Shouldn’t be so frustrating in the first place.
Shouldn’t be so frustrating in the first place.
While that would indeed be awesome, that’s not the route they proposed. It’s more about slowing down the perception of time, rather than being able to actually do something peoductive during that.
Philosopher Rebecca Roache, who leads a team of scholars, explains two methods to this madness. The first involves psychotic drugs that distort a person’s sense of time.
With a simple pill or injection, prisoners may believe they’ve been incarcerated for much longer than any natural human life could allow.
The second approach Roach explains is a bit more complex. Option number two involves uploading human minds to computers (da f*ck?), and speeding up the rate at which the brain functions. On her blog, Roach writes: "[…] This would, obviously, be much cheaper for the taxpayer than extending criminals’ lifespans to enable them to serve 1,000 years in real time.”
https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/new-technology-could-make-inmates-feel-like-theyre-serving-a-1000-year-sentence-in-8-hours-scrol/
Despite thinking, “wow that’s a disgusting way to see and treat humans”, and some obvious moral concerns (like, social isolation for what feels like 1000 years, which will fuck up most people badly), which make this feel like a black mirror episode, the mind-upload issue is technically extremely tricky. Even if we had the technology to “upload” the human mind, it will be a copy, a clone, not you individually. And if we don’t have an option to download the copy back into your brain, it will just be a waste of energy.
More importantly, an intriguing question is raised: After such a download, will this be you? Or just a copy of a copy and thereby another being which just replaces another one.
Another thing I find important to ask here: what’s the point of penalties? These suggestions seem to me like psychological torture rather than measures to “correct” social behaviour. In no way resocialisation seems to matter here. So we just fuck people up by that and unleash them onto society afterwards. Doesn’t sound good to me.
Sorry for not keeping my reply focused on your idea. I had some time to spare and this kept me busy.
And that’s the problem, because everyone is coerced to do that if they want to survive. And those, who own the means of production, the capital, the companies, are those who have the power to exploit those who don’t. And they do.
Was it satisfying? How did it feel? Don’t be shy about details.
I’m… err… asking for a friend.
Seems like you speak out of experience. Sorry for you. It’s sad that so many people forget how to treat each other respectfully.
That’s why we shouldn’t generalize so incautiously and shove all people of group X into one drawer.
Geometric series disagrees.
No.
Nvidia driver fucking X in the arse without lube.
They just fuck with Kenyans. And that’s obviously okay, because they are not part of the western nations. /s
That’s why you need several security layers and failure protection systems.
That’s not separation, but a different ethical concept or a lack of thought about one.
Go back to kindergarten.
It’s objectively worse than Firefox. For example, Firefox recently passed all minimum security requirements by the German Federal Office for Information Security. No other browser meets them.
Why though? It’s not like you are building your own OS every time on assembler level, or do you?
Making software more convenient is one of the reasons for having software at all.
That doesn’t mean turning it into an “opaque box” where company interests will be pushed. Having a more user experience oriented design in Linux distros can save a lot of time and frustration as well as make it more attractive to average users. Even power users, who work with Linux professionally will benefit.
And it just might start with something as simple as proper documentation of a package.