Formerly u/CanadaPlus101 on Reddit.

  • 4 Posts
  • 1.52K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • Hah, I actually make a lot less sense when not in text form. I can write, reorder and edit a bunch on here. IRL my very first communication idea comes out, and it’s stupid.

    I know this is .ml, but I don’t really expect a global revolution either. Then again, the UK never had a (successful) revolution, and their monarch is just a figurehead at this point, so I still expect change, good or bad.


  • It opens with mostly flavour, but it does eventually get into what happened:

    Since then, Prospera and Crawfish Rock villagers have battled over ground water, and tense public meetings have boiled over into fistfights between Brimen’s employees and locals, she said. Brimen [the Prospera founder] himself has visited the community to collect signatures in support of the project and offer loans. Another Prospera leader once rolled in with two pickup trucks full of police, which Cardenas [local Garifuna leader] took as a threat.

    So, unsurprisingly for a libertarian project, they ran into trouble with managing common natural resources, and unfortunately the cryptobros arriving are incapable of relating to the locals enough to actually negotiate with them.

    It goes on to say that a lot of locals have been hired for this thing as well, so it’s not all bad, but there’s more:

    The local government needs to expand its main highway, build a new police station and landfill. But under the legal protections Prospera enjoys as a ZEDE, it pays no taxes to Honduras or Roatan.

    “They use our garbage dump, they use our roads, our airports, and they buy their electricity from the local company in Roatan,” McNab [nearby mayor] said. “I don’t think it’s fair.”

    That’s an obvious glaring problem. No wonder they achieve single digit taxes with other people paying for their infrastructure.




  • I mean, doesn’t that imply the existence of natural rights outside of our social agreement they exist? I think there’s lots in history that runs counter to that assumption.

    So, reinterpreting a bit, should we have a right to be forgotten? On the one hand, that sounds nice. I’ve fucked up a lot in my life, and as long as someone remembers it feels like it’s permanent. On the other, there’s all kinds of academic arguments to preserve everything. Who knows what brilliant anthropological research you could do in 3000AD with the time someone overheard teenage me smack-talking their baby? (Only semi-/s)

    I guess my main instinct is that once a right is established, it should be hard to get rid of. For that reason, I’m going to say no, not without an overwhelming argument for it. I still like legislation that allows you to withdraw your information from services, but that’s more because I don’t trust the services (practically and in abstract) than for a deep philosophical reason.



  • Moderately bad would be, for example, getting stuck in the agrarian neolithic for geological time because every significant technological advance leads to a devastating social collapse that wipes it away. If farming is already a new thing to the species, why shouldn’t we struggle just to keep it going at a basic level?

    I mean, technologies getting lost did happen all the time, and social progress basically didn’t exist until recently. But, progress in both senses eventually came. By the 20th century there was little anyone from the paleolithic would recognise in Western life, and we adapted, with only a few health and demographic problems to show for it.




  • The false thing they teach is that air has to go over the longer side faster. Actually, it’s under no obligation to meet back with the same air on the other side, and doesn’t in practice. The real magic bit is the corner on the back, which is not aerodynamic and “forces” air to move parallel to it (eventually, as the starting vortex dissipates).

    The pressure difference from different volumetric flow speeds is real, it’s just not that straightforward to produce, because air mostly does whatever it wants. A lot of aerodynamics is still more art than science, and it’s even possible the Navier-Stokes equations it’s based on fail under certain conditions.



  • Yep. The Higgs field interacts with matter, both holding the waves it’s made up of “in place” (so it can seem macroscopically like it’s not a wave), and carrying a bunch of energy.

    There’s also mass-energy just in the very fast and powerful internal movements and fields of the nuclei and the individual protons and neutrons (which are made of gluons and quarks). Not sure about the breakdown off the top of my head, though.

    If you blew up an atomic bomb in a magically indestructible sealed container, it would stay the same weight, just with a noticeable contribution from pure electromagnetism now.








  • Well, for one thing, it’s not clear that DID actually exists.

    But, for the sake of argument, say it does. I think the most reasonable-sounding approach is to say the identity in control at the time has something like usufruct ownership of the body - they can use it, but not damage it, so they better be having safe sex.

    The second situation is pretty straightforwardly rape by deception, depending on how exactly it unfolds.

    I guess slightly related, I’ve always wondered how conjoined twins manage these sorts of compromises. I’m sure it’s possible for one conjoined twin to violate the other’s bodily autonomy by engaging in sexual relationships with other people without their consent (like maybe while they were asleep or weren’t able to control their body) right?

    I have no idea how sex specifically works, but I know of one pair that at least dates. They say they’re really good at ignoring the other and just reading a book. In a lot of ways, it’s not too different from more mundane situations where people are forced into uncomfortably close quarters - like in a shared prison cell.