Fix? Not without some eugenics (traditional or modern). Mitigate? We can definitely mitigate it. There was a study recently that showed that it’s not really the punishment for a crime that dieters people, it’s the probability they will or won’t get caught that’s the primary factor. So for instance if there’s a 98% chance they will get caught people are unlikely to commit the crime and if there is a 5% chance they will be caught they are much more likely to commit the crime even if the punishment is extremely harsh. There’s of course a balancing act between personal freedoms and privacy and the ability to catch people aka the more privacy people have the more difficult it is to catch crime and generally the less privacy (and ability to parse large sums of data) the easier it is.
Laws aren’t a tool for preventing bad outcomes, and if you think they’re the primary tool you are not a serious person and will not create a functional society.
You would rather change what humanity is on a biological level than fucking acknowledge that existing power structures are nonsense and horrible?
I would ask what drugs you’re on, but since monday I’ve been on or around people who were on acid molly coke meth weed severe head trauma alcohol none of their prescribed antipsychotics dilotted and some rich people designer bullshit that’s just strings of letters and numbers I can never remember. None of it made any of them this deranged.
In case you haven’t been paying attention, it would seem on average a solid third to half of all humans are just inherently fascist. Until they’re gone you will inevitably end up with a fascist society.
Far right populist fascism is on the rise literally everywhere and has some or all control of what, like half the first world governments? More of the rest. And you don’t think that’s evidence of an issue?
Are you going to argue that the public has no agency and it’s only the people running things that are fascist? Because that’s dumb as fuck in representative democracies where the people largely choose their representation and guess fuckin what? They keep choosing fucking fascists. That makes them fuckin fascists. You following along now or do I need to use smaller words so you can follow A to B? Is nobody capable of fuckin abstract thought anymore? Why would fascism be on the rise? Because there’s a lot of fuckin fascists and they vote. Gah.
I mean we’ve already started modern eugenics with gene therapies to cure genetic diseases and soon there will be services offering designer babies not unlike the movie Gattaca. Why would you not want to have your child’s IQ increased 20 points along with removing their asthma and near sightedness?
There’s no political system devoid of corruption and people willing to harm others to get what they want. We can prevent a lot of crime but we’re not preventing human behavior anytime soon. I mean we can but we won’t.
What is crime? How does it relate to undesirable outcomes? Why do you think laws, just threatening people and public punishment and awfulnes, are a good tool for anything you want?
Not even going to start on the ‘eugenics’. You get that gattaca was not a “we should do this!” Movie, right? Jesus buckets of frothy diarrhea Christ are you from fucking San Francisco or some shit?
It’s not always a crime necessarily but harming people to get what one wants is usually a crime. As for constraining human behavior there’s really only two tools, benefit the behaviors you want and punish the ones you don’t want. People will obviously be self interested and will sometimes cause a lot of harm to get what they want but they wouldn’t if they knew for a fact they would be caught and punished. It’s more so the likelihood of being caught than the punishment that’s actually the deterrent. You can have an extreme punishment for something but if it’s unlikely someone will be caught then they will take their chances. Downside is with a higher rate of catching bad behaviors we diminish privacy. An extreme would everyone being watched and recorded 24/7 would make it trivial to catch any bad behavior or crime but there would be zero privacy.
As for Gattaca,. I think it’s more so that they used it to differentiate society into two groups where one was treated very poorly more so than the gene editing itself being the issue. For sure we will cure genetic diseases and then move into grey area stuff like giving people perfect eyesight and so on. I think it’ll be far too tempering to make designer babies though, higher IQ, better looking (subjective), better physique, better health and so on. Of course anyone who’s ever bred animals knows you can breed them to constrain their behavior so one could theoretically alter humanity to be more compassionate and less of a jerk to itself.
The idea of making the behaviors you want easier, the outcomes you want more likely to happen, just does not occur. Like, if you want less reckless driving, make it less necessary or convenient to drive.
You realize punishment is harm, right?
You understand nothing
I’m really not interested in your extremely remedial analysis. I am aware of the various philosophies of law. The idea of making the outcome you want easier just does not occur.
It’s all about proximal causes and assigning ultimate responsibility to a person you assume must be evil and not helping them to do what you want even when its something that’s usually a function of recklessness irresponsibility or incompetence but just hurting people until the world is better.
The violently incurious crescendo of dunning-kruger that you would take out on others is absolutely disgusting. Everything you’ve said here is violently stupid, literally violently. Never stop posting. Not for a moment.
I was more so getting at a scenario like The Giver where humanity modifies itself to be more peaceful with itself more than what you’re getting at. Of course maybe not to such an extreme like the giver. Anyways I think we could have a better conversation without the name calling but to each their own I guess.
Some people take joy in hurting others. I have no faith that we can fix that.
Fix? Not without some eugenics (traditional or modern). Mitigate? We can definitely mitigate it. There was a study recently that showed that it’s not really the punishment for a crime that dieters people, it’s the probability they will or won’t get caught that’s the primary factor. So for instance if there’s a 98% chance they will get caught people are unlikely to commit the crime and if there is a 5% chance they will be caught they are much more likely to commit the crime even if the punishment is extremely harsh. There’s of course a balancing act between personal freedoms and privacy and the ability to catch people aka the more privacy people have the more difficult it is to catch crime and generally the less privacy (and ability to parse large sums of data) the easier it is.
Eugenics, yeah, cool. Love it.
Laws aren’t a tool for preventing bad outcomes, and if you think they’re the primary tool you are not a serious person and will not create a functional society.
You would rather change what humanity is on a biological level than fucking acknowledge that existing power structures are nonsense and horrible?
I would ask what drugs you’re on, but since monday I’ve been on or around people who were on acid molly coke meth weed severe head trauma alcohol none of their prescribed antipsychotics dilotted and some rich people designer bullshit that’s just strings of letters and numbers I can never remember. None of it made any of them this deranged.
In case you haven’t been paying attention, it would seem on average a solid third to half of all humans are just inherently fascist. Until they’re gone you will inevitably end up with a fascist society.
‘Inherently’
That’s bullshit. They’re no more inherently fascist than they are inherently Christian, and not all fascists are or were eugenicists.
Far right populist fascism is on the rise literally everywhere and has some or all control of what, like half the first world governments? More of the rest. And you don’t think that’s evidence of an issue?
Is that what I said?
Are you going to argue that the public has no agency and it’s only the people running things that are fascist? Because that’s dumb as fuck in representative democracies where the people largely choose their representation and guess fuckin what? They keep choosing fucking fascists. That makes them fuckin fascists. You following along now or do I need to use smaller words so you can follow A to B? Is nobody capable of fuckin abstract thought anymore? Why would fascism be on the rise? Because there’s a lot of fuckin fascists and they vote. Gah.
What do you think the word ‘inherently’ means?
I mean we’ve already started modern eugenics with gene therapies to cure genetic diseases and soon there will be services offering designer babies not unlike the movie Gattaca. Why would you not want to have your child’s IQ increased 20 points along with removing their asthma and near sightedness?
There’s no political system devoid of corruption and people willing to harm others to get what they want. We can prevent a lot of crime but we’re not preventing human behavior anytime soon. I mean we can but we won’t.
‘Prevent crime’
What is crime? How does it relate to undesirable outcomes? Why do you think laws, just threatening people and public punishment and awfulnes, are a good tool for anything you want?
Not even going to start on the ‘eugenics’. You get that gattaca was not a “we should do this!” Movie, right? Jesus buckets of frothy diarrhea Christ are you from fucking San Francisco or some shit?
It’s not always a crime necessarily but harming people to get what one wants is usually a crime. As for constraining human behavior there’s really only two tools, benefit the behaviors you want and punish the ones you don’t want. People will obviously be self interested and will sometimes cause a lot of harm to get what they want but they wouldn’t if they knew for a fact they would be caught and punished. It’s more so the likelihood of being caught than the punishment that’s actually the deterrent. You can have an extreme punishment for something but if it’s unlikely someone will be caught then they will take their chances. Downside is with a higher rate of catching bad behaviors we diminish privacy. An extreme would everyone being watched and recorded 24/7 would make it trivial to catch any bad behavior or crime but there would be zero privacy.
As for Gattaca,. I think it’s more so that they used it to differentiate society into two groups where one was treated very poorly more so than the gene editing itself being the issue. For sure we will cure genetic diseases and then move into grey area stuff like giving people perfect eyesight and so on. I think it’ll be far too tempering to make designer babies though, higher IQ, better looking (subjective), better physique, better health and so on. Of course anyone who’s ever bred animals knows you can breed them to constrain their behavior so one could theoretically alter humanity to be more compassionate and less of a jerk to itself.
The idea of making the behaviors you want easier, the outcomes you want more likely to happen, just does not occur. Like, if you want less reckless driving, make it less necessary or convenient to drive.
You realize punishment is harm, right?
You understand nothing
I’m really not interested in your extremely remedial analysis. I am aware of the various philosophies of law. The idea of making the outcome you want easier just does not occur.
It’s all about proximal causes and assigning ultimate responsibility to a person you assume must be evil and not helping them to do what you want even when its something that’s usually a function of recklessness irresponsibility or incompetence but just hurting people until the world is better.
The violently incurious crescendo of dunning-kruger that you would take out on others is absolutely disgusting. Everything you’ve said here is violently stupid, literally violently. Never stop posting. Not for a moment.
I was more so getting at a scenario like The Giver where humanity modifies itself to be more peaceful with itself more than what you’re getting at. Of course maybe not to such an extreme like the giver. Anyways I think we could have a better conversation without the name calling but to each their own I guess.
You get that ‘the giver’ is a dystopia, right? Of fucking course you don’t.