Chinese Courts Rule Companies Cannot Fire Workers Simply to Replace Them With AI - Judges classify AI adoption as a controllable business strategy rather than an unavoidable disruption, shielding employees from automation-driven layoffs
Not really, no. While an ideal utopia might successfully eliminate psychopathy and all related disorders falling under that umbrella, or at the very least totally prevent its affects on society, we are not in that ideal utopia and likely won’t reach there as we don’t know what genetics precisely cause it (mainly because rich people do not contribute DNA for research.)
Until we can either safeguard society from its affects or eliminate that particular defect from humanity, whichever is possible, we cannot eliminate capital punishment. There will always be another day, and normal humans are quick to forget and forgive, not to mention just be miseducated on the subject. Just see the deification of figures like Henry Ford, Ted Bundy, or Henry Kissinger for examples. While all but the last had their reputation resurrected long after their death, Kissinger shows this reputation can be changed or hidden from the masses in real time during their lifetime.
Life imprisonment then becomes a Sword of Damocles instead of a solution for these people that objectively, by all current scientific research, cannot physically change what they are or how they think and act. Eventually that Sword will fall, the public will forget, forgive, or be misled about their crimes, and they and their fans and enablers will be free to do their crimes again.
I agree capital punishment is not ideal, no state should have that power, but then again there shouldn’t be states, period; but as there are and we have to live until there’s not… we must have a solution for those that harm masses of workers.
That solution is their crimes being laid bare, a public representative lawyer having every chance to defend them fairly, and a jury panel of either judges or the public deciding their fate; allowing the state to execute the will of the people before the people take matters into their own hands — which is another point to be made; These people will die if they continue their crimes. The people will enact justice with or without the state, and for all the reasons above imprisonment is not seen as justice to those wronged badly enough.
It is much better to have a system handling this than relying on heroes like Luigi Mangione, may his innocence be held up in court, to handle what needs to be handled.
Find a better solution to permanently disabling the power of a person who feels no shame or empathy and who has harmed, in most cases thousands to millions of people; then talk.
Well you can disagree, but just know that there isn’t a single human right’s agency that advocates for capital punishment and you will be consider a human rights violator for supporting it.
I think a choice between life imprisonment and capital punishment is a false dilemma.
Most human rights agencies were started by “ex” US intelligence members. That’s a true fact btw, really weird fact, but true. That aside no human rights have ever been won nor retained without violence against those withhold and oppressing those rights.
Ever.
While we can always acknowledge all enforcement of laws is violence, some violence is not effective enough to ensure the safety of the people. Certainly not all or even most cases, but in a few cases there is no rehabilitation. There is no recovery. There is no chance the individual ever actually sees what they did as wrong.
And that’s unfortunate. And I would sincerely love to see the utopia in which you dream of, but there would need to be incredible amounts of violence to ever get there, and I don’t think you or other anti-capital punishment advocates have that in you.
Ah yes, human rights is an imperialist conspiracy. Spoken like a true apologist to human rights violations.
Also, the only way to rights is violence? Let’s just say your worldview of death and destruction is incompatible with human rights in general. I do understand your opinion is quite common.
There is a way forward, but committing mass murder and hoping your ideology will rise from the ashes is pretty farcical.
I don’t advocate for a utopia rather incremental positive changes to improve all of our lives.
Mass murder is not what’s happening; but your world view is quite common and naive among young aspiring liberals wanting to ignore the violence inherent in your very existence.
You are not unique for wanting incremental peaceful changes. Everyone goes through that phase. Then you start reading history, and theory. Or worse, you actually try to put your ideals into practice and are met with violence that you don’t realize your ideals cannot overcome.
If the world were sunshine and rainbows and not ruled over by pedophiles that literally eat children and flagrantly kill anyone who’s a threat to their power your ideal would be great. Fantastic even. But your ideal is not one born of education or experience. It is born from the lack thereof.
In the real world, the one in which we live, the one in which you know someone (1 in 4 in the US) who has been a victim of Police Violence, the one in which you have met someone (1 in 3 globally) has been a victim of the US Military Industrial Empire, the one in which the leaders of the ‘democratic peaceful free world’ are literally all pedophiliac cannibals, the one in which literally every aspect of your privileged little life comes at the direct cost of a child in Africa or South America or India suffering, violence has to happen.
If we really want to delve into Theory, violence is inherent in the concept of society. Restraining someone is violence, it is a violent act. It is the least violent act that can be taken when they do not agree with your imposed social contract of sunshine and puppies, but it is still violence.
There is no possible way to get to a world without violence, without instituting a hive mind (i.e. eliminating society), Eugenics, or otherwise magically curing the human condition itself. Every possible society will have some violence, because there will always in any evolving society be those that go against what the current Social Contract is. Always. Sometimes for good, sometimes for evil, but there will never be a world where everyone is content — mainly because contentedness means stagnation and we are unlikely to ever be ‘fully’ socially evolved as to call for stagnation. There will always be better to strive for;
But that evolution cannot happen if those with the power and all the capability for violence intentionally stop progress because it hurts their personal progress towards being wealthy. It cannot happen if, with every breath and step we must keep handling those that are against the concept of society with kids’ gloves and pretending they can ever change.
All current science points to the existence of those whom physically cannot understand empathy. They lack the parts of their brain that allow for that. And without empathy, there cannot be society, much less a violence-free society that you and every other real human so desperately wants.
Since Eugenics is bad, and since Mass Murder is bad; that leaves us with the current system — when those with this defect show they have no self control and abuse this defect of theirs to harm the rest of society, we put them down. Education cannot work; and they have nothing in their head stopping them from lying about being rehabilitated, and we have no such technology (and never should) to read minds and figure out if they’re being honest. So the only safe route for all of us, all the real people with empathy to live, is for those that cannot even fake being one of us to die.
The alternative is human history, and one really doesn’t need to look far in human history to understand why we cannot have repeat episodes.
Oh mass murder is definitely happening, sometimes deliberate, and sometimes as an externality. I was insinuating you were suggesting mass murder to create social change. If I was wrong, I apologize.
I have not met many people capable of the nuance it takes to see incremental changes as a primary way to seek positive change. Most people advocate for violence because that can’t see a way forward and would be frustrated by small changes that would not immediately realize their goal. I think it is human nature to want to see immediate change, but that is perhaps not the best way to move society forward.
The world is not just sunshine and rainbows, but it is also not just pedophiles and baby eaters. It is a messed up mix of a lot of things for sure and I totally get your frustration. Our thinking is often framed by our experiences and what we have learned. This can often limit us to coming up with solutions to our problems.
I truly believe there are several correct ways to handle any situation and there are many possibilities we have not even thought of yet. While I am optimistic it is not because I lack an understanding of the horrors we face everyday. I like to think of myself as an optimistic realist, if that makes any sense.
I am very aware of the US’s many human rights violations not just against the world, but also their own citizens. It is not just police brutality either, the US locks up 20% of the entire world’s prison population, but has only 5% of the entire world’s population. Obviously something is very wrong when 1/3 of US males have a criminal record with a heavy leaning towards minority imprisonment.
I reject blaming the average US citizen for the suffering around the world when they suffer themselves. I know personally several people who have been shot and killed and also know dozens who have died of overdose. While my life may seem privileged compared to others around the world happenstance is not a reason to blame people for the world’s problems. Not only that, it is a poor way to connect with people and convince them of your cause.
I think you correctly identify greed and callousness as the primary causes of human suffering. I would also agree in a limited way that there are a lot of sociopathic people who call the shots so to speak. In the US this because Americans worship greed, power, and control. These ideals lead to the questionable results we get.
I think you have some serious bloodlust going on and I would examine this part of yourself more carefully. I do not agree the only solution is to clean the world of people you see as bad. This seems to be the very trappings you rail against.
Not really, no. While an ideal utopia might successfully eliminate psychopathy and all related disorders falling under that umbrella, or at the very least totally prevent its affects on society, we are not in that ideal utopia and likely won’t reach there as we don’t know what genetics precisely cause it (mainly because rich people do not contribute DNA for research.)
Until we can either safeguard society from its affects or eliminate that particular defect from humanity, whichever is possible, we cannot eliminate capital punishment. There will always be another day, and normal humans are quick to forget and forgive, not to mention just be miseducated on the subject. Just see the deification of figures like Henry Ford, Ted Bundy, or Henry Kissinger for examples. While all but the last had their reputation resurrected long after their death, Kissinger shows this reputation can be changed or hidden from the masses in real time during their lifetime.
Life imprisonment then becomes a Sword of Damocles instead of a solution for these people that objectively, by all current scientific research, cannot physically change what they are or how they think and act. Eventually that Sword will fall, the public will forget, forgive, or be misled about their crimes, and they and their fans and enablers will be free to do their crimes again.
I agree capital punishment is not ideal, no state should have that power, but then again there shouldn’t be states, period; but as there are and we have to live until there’s not… we must have a solution for those that harm masses of workers.
That solution is their crimes being laid bare, a public representative lawyer having every chance to defend them fairly, and a jury panel of either judges or the public deciding their fate; allowing the state to execute the will of the people before the people take matters into their own hands — which is another point to be made; These people will die if they continue their crimes. The people will enact justice with or without the state, and for all the reasons above imprisonment is not seen as justice to those wronged badly enough.
It is much better to have a system handling this than relying on heroes like Luigi Mangione, may his innocence be held up in court, to handle what needs to be handled.
Capital punishment is a barbaric practice that can not be justified by hiding it behind a jury.
Find a better solution to permanently disabling the power of a person who feels no shame or empathy and who has harmed, in most cases thousands to millions of people; then talk.
Well you can disagree, but just know that there isn’t a single human right’s agency that advocates for capital punishment and you will be consider a human rights violator for supporting it.
I think a choice between life imprisonment and capital punishment is a false dilemma.
Most human rights agencies were started by “ex” US intelligence members. That’s a true fact btw, really weird fact, but true. That aside no human rights have ever been won nor retained without violence against those withhold and oppressing those rights.
Ever.
While we can always acknowledge all enforcement of laws is violence, some violence is not effective enough to ensure the safety of the people. Certainly not all or even most cases, but in a few cases there is no rehabilitation. There is no recovery. There is no chance the individual ever actually sees what they did as wrong.
And that’s unfortunate. And I would sincerely love to see the utopia in which you dream of, but there would need to be incredible amounts of violence to ever get there, and I don’t think you or other anti-capital punishment advocates have that in you.
Ah yes, human rights is an imperialist conspiracy. Spoken like a true apologist to human rights violations.
Also, the only way to rights is violence? Let’s just say your worldview of death and destruction is incompatible with human rights in general. I do understand your opinion is quite common.
There is a way forward, but committing mass murder and hoping your ideology will rise from the ashes is pretty farcical.
I don’t advocate for a utopia rather incremental positive changes to improve all of our lives.
Mass murder is not what’s happening; but your world view is quite common and naive among young aspiring liberals wanting to ignore the violence inherent in your very existence.
You are not unique for wanting incremental peaceful changes. Everyone goes through that phase. Then you start reading history, and theory. Or worse, you actually try to put your ideals into practice and are met with violence that you don’t realize your ideals cannot overcome.
If the world were sunshine and rainbows and not ruled over by pedophiles that literally eat children and flagrantly kill anyone who’s a threat to their power your ideal would be great. Fantastic even. But your ideal is not one born of education or experience. It is born from the lack thereof.
In the real world, the one in which we live, the one in which you know someone (1 in 4 in the US) who has been a victim of Police Violence, the one in which you have met someone (1 in 3 globally) has been a victim of the US Military Industrial Empire, the one in which the leaders of the ‘democratic peaceful free world’ are literally all pedophiliac cannibals, the one in which literally every aspect of your privileged little life comes at the direct cost of a child in Africa or South America or India suffering, violence has to happen.
If we really want to delve into Theory, violence is inherent in the concept of society. Restraining someone is violence, it is a violent act. It is the least violent act that can be taken when they do not agree with your imposed social contract of sunshine and puppies, but it is still violence.
There is no possible way to get to a world without violence, without instituting a hive mind (i.e. eliminating society), Eugenics, or otherwise magically curing the human condition itself. Every possible society will have some violence, because there will always in any evolving society be those that go against what the current Social Contract is. Always. Sometimes for good, sometimes for evil, but there will never be a world where everyone is content — mainly because contentedness means stagnation and we are unlikely to ever be ‘fully’ socially evolved as to call for stagnation. There will always be better to strive for;
But that evolution cannot happen if those with the power and all the capability for violence intentionally stop progress because it hurts their personal progress towards being wealthy. It cannot happen if, with every breath and step we must keep handling those that are against the concept of society with kids’ gloves and pretending they can ever change.
All current science points to the existence of those whom physically cannot understand empathy. They lack the parts of their brain that allow for that. And without empathy, there cannot be society, much less a violence-free society that you and every other real human so desperately wants.
Since Eugenics is bad, and since Mass Murder is bad; that leaves us with the current system — when those with this defect show they have no self control and abuse this defect of theirs to harm the rest of society, we put them down. Education cannot work; and they have nothing in their head stopping them from lying about being rehabilitated, and we have no such technology (and never should) to read minds and figure out if they’re being honest. So the only safe route for all of us, all the real people with empathy to live, is for those that cannot even fake being one of us to die.
The alternative is human history, and one really doesn’t need to look far in human history to understand why we cannot have repeat episodes.
Oh mass murder is definitely happening, sometimes deliberate, and sometimes as an externality. I was insinuating you were suggesting mass murder to create social change. If I was wrong, I apologize.
I have not met many people capable of the nuance it takes to see incremental changes as a primary way to seek positive change. Most people advocate for violence because that can’t see a way forward and would be frustrated by small changes that would not immediately realize their goal. I think it is human nature to want to see immediate change, but that is perhaps not the best way to move society forward.
The world is not just sunshine and rainbows, but it is also not just pedophiles and baby eaters. It is a messed up mix of a lot of things for sure and I totally get your frustration. Our thinking is often framed by our experiences and what we have learned. This can often limit us to coming up with solutions to our problems.
I truly believe there are several correct ways to handle any situation and there are many possibilities we have not even thought of yet. While I am optimistic it is not because I lack an understanding of the horrors we face everyday. I like to think of myself as an optimistic realist, if that makes any sense.
I am very aware of the US’s many human rights violations not just against the world, but also their own citizens. It is not just police brutality either, the US locks up 20% of the entire world’s prison population, but has only 5% of the entire world’s population. Obviously something is very wrong when 1/3 of US males have a criminal record with a heavy leaning towards minority imprisonment.
I reject blaming the average US citizen for the suffering around the world when they suffer themselves. I know personally several people who have been shot and killed and also know dozens who have died of overdose. While my life may seem privileged compared to others around the world happenstance is not a reason to blame people for the world’s problems. Not only that, it is a poor way to connect with people and convince them of your cause.
I think you correctly identify greed and callousness as the primary causes of human suffering. I would also agree in a limited way that there are a lot of sociopathic people who call the shots so to speak. In the US this because Americans worship greed, power, and control. These ideals lead to the questionable results we get.
I think you have some serious bloodlust going on and I would examine this part of yourself more carefully. I do not agree the only solution is to clean the world of people you see as bad. This seems to be the very trappings you rail against.