying is "if the state is going to execute people, then nitrogen asphyxiation is an excellent and humane choice, provided that the state performs the execution properly."

I am not saying anything beyond that. I'm not saying that this specific execution was performed properly. I wouldn't really trust the state to say it was done right, or a reporter to day it was done wrong.

People (and animals) can jerk and twitch when they die. They can gasp and breathe heavily even, sometimes. They are unconscious by that point if asphyxiation is done right. Look into hypoxia, there's a ton of documentation on it, video and otherwise, including direct accounts.

The only thing we can do to make it more humane is a: ensure the method is implemented correctly, and b: provide a choice of methods to the person to be executed.

Of course, that's aside from the question of whether the state is capable of correctly evaluating who should be killed in the first place.

Firstly, death causes twitching. And it's not fucking pretty. Most animals, humans included, have a very wide array of stuff that their body does even after they are fully unconscious. It's not at all surprising that bystanders were freaked out, even in ideal circumstances.

You should really look into apoxia. When done right (and I'm not arguing that the execution in the article was done right), it's a minute, maybe two. And that's probably less time than you'd spend on a firing line.

The reality is that there simply is no "perfect" way to kill someone who doesn't want to die. We could give them a choice, possibly, but will they even choose?

Nitrogen asphyxiation, done right, is humane. There is no pain. But one way or the other, the person's gonna know it's happening, no matter the method used to execute them.

Again, none of this is to condone execution as a consequence of crime. I don't think the state is qualified to make the call.

Ah. Bad title, then.

Nice.

Me too. It's good for the market as a whole.

returns to playing Steam games

I just learned about the fans, and my plans to get a framework next time tanked.

Power makes existing tendencies for corruption obvious.

You want to pull passive aggressive or direct aggressive bullshit in a small group? Well, that'll work a lot of times. People compensate, or they circumvent you to make things ok. But those same dynamics at scale cause inescapable problems.

Accepting that you have limited power, choosing an issue, and acting locally has become a lost art. People would rather bitch about how it should be different.

Yes, precise circumstances matter.

For nitrogen asphyxiation in general, you do not have to be calm and cooperative for it to be painless, any more than you do so to stand in a room or sit in a chair.

As to the specific setup that the government chose, I can't vouch for that.

It doesn't mean thousands of litres per second to do it properly. A mask or helmet could be considered a poor tool for the job, though, because they are easier to fight/struggle with, and the person could hurt themselves in the process of that.

You need the normal level of air replacement for any given volume with a human in it, but you need to be using nitrogen as the source of air replacement. If you want to speed the process up, you could do 1x space volume/minute for a couple minutes, then drop it down to a normal rate of replacement.

Choosing a larger volume will not make it painful, but it will make it slower unless you increase the flow. But slower is not bad, per se, except that since it's an execution, faster is possibly more merciful (depending on the person's preference) because the person has less time to sit there and contemplate the fact of their death.

The suicide pods are pretty much the ideal balance of space taken. For an execution, perhaps a small room with a chair, and a somewhat faster nitrogen replacement rate (like, 60 volumes/h for the first two minutes, then 5 volumes/h after that).

But that's not a problem with nitrogen asphyxiation, that's stupid human implementation.

Ah. Well, if nitrogen asphyxiation is done right (a proper mask, or better, total immersion), cooperation is only necessary for the painlessness in the same sense that walking down a hallway or sitting in a chair requires your cooperation - if you smash your head against a wall, or pick up a chair and smash it and hurt yourself in the process, for example, it's not painless.

As far as a person's struggle to live - yeah, no shame in fighting for it.

I think that if you're a robot boop capable of enough complexity (including having a tendency towards dynamically stable emotive field states), and can interface with a body and society well enough to remain comparatively indistinguishable from a human, that makes you human, right? beep anyways, time is relative, right?

Then that's not simply killing him with nitrogen gas. But the better method is:

• A mostly enclosed cask with one exit, just large enough to prevent pressure buildup (vented to the exterior, since we probably don't want the whole room to be the same thing)
• solid nitrogen flow in

..that is all. If they're fucking it up, it's on them.

..that is all.

But also, even when completely unconscious, complex living things with a central nervous system (including people) tend to flop when they die.

No, they don't need to cooperate. If you struggle and thrash, no matter how you die, you'll endure the struggle and thrashing.

Yeah. The suicide pods are a good example. There's enough space in them that the person won't experience CO2 buildup in the short amount of time it takes.

Yeah. This is the thing.