Kill death ratio - or rather, kill save ratio - would be rather difficult to obtain and more difficult still to appreciate and be able to say if it is good or bad based solely on the ratio.

Fritz Haber is one example of this that comes to mind. Awarded a Nobel Prize a century ago for chemistry developments in fertilizer, used today in a quarter of food growth. A decade or so later he weaponized chlorine gas, and his work was later used in the creation of Zyklon B.

By ratio, Haber is surely a hero, but when considering the sheer numbers of the dead left in his wake, it is a more complex question.

This is one of those things that makes me almost hope for an afterlife where all information is available from which truth may be derived. Who shot JFK? How did the pyramids get built? If life’s biggest answer is forty-two, what is the question?

Technically speaking

This joke is the first thing I thought of when I saw the headline.

I’m adding this to the list of things that I would have used if not for learning about it from a shutdown announcement.

I disagree they are bozos. I’m actually coming around on the idea. Not the mirror thing of course, but the VC grift using a flashy idea. Millions of dollars and the only thing you make is a slideshow? Brilliant.

This reminds me of the venetian shade idea. ‘Trillions of dollars’ hahaha okay let’s see who wants to pitch in.

Could you elaborate on this comment?

Oh I didn’t mean ‘end of the line’ to come off as though I have experience in the food industry. I’ve worked in waste disposal at end point facilities and have seen all what the grocers toss away on a daily basis.

Thousands of apples rolling out of a truck is a surreal sight. It looks like a physics simulation on a high end computer. The first few times I almost found myself in awe. At least until I remembered where it was happening.

Don’t get me wrong, most organic waste being disposed of was spoiled, but a truck or two a day of edible food was typical.

Progress is being made. I’ve been smacking coconuts together these past couple days.

Unfortunately, I have experience at the end of the line so to speak, and the number of trucks disposing of otherwise edible food is disheartening. Not to discount your experience of course, but not seeing it happen doesn’t mean it isn’t happening elsewhere.

Seems to me the misunderstanding was my joke being interpreted as an opening to a semantics debate when it was merely an offhand remark loosely connected to the subject matter of this post.

However I’ve checked the clock just now and it does appear to be minutiae time.

I don’t consider the literal tale of Theseus to be the only point of valid argument when invoking his name. Had the man returned with 85% of the ship boards replaced, the same philosophical argument about the ship not returning with him could be had.

Mentioning his name in relation to an issue communicates a concept. Similar to a child suddenly spouting a detailed piece of factual information being called Einstein. The concept being communicated is that Einstein was a genius, not that he was a mathematician.

To frame this with an analogy, when I’m at the grocers looking for salted peanuts, I go to the section where I also find almonds, hazelnuts, and pistachios. I wouldn’t berate management if I couldn’t find them around the chickpeas and lentils.

Oh, would you look at the time.

Interesting viewpoint. I disagree the Theseus argument requires total replacement, but that’s minutiae not worth getting into at the minute.

I always considered the more complex question of the thought experiment not being if the whole is different when the components are replaced, but when that change would occur if you assume change occurs in the first place.

Difficult to think about. I might need a bigger brain.

I’m aware of Penrose and his position relative to Hawking.

When I wrote psychologists or philosophers, note I didn’t write psychologist or philosopher. It’s great work Penrose did to be sure, but I’d prefer not to rely on a foundation of thought laid by a single mind, no matter their intellect or dedication to science.

With respect to you, I made a quick joke about whether human rights would be applied to cyborgs in the future, I was not questioning the fundamental nature of what it is to be.

Though it should be, donating like this is not mainstream. It’s logistically cheaper to fill the dumpster than to haul it to a food bank.

The thought of wrapping a banana with lettuce as a snack is quite funny to me.

Physicists are often pointed to as the ‘smartest’ among us, yet when they turn to other fields, their genius isn’t always transferable. I personally would prefer psychologists or philosophers to determine what is consciousness.

Also, I wasn’t suggesting we replicate consciousness. I was touching on whether a human is still a human if, to put it extremely, neck down is machinery instead of biology. I might be okay with a Wall-e body.

Wouldn’t it be nice to just support human rights? The one thing all of these groups have in common is their humanhood.

Well at least until we reach a ‘body of Theseus’ point in technological augmentation. Then we may need to rebrand ‘human rights’ to ‘consciousness rights’ or something more catchy.

You’d have to be in a tight spot to be fired and replaced to accept being rehired even at the same salary, never mind a smaller salary. I feel bad for these people. Hopefully they work a bit slower in proportion to the reduced pay.

I was wondering what you were referring to as ‘they’, so I reread my comment and it occurs to me I should have worded it, ‘a course on governmental collapse, taught in European universities.’

Hopefully that’s clarifying.

It’s quite surreal to live through what will one day be a course on governmental collapse in Europe.

Oh I agree, and I didn’t mean it to come off as some realistic plan. I don’t know any teachers that would leave the profession either. I’m not even suggesting that a significant amount of teachers would leave under the circumstances the ATA finds themselves.

I’m only saying that I would leave if pressed into these circumstances. ‘Teaching’ doesn’t necessarily mean working at an elementary or secondary school. It would of course be an emotional transition to make, but loyalty to individual students - or even a specific school - and loyalty to the concept of imparting knowledge are different forms of loyalty.

Alberta has been successful in bringing more people - students among them - to live in the province. Unfortunately, not much has been done to prepare for an increasing population. Specific to teaching, this can be seen in classroom sizes ballooning out of control. Not only is compensation inadequate for the additional responsibility of handling more students, but now the quality of the education the students receive is diminished.

Even as a cog, I couldn’t be loyal to a machine that permits this to happen when the solutions to these problems are so obvious.

I didn’t mean for this to be so long, it just really bothers me when society treats teachers like third class citizens while also entrusting our children to their care.