To avoid accusations of some kind of class war, I expect.
Difference being, of course, that this would likely be a progressive tax, like the mansion tax or income, so as to impact the "big fish" and allow movement of others.
I suppose it's not solely for gaming which turns me off the deck option; it would also be serving as the entry point for some self hosted stuff I'm running on the clunky old unit that's still chugging along.
What's the benefit of that Vs this? I don't care for portability and I like the option to at least crack this open and expand a few bits (if I need to).
PC Partpicker disagrees with you, especially at the reduced price on the Amazon micro option - making some assumptions on equivalence between the 'baked in' chips and proper GPU etc.
I'd assume that economies of scale play a part too.
GPU prices being what they are an equivalent full size card, and the same CPU aren't far off the full build cost of the micro unit I linked to, and that's before cases, power supplies and whatever.
I understand the service situation; but that's not worse than my laptop/integrated devices - and this still has some scope for replacing non-soldered parts, presumably.
That denying someone the opportunity to experience something beneficial is immoral, somtomhave kids is moral positive.
My primary objections are
That suffering is always bad (although we disagree on the definitions of suffering, somits likely to be a moot point)
Having children on the basis of it being morally good presents a number of very upsetting and dangerous implications.
Gaza was an example of a point, and of my own views on suffering; that suffering is something you cannot escape and that you do not choose, not something that's difficult or temporarily painful you can choose to do which will ultimately produce some good. I'd posit that everyone experiences some form of suffering in their lives, to varying degrees, and the minimisation of this can only ever be a net positive.
Personally I don't want children for a number of reasons, but boiling it down to a moral reason is reductive, unhelpful, and can be dangerous.
I'd put it to you that suffering, in the sense that we're discussing, would be something more than the pain of exercise - the people of Gaza are suffering, when I go into the 'pain cave' on a bike ride I'm enduring something for the benefit of it; I can stop, pause or relent if it becomes overbearing. It's type 2 fun. It's not suffering if you can opt out; challenge, and difficulty arent bad; suffering is.
It's interesting that your anti-theistic approach has led you to what I would see as a very religious adjacent approach to reproduction; my worry with approaches like the outline you gave is that it can end up punishing any sort of reluctance to have kids (and can paint those who aren't able to as immoral in some way). Not saying that's you're intention, just saying.
Could an artist not suffer for their work that brings great joy to themselves and others? Is that suffering not then worthy and good?
This is an awful take. Not suffering is always preferable to suffering.
If something is worthy and good then denying others the opportunity to exist and be worthy and good is itself immoral.
Does this mean that you have a moral imperative to have children because there are "worthy and good" things in the world? Is the logic "I can have children, there is good in the world, therefore it's immoral to deny a potential life the opportunity to experience life"?
I say this as someone who can, but won't, have children, and who grew up in an evangelical church - that's a bizarre logic that feels an awful lot like some fundamentalist Christian quiverfull shit.
Using flags to create an atmosphere of exclusion: likely racist, definitely xenophobic
Don't get me wrong, I love a good flag, and the St George's cross is a great design (esp. When it doesn't have "England" written on it) but 90% of the people flying the flags are slow witted flag fuckers who are upset that brown people exist in "their" country.
Please! Although I'd hesitate to say I have any "claims" as such - I'm ex religious and flip-flop from agnosticism to some kind of atheistic nihilism depending on the day. "I don't believe in anything" is as close to a solid statement of belief as I'm likely to get.
To avoid accusations of some kind of class war, I expect.
Difference being, of course, that this would likely be a progressive tax, like the mansion tax or income, so as to impact the "big fish" and allow movement of others.