• lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      14 days ago

      i am on the record as saying that nobody “deserves” to die, but i can get behind a noble sacrifice in the name of scientific advancement.

      • ayyy@sh.itjust.worksBanned
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        14 days ago

        Someone responsible for the deaths of millions of people (remember USAID?) deserves to die.

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          14 days ago

          i will continue disagreeing. i think they need to see the damage first hand. they deserve to be stripped of power and fame, prevented from ever gaining it back, and permanently marked to live in misery for the rest of their lives.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        I would argue people deserve to die if they’re sufficient net negative to society. I believe Musk is one of these, as are most, if not all, seriel killers. The issue is determining who these people are, which we won’t all agree on. I don’t think the state should have this power because they get it wrong too often (and also I think their incentives are usually wrong and they benefit from protecting the wealthy).

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 days ago

          i woulh rather they be made to personally deal with all the consequences of their actions. do unto others. death is easy, but making these people grasp what they have done is hard.

          unfortunately there’s no real way to do that.

          not believing anyone deserves to die doesn’t mean i don’t approve.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Completely unrelated question, how long has it been since the last time we had a vivisection?

  • brownsugga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    14 days ago

    How rich does someone have to be before their physical body is torn to shreds in front of a cheering crowd? Purely theoretical question

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      Depends on how powerful they are.

      I’m sure millions of Ukrainians would love to tear billionaire Putin to shreds, they just can’t get at him.

  • MrSelatcia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    14 days ago

    The other monkeys would kill the hoarding monkey and take his bananas. Maybe the monkeys have it figured out.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 days ago

      Eat and masturbate all day

      Sleep in a tree

      Occasionally violently murder others causing you distress

      Yeah, I think they have it pretty figured out. We fucked it up

    • MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 days ago

      With humans, the monkeys with atleast one banana defend the banana hoarder because they want to kill the starving monkeys.

  • veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    14 days ago

    I like the video of researchers experimenting on social behavior in monkeys where they gave one monkey a banana who was happy until they gave another monkey a cherry in view of the first. That first monkey lost his shit and started screaming at the researcher by being visibly frustrated in his cage.

    That’s us, except we are losing our bananas, while the other one is getting the entire cherry orchid.

  • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 days ago

    It’s good to know we learned the obvious and valuable lesson Howard Hughes and the dangers of concentrated wealth have taught us multiple times over throughout the past, because it would be really fucking stupid for the world to repeatedly enable that exact same situation over and over again, that would be really disappointing.

  • tristan@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    I mean, in the simplistic case of monkeys, this doesn’t work because the other monkeys starve, which is a failure as a species.

    The monkey would have to hoard just enough bananas that the other monkeys can still barely their basic desires, while keeping them hungry for more and letting them believe they could one day be like you and get as many bananas by working their way up an imaginary hierarchy, where the way to go up is to fuck over other monkeys and get you as many bananas as they can, while you give them the minimum possible share.

  • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    Bananas are perishable, so yeah it’s kinda dumb to hoard them unless you are planning to bake a lot of banana bread. Mmmmm banana bread!

  • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    i like her argument and all but…

    now that elon-monkey is here, she-monkey should tell them other monkeys where those scientists should be~

    • TheBloodFarts@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 days ago

      Owning 1.3T of anything is a hoard by definition. I would be surprised if anyone at any time in history has ever owned a trillion of anything

      • krisevol@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        So no one is own to own a company? Because that is all his wealth. It’s stock shares.

            • klankin@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              14 days ago

              Genuinely asking what’s the difference?

              Like sure liquid $1T would be insane for one person to have, but a $1T company is equally as insane

              • qaz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                14 days ago

                It’s not as insane because there is a significant difference between liquid and illiquid assets in how these can affect the world. However, regardless of how it compares, people owning more than a billion is one more sign our global economic system is very broken (and trillion even more so).

              • krisevol@lemmus.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 days ago

                A 1 trillion company trading at 350 p/e tells you everything you need to know about how liquid the market would be if he tried to sell it all

            • Phantaloons@piefed.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              14 days ago

              it’s crazy to have 1.3T dollars

              somehow =

              it’s crazy to own a business

              what a fucking idiot

            • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              I didn’t say that. I said nobody should have that much wealth. If the business is worth that much, no one person should own that large of a stake in it because it’s apparently a very important business.