The sparrows are eating our crops. Kill'em! Oh! Sparrows were eating locusts, too. Locusts are eating more crops than sparrows did. Remove locust habitat by pulling up grass! Oh! Grass was keeping sand from creating dust storms. Great. Now we have neither sparrows, locusts, grass, food nor breathable air.
Bottom line. Don't mess with an ecosystem on which you depend and don't understand.
Applying for a job, forty years from now
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 1
Unix System Administrator
In this role you will need:
* Expertise in UNIX system administration
* Fluency in at least fifteen scripting/coding languages
* Experience running mega-traffic web services
Requirements:
* 5+ years experience with UNIX systems administration
* Outstanding analytical abilities
* One hat, black
* Certificate of designer DNA type 12.7 (ISO 90613028-5: Genetics adjustment: HCI no lower than level 4 and Complying Personality level 8 or higher)
Randomly/naturally designed people need not apply.
You chose to give certain situations in your life meaning, and you chose to say that others had no meaning
Unfortunately, I think it's more complicated than that. There are things in life, though initially meaningless, that can be declared meaningful. There are also things that once held meaning which no longer doesn't, either by your own choice or by some other process.
Now let's take a look at this other process. You mention "meaning-templates that society provided". This is the cultural part of Meaningful Stuff. But just like any other traits we carry, we also get handed a list of Meaningful Stuff from nature. Most any animal will feel a sense of accomplishment after a good meal, after sex, after having improved that which you call home, and so on. This is stuff that is inherently meaningful and often very hard for culture to override.
I think this is the reason why most of our basic real life activities hold meaning, while most of our virtual activities need to be rigorously defined as meaningful before they can contribute to our lives. For my own part, defining virtual activities as meaningful is too great an effort and feels like self-deception. These activities only give me gratification in the present; no real sense of accomplishment. Why am I still a programmer? I'm trying to quit - get a job that consists of manipulating the real world - but it's somehow so very easy (and cowardly I guess) to keep tapping the keyboard.
Poking people in the name of science is subject to all kinds of ethical considerations. Entertainment on the other hand, is exempt from such dreary considerations. So why not do the poking and pretend it's in the name of entertainment? I'll bet an experiment can be designed in such a way that it both results in useful data that couldn't be collected otherwise, all the while making millions as a "reality" show or somesuch!
Does it take less pollution to create methanol and biodiesel this way, versus drilling them from the earth?
Surely, the benefit from "creating" methanol, as opposed to drilling for it, is obvious. Creating it might take hours, whereas replenishing our stock of geologically produced methonal takes millions of years.
Also, where does the notion come from, that we are free to spend all the fossil fuels we are capable of drilling up? It's kind of like saying it's ok, because we can. To me, this represents an utter disregard for the needs of future generations. Sure, they might discover other efficient sources of power. But they're guaranteed to look back on this century of fossil fuel spending as the most egoistic wasting of resources that's possible to imagine.
A law is immoral if it denies a person their right to conduct their life as they see fit, with no exceptions except where their actions would harm another. ...
This really isn't complex.
Is a laws morality only affected by it's influence on humans? What about a law that denys humans the right to kill animals just for fun? Or a law against imbalancing or destroying ecosystems? Or even a law against planetcide, albeit a planet where no human lives? These examples would certainly restrict human actions, without preventing harm to others. Err... other humans. But is that all that counts?
If it were a dwarf, we could expect battleaxes, scraps of armour, and of course the occasional goblin skull to be floating about in the cave with it... Hold on! It might be a goblin! Did any of the bones have a the "Made in Mordor" logo?
Communism itself can't tolerate any kinds of rivals whatsoever.
You are, of course, mistaken about what communism can and cannot tolerate. Communism is not about tolerance or rivalry, but the division of resources: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
However, I agree with you that the Chinese attempt at implementing communism fits most of what you say is communism.
has been increasing the size of there portions based on demand
This is where I disagree. Demand has nothing to do with it. I'm from Norway. People here are no less thirsty than people anywhere else, and we have been going with fairly small drinks (by US standards, anyway) for a long time. Recently, the local Burger King started pushing.8 litres of pop, which is for every pratical use an oversized drink. In my opinion, there are two reasons for the increasing size of drinks sold:
1. Short term profit for the vendor: The shop makes more money as ingredients for a litre of pop is virtually free. But the petty cash you pay extra for the much larger drink seems like a good deal.
2. The Fast Food Chain Conspiracy: People become fat by consuming a lot. Fatter people consume more. Make fat people, and thus heavy-spending customers, by feeding them larger quantities.
The moral is: Fight back! Go for the small drink. You don't need the big one, even if it's volume-wise relatively cheaper.
Slashdot Mirror
This reminds me a bit of Maos Great Sparrow Campaign:
The sparrows are eating our crops. Kill'em! Oh! Sparrows were eating locusts, too. Locusts are eating more crops than sparrows did. Remove locust habitat by pulling up grass! Oh! Grass was keeping sand from creating dust storms. Great. Now we have neither sparrows, locusts, grass, food nor breathable air.
Bottom line. Don't mess with an ecosystem on which you depend and don't understand.
Unix System Administrator
In this role you will need:
* Expertise in UNIX system administration
* Fluency in at least fifteen scripting/coding languages
* Experience running mega-traffic web services
Requirements:
* 5+ years experience with UNIX systems administration
* Outstanding analytical abilities
* One hat, black
* Certificate of designer DNA type 12.7 (ISO 90613028-5: Genetics adjustment: HCI no lower than level 4 and Complying Personality level 8 or higher)
Randomly/naturally designed people need not apply.
First thing you know, someone will hack this thing and install vista on it.
While GOD spell backwards is DOG, BOB spelled backwards is still BOB! All praise BOB!
You chose to give certain situations in your life meaning, and you chose to say that others had no meaning
Unfortunately, I think it's more complicated than that. There are things in life, though initially meaningless, that can be declared meaningful. There are also things that once held meaning which no longer doesn't, either by your own choice or by some other process.
Now let's take a look at this other process. You mention "meaning-templates that society provided". This is the cultural part of Meaningful Stuff. But just like any other traits we carry, we also get handed a list of Meaningful Stuff from nature. Most any animal will feel a sense of accomplishment after a good meal, after sex, after having improved that which you call home, and so on. This is stuff that is inherently meaningful and often very hard for culture to override.
I think this is the reason why most of our basic real life activities hold meaning, while most of our virtual activities need to be rigorously defined as meaningful before they can contribute to our lives. For my own part, defining virtual activities as meaningful is too great an effort and feels like self-deception. These activities only give me gratification in the present; no real sense of accomplishment. Why am I still a programmer? I'm trying to quit - get a job that consists of manipulating the real world - but it's somehow so very easy (and cowardly I guess) to keep tapping the keyboard.
Poking people in the name of science is subject to all kinds of ethical considerations. Entertainment on the other hand, is exempt from such dreary considerations. So why not do the poking and pretend it's in the name of entertainment? I'll bet an experiment can be designed in such a way that it both results in useful data that couldn't be collected otherwise, all the while making millions as a "reality" show or somesuch!
Does it take less pollution to create methanol and biodiesel this way, versus drilling them from the earth?
Surely, the benefit from "creating" methanol, as opposed to drilling for it, is obvious. Creating it might take hours, whereas replenishing our stock of geologically produced methonal takes millions of years.
Also, where does the notion come from, that we are free to spend all the fossil fuels we are capable of drilling up? It's kind of like saying it's ok, because we can. To me, this represents an utter disregard for the needs of future generations. Sure, they might discover other efficient sources of power. But they're guaranteed to look back on this century of fossil fuel spending as the most egoistic wasting of resources that's possible to imagine.
A law is immoral if it denies a person their right to conduct their life as they see fit, with no exceptions except where their actions would harm another.
...
This really isn't complex.
Is a laws morality only affected by it's influence on humans? What about a law that denys humans the right to kill animals just for fun? Or a law against imbalancing or destroying ecosystems? Or even a law against planetcide, albeit a planet where no human lives? These examples would certainly restrict human actions, without preventing harm to others. Err... other humans. But is that all that counts?
Methinks this is more complex than youthinks.
If it were a dwarf, we could expect battleaxes, scraps of armour, and of course the occasional goblin skull to be floating about in the cave with it... Hold on! It might be a goblin! Did any of the bones have a the "Made in Mordor" logo?
Shooting rabbits? Sniping deer? There's no experience points for killing grey stuff anyway!
Communism itself can't tolerate any kinds of rivals whatsoever.
You are, of course, mistaken about what communism can and cannot tolerate. Communism is not about tolerance or rivalry, but the division of resources: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
However, I agree with you that the Chinese attempt at implementing communism fits most of what you say is communism.
has been increasing the size of there portions based on demand
.8 litres of pop, which is for every pratical use an oversized drink. In my opinion, there are two reasons for the increasing size of drinks sold:
This is where I disagree. Demand has nothing to do with it. I'm from Norway. People here are no less thirsty than people anywhere else, and we have been going with fairly small drinks (by US standards, anyway) for a long time. Recently, the local Burger King started pushing
1. Short term profit for the vendor: The shop makes more money as ingredients for a litre of pop is virtually free. But the petty cash you pay extra for the much larger drink seems like a good deal.
2. The Fast Food Chain Conspiracy: People become fat by consuming a lot. Fatter people consume more. Make fat people, and thus heavy-spending customers, by feeding them larger quantities.
The moral is: Fight back! Go for the small drink. You don't need the big one, even if it's volume-wise relatively cheaper.
2/5 of cold pizza left from last night (all there is).
Wash down with available cola.
If not enough, search appartment for even older leftover pizza.