Hi Everyone. I'm not sure if I have missed a previous question during search. If someone could point out a dup I would be appreciative... I'm looking for Q&As on civilization and slaves. Can a civilization move from hunter/gatherers into a modern age like industrial without slavery of some form?
The reason I ask is, I'm having trouble reconciling slavery and its prodigious use throughout Earth history, and some of the positions of some of the great philosophers, like Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas.
It would really bother me to learn that economic models say slavery must exist to push through some barriers. It is kind of a touchy subject and I don't want to ask on the main site.
@Hosch250 Yeah, but in terms of great labors, those kind of multi-generation projects are pretty impressive. Probably man-hours in the same order of magnitude as the Great Pyramid, and without a single slave.
@JohnLocke I'm gonna go with "Yes, but we'll joke about it anyway because we're terrible people."
I am new on this site, I asked this question about the logistics of corpse disposal for inspiration on a short story I'm working on. After reading the answers I decided on my own version which involves the mix of both ideas presented in this answer as well as some personal ideas which are not tal...
I possibly would have gone with "don't get your pretzels in a twist", but not for any good reason, and it probably would have been poorer over all for it.
Speaking of poorer over all, did you get my character file?
I'm equally sure I missed a lot of stuff... Mostly give it a once over, looking for stuff I didn't think to do, like "hey, your character might want some shoes."
"You decide to walk to work... and you rolled a 1... you stepped on a nail... you rolled a 1 again... and you have blood poisoning and died."
New England might have some they should look at, but US buildings are, as a general rule, way, way newer, and with the yearly fires out west, most of them are pretty fire-proof anyway, if they lasted this long.
Many places out there only allow you to build with brick because of the fire issue.
@Hosch250 We don't really have any buildings more than 300ish years old in Canada either. As opposed to Europe, where there's a building over five centuries old in every other town.
Yeah, other than history and old-style architecture, though, the US has everything I like. Less restrictions on normal people, and lots and lots of good hiking land--especially out west.
Haha, it's whatever you guys want to do. I will mess with you if you leave me an opening, but I don't want you guys to run characters you don't want to do. :)
But being a decker is both a skill point and $ investment (to get a good deck).
@Gryphon Statistically, Trump has a good chance of winning simply because he's the incumbent. Obama: 2 terms. W: 2 terms. Bill: 2 terms. Bush Sr, one term, but Reagan 2 terms.
If a big part of winning a political race is just getting your name out there, and people familiar with your name... being the president of the United States helps to that end.
Trump has a good chance of winning because the regressive left have drunk their own cool-aid and don't realize that only a very tiny minority want socialism...
@NexTerren That's a bit simplistic. But even on a more detailed analysis, he's got a fairly good chance. He does have to keep Florida, but if he does that, he's got a great chance.
@Gryphon 100% simplicitic, although I meant to be clear I was focusing on just the one aspect (which, I did imply and will stand by, has a strong effect on the outcome)
@AndyD273 Which is why it worries me when she gets called things like the "fresh new face of the Democratic party". In regards to that beverage, I just sorta stuck in everything I thought of in a two-second period.
@Gryphon I think she's a symptom of a deeper sickness. Was watching Tim Pool the other day, and he said something like "historically the role of democrats has been to push the country forward, and the role of republicans has been to keep them from going off of a cliff. The problem is that conservative and moderate voices have been censored and silenced, and all that are left are the fringe wackos with the gas to the floor and the cliff coming up fast."
We're definitely seeing a push on both (all?) sides of the aisle towards the extremes, which is frustrating, because I suspect most people in the US fall somewhere in the middle, rather than on the edges.
@Gryphon Maybe it would be out of place on some other site's starboard, but this is Worldbuilding. Nothing is out of place because everything is out of place.
@Hosch250 I guess I subscribe to the exhausted majority theory. I suspect I lie near one end of that (not a centrist/moderate, but not a winger, either).
@James I've been following him a little. I like his policies, for the most part, and he seems like a good human being. I wonder if he could garner some significant centrist votes in 2020.
Is this a reasonable take/overview on his political views? If so, does he really seem like a centralist to you?
@AndyD273 Assuming today's dollar value of the USD, I'm trying to put a price on a cloned body, with the market demand of being able to insert your mind into the body. How the technology works is entirely up to me. I want them to be restrictive, those in poverty or near poverty not able to afford them. My gut says that "the price to raise a child to 18" would be a good starting point.
As I said, primarily opinion based, would be closed on the main site. :P
To clarify, if you could keep buying bodies this effectively could leave you immortal. That's the value of the technology.
@NexTerren Might not be all that opinion based. Given mature artificial womb tech, growth acceleration, etc, you could probably estimate a cost, then give it a markup. If you just want the price of raising a human child to 18 in the US, that has been studied, and the number is ~$230k.
@NexTerren Might be a bit low, given retirement plans and social security. If you took the balance of your 401k at 65 you'd probably have enough to buy a new body. Just repeat every 50 years or so, the downside being that retiring probably be out of reach for at least 3 or 4 cycles, and you'd probably have to go back to work after a few decades...
Come to think of it, you're probably right in making this non-opinion based, and I wouldn't even have to make the question long.
"This question has the assumption that there exists a technology exists that can provide a person a new, 18-year-old body, effectively allowing immortality if the individual's brain can be recovered. What cost, in USD, for the body would stop most of the middle class (>60%) from being able to make use of this technology?"
Oh, and life insurance. If I get a $1,000,000 policy and get hit by a car, can my widow take my brain and the insurance payout and have me resurrected?
Actually... if say life insurance stops being a thing, or they refuse to pay because you aren't permanently dead, that would exclude a lot of people who die prematurely. I might be able to work 30-40 years and save up $1,000,000 and be able to afford a new body. But if I die early there might not be enough money to make it happen, which would go a ways toward reaching 65%.
Combine that with low skill workers, liberal arts majors, and other people who don't get retirement plans, and 65% is probably pretty easy.
@AndyD273 Knowing what I know about the insurance industry I can virtually guarantee that companies would end up creating a new form of insurance for replacement bodies. We have Life, Health, Dental, Death, Pregnancy, Pet, Electronics and freaking vacation insurance after all...
Life insurance would probably actually get cheaper...since...you know people are less likely to cash in.
Well...so long as it was bundled with new body insurance
@AndyD273 I struggle with answering this question:
Which statement do you agree with more?
People are largely responsible for their own outcomes in life
People’s outcomes in life are determined largely by forces outside of their control
@James or life insurance would actually insure your life (instead of your death), with the idea that you'd get a policy when you're young, and continue to pay them money for the next several centuries...
@James Probably one of those questions you're not supposed to overthink too much. Do you think that people can get ahead if they make wise choices and work hard, or is the driving factor fate and luck?
I'm not who you asked, but if I can offer my opinion, I think the question is too simplified.
Even keeping it decently simplified, I'd say "forces outside your control" create both opportunities and obstacles. Some opportunities are basically dumped in your lap, some obstacles are too great to realistically overcome. The individual is tasked with making use of opportunities and attempting to overcome obstacles.
@James have you heard much on Yang? This interview was interesting. I don't agree with all that he said, but I can respect him for being willing to discuss it
"These days it seems the rights of Black Lives Matter protestors and activists are more protected than the rights of the police."
I feel like there's an implied bit behind this question, and I don't like the implication.
I assume they are saying "Boo protesters, go cops" - Right, "Boo cops, go protesters" - Left. I assume they are not addressing what rights a civilian might have/should have vs the rights a police officer might have/should have.
I feel like this is a bad question...
Or this is... requesting a binary response to an easily non-binary question.
"Which do you agree with more?
The American government is mostly rigged to serve the rich and influential
The American government mostly reflects the will of the American people"
It assumes that the only two conditions are an accurate representation or one manipulated by the rich.
I feel like several of these questions fall in the spirit of the old, "Did you cheat on your wife this week or last week?" without offering "no, I didn't cheat on my wife" as an option.
(Paraphrasing, don't remember exactly how that quesiton goes)
Say that someone (and... there are certainly those with these views) think that "vocal ___s have swayed politics," not assigning it to the rich, and they also don't think politics are accurate of the will of the people.
Which one of the statements do they agree with more, if the don't agree with *either?*
"Do you spend more of your time supporting Nazis, Soviets, or the American Cheese foundation?"
I cannot answer the question, because it's a bad question.
@AndyD273 Cheese is delicious, but my time supporting the American Cheese Foundation, Nazis, and Soviets all tie for 0. I cannot, with a radio-button question, in good faith select any of the three.
I'd have to answer, like you did, "I'm going to intentionally lie in response to this question, and reask myself 'which do you support more?'" The more I have to mutilate the question in my head, the worse of a quesiton it is.
@NexTerren Sure, but if you were one of the far left then it would be an immediate "the rich are immoral". Answering some one way, some the other makes someone a moderate. I have no experience in scientific survey making, and my opinion is invalid.
@AndyD273 that probably was more true in the past than it is today -- we're seeing some pretty nasty effects re: polarization-of-the-job-market (through subcontracting, misclassification, part-time abuse, and the likes). I personally would rather it was more true in some ways, although the other half of that is the lack of credit given to caregiving situations as well...
@NexTerren I think you are spot-on that the question's premise is faulty -- it's assuming that the police are operating from a top-down, authoritarian model, if you will. If you assume that the rights of the police flow from the rights of the people in a more Peelian fashion, (which is I think how it should be), then the question is rather....moot.
The Factory Floor
The Factory Floor