Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)S
Posts
0
Comments
320
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I have, I studied these ideas at university. I'm just curious what makes these thought experiments harder than e.g. the double slit experiment, Plato's cave analogy or Rawls' veil of ignorance?

  • What makes relativity the hardest thought experiment?

  • For sure, but it's yet to be seen if the bad outweighs the good. For the last several centuries it's been going the right way, so there is good reason to hope that a century from now, things are even better than they are today.

    Doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for the good causes, naturally.

  • Do the technological and social advances not show that we are also at heart a progressive people with a need to care for eachother and create a better future?

  • By most measures, such as number of humans killed in war or child mortality, human suffering in the modern era is less than it's ever been. In the grand scheme of things, we have made the world a place with much more room for joy and love over the course of human civilisation.

  • Our constitutional rights ensure that the police must have a good reason to investigate our correspondence. I suppose the issue with well-encrypted messaging for the state is that even with a good reason, the police can't read the correspondence.

    Not that I support this nonsense, just saying.

  • NSFW

    Trophy hunter

    Jump
  • Looks great! Love the storytelling.

  • The CPC calls itself communism as in Communist Party of China (CPC). So yeah.

    I know it's a tired comparison, but the Democratic Republic of Congo calls itself democratic, but is authoritarian.

    North Korea is also officially called the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea".

    What does that mean for the praxis of democracy?

  • I'll always prefer ideologies that aim to do well but end up misused for power over ideologies that directly aim to do evil.

    Nazism aims to end the "oppression" of the straight Aryan man by destroying Jews, queers and so on.

    Communism aims to end the oppression of the worker by ending private property and seizing the means of production.

    Even if many or all communist systems end up in violent autocratic tyranny, I'll never equate the two ideologies or their followers.

  • Cool! What's your take on the empirical method then, considering the relationship between reality and the subject?

  • Yes, it's pretty important to me for mental hygiene and self-control.

    But what do you mean it's "a bigger deal than science"? Do you do science as well?

  • Virkelig sjovt at spille som par!

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Sure, that makes sense, but it feels like they're implying "energy" when they say "electricity".

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Imagine a clock that doesn’t have electricity, but its hands and gears spin on their own for all eternity.

    No, no, no, these crystals still need energy to move. They talk about "all you have to do is shine a light on it", yes, that adds energy.

    Cool results, but yet another failure of science communication.

  • We can accurately simulate physics, outside of certain extreme environments

    This is not true. For example, we don't know why [ice is slippery].(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2014.03.002).

    Furthermore

    There are no extreme environments on Earth...

    Yes, there is. Ice. And superconductors. And so on... And even if all the other stuff is exotic, it's important to know all the other underlying principles to comprehend what's actually going on.

  • But we have no evidence that we're anywhere close to being able to accurately simulate physics, even with planet sizes computers.

  • I mean, if you take an existing physics simulation and just scale up the hardware...

    Then what? We have no reason to believe that would cause parts of the simulation to be conscious and think they exist in reality.

  • Assuming reality and/or consciousness can be simulated, which we have no way of knowing is true (for now).

  • Thanks again. I'd like to restate my question: which China-critical sources do you consider credible? Any western ones? Is there any way I could present this argument to make you change your mind?

    I'm having a hard time accepting that all western sources are propaganda. I've never had reason to doubt the sources I cited before, such as Amnesty International, in other cases they've been accurate. Are they only misleading on China?

    The free media of my country, Denmark, reports the same facts based on their investigations, across the political spectrum and despite angering our government, which has close economic ties to China. How does that fit with these organizations and this media being government mouthpieces?