It seems like slightly different wording would have fixed it. "Oddly fitting"? We don't usually describe untimely deaths as "fitting". Perhaps "ironic" or something along those lines would fit the tone better.
If the pipette dude would have died of drowning by pipetting, that would be ironic. If he drowned from a microlitre of water, that'd be ironic. But saying he couldn't handle large amounts of water is weird. The dude's unfortunate drowning death really doesn't add much to the story.
> A national lobbying group has retracted its startling estimate that “organized retail crime” was responsible for nearly half the $94.5 billion in store merchandise that disappeared in 2021, a figure that helped amplify claims that the United States was experiencing a nationwide wave of shoplifting.
> In fact, retail theft has been lower this year in most of the country than it was a few years ago, according to police data. Some exceptions, including New York City, exist. But in most major cities, shoplifting incidents have fallen 7 percent since 2019.
It's wild how poverty and depressed circumstances among lower income people, especially when they see business profits continuing to grow in spite of wages, can lead to crime!
Being poor doesn't lead you to becoming a criminal. The evidence we have for that is the vast numbers of poor people who are not criminals.
Being taught that everyone is against you, that you are a victim, and that you are being oppressed does lead to crime, however. In other words, the current fashion for leftist politics is to supply justifications for stealing, so long as you steal from someone who has more than you do.
> Being poor doesn't lead you to becoming a criminal.
You're misunderstanding. Not all poor people are criminals, however, being poor is a motivating factor in crime.
> Being taught that everyone is against you, that you are a victim, and that you are being oppressed does lead to crime
Leftist rhetoric doesn't actually state "everyone is against you", sorry buddy. In fact, there's over 100+ years of leftist rhetoric and writing stating the exact opposite -- "we are stronger as a a community". Right wing rhetoric and views absolutely parrot "everyone is against you". This is why left wing circles create mutual aid groups (to benefit the community), and right wing circles create... well.. do they actually create anything? Has anything notable come out of incel circles that isn't "school shooters"?
> In other words, the current fashion for leftist politics is to supply justifications for stealing, so long as you steal from someone who has more than you do.
The majority of theft that outweighs all other theft by the measure of billions is theft of labour, though. So who are we to complain when people start stealing in response?
I just hope the take on it will be to understand the watcher is also suffering a lot, and the people you hate as well.
Life is full of of suffering, for every body.
Yes, even the person you are thinking about right now.
And sure, we can always rank suffering by taking examples and saying a raped tortured 6 years old suffers more than your average tech billionaire.
But the main point is, suffering is universal. It's a common ground we all share. It's goes beyond context and morality, because we all agree we don't want to suffer, and we do anyway. That's one of the rare things we all get to experience again and again, and that shapes your life.
I really wish people looking at the internet window will get this as the message, as a way to get closer to the other humans, instead of classify suffering and divide us in categories. Maybe develop a deeper understanding of suffering, which is not just pain or other obvious manifestations.
And also be more kind, tolerant, wish others, and oneself.
And also be more kind, tolerant, wish others, and oneself.
I agree that this is the ideal response, but unfortunately this hasn't been the general result and I doubt it ever will be. When an animal learns (or is tricked) that its environment is more harsh and dangerous than it previously believed, its instinctive reaction is to become less trusting, less curious, more withdrawn, and very often more prone to anger and violence. Humans are no different by and large.
To be clear, my comment was specifically about the effect of "horror news bombardment" on individuals, particularly via social media. I'm not sure it can take credit for the trends you mentioned, which started a very long time ago.
This is important. Life is not a contest of who suffers the most, but suffering brings us together. There also isn't a scarcity of suffering in the world, so we don't have to go looking for it. On the contrary, we as a society are failing to reduce the suffering of others. Maybe because we can't reconnect with people? They are just numbers and dates in political history?
In any case, welcoming pain as immanent in life while not being numbed and crushed by the sheer amount of it is a very important skill to develop.
But I’m sure you want to help the person who is suffering more before you help the person who is suffering less yes? The idea that “suffering is suffering” is almost sociopathic.
Can't both be done? Can't society provide for both in immediate danger as well as those suffering less?
Do we need to stop tending for people's mental health because many are not eating?
Maybe the effort involved in categorising, understanding and prioritising suffering would be better used... well... actually reducing suffering.
Because when we think like this we risk dismanteling efforts that are really important, like protecting other animals from abandonment or abuse, or protecting the environment, because we risk putting them in lower hierarchical priority compared to our own most immediate form of suffering.
Apparently we can’t. So I’m looking at this as a form of triage. At the very least, we can help those who are suffering the most, right? Because right now I’m neither being treated for my mental illness or my homelessness so there you go.
But yes, many people would rather protect and house animals than protect and house people. So I guess as humans we should have the same priorities, no?
But if you think protecting the environment is more important than providing people shelter I don’t know what to say. And in fact, I am going to state that it is easier to care about the climate than to provide people with housing, which is why people focus on the formal rather than the later.
> The idea that “suffering is suffering” is almost sociopathic.
I'm somewhat troubled by this line of thinking. Some people suffer due to war, climate change, hunger and so on, and others because their mother passed away peacefully at age 90. These are absolutely not the same and saying suffering is suffering greatly devalues the (somewhat preventable) suffering caused by unmet material needs, political actions and the like.
Might depend on the interpretation of "roguelike" -- Rogue combined single-character adventure with grid tactics, so to many people, "roguelike" means single-character grid tactics, usually with some other less unique features (such as randomness), just like it did in the 80s. This was also the most important roguelike feature for the design of HyperRogue. While more commonly "roguelike" is used for marketing anything that takes whatever inspiration from a game marketed as roguelike. In the roguelike communities, mentioning The Binding of Isaac (in a way suggesting that roguelike means a game like it) happens regularly and yields very negative reactions, because it is not tactical and thus not interesting to the community. Similar for the other ones you mention.
Still, there are many very polished roguelikes on Steam (Dungeons of Dredmor, Crown Trick, Sproggiwood, Moonring, etc.).
At this points, it should be mandatory by law to open source the code of any online service your discontinue if people paid for a product that is tied to it.
This is a wildly armchair question, but can't we just model human's ability to adapt to change and then as a result determine if technology will be sufficient to save us from impending environmental collapse? I suppose this is a multi-trillion dollar open question...?
We have many examples of us both adapting and failing to adapt, and can therefore say things like "adapts X% of the time", except in those cases the solution has often been "move elsewhere and/or fight other people" which I think isn't useful because it doesn't work so well on a planetary scale unless and until interplanetary travel is as easy as the Mayflower/Plymouth Rock journey.
Might still be useful for general governance just by characterising dangerous parts of the phase space[0] where dragons be so they can be avoided.
[0] how does phase space differ from latent space anyway?
You key is evicted buddy, now go back to the big blob of matter.