h a l f b a k e r yactual product may differ from illustration
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
MoralJudgementScenario.com
Would you vouch for someone based on what they believe and agree with? This idea is a website where people pose moral quandries and then they say what position they take. Then you can network socially with people who you agree with. You don't want to do things with bad people. | |
A website where scenarios are invented and people decide what is right based on the scenario.
Be matched to people you agree with.
[link]
|
| |
Can you throw down an example? |
|
| |
You have free healthcare and the majority spend is on preventable illnesses such as smoking, alcohol or drug abuse. |
|
| |
On the radio they say these people should pay towards their care. |
|
| |
Another example is that the train drivers and doctors are striking because of inflation and lack of pay, do you think they should be paid more? |
|
| |
I believe that it is best to actively seek out those who hold different opinions from oneself, so as to try and avoid the positive bias or echo-chamber effect. Would you agree? |
|
| |
There are good people with opinions different from mine, and probably also bad people with opinions similar to mine. People with opinions very different from mine include some of my past selves. |
|
| |
Therefore this is a terrible idea. [-] |
|
| |
My beliefs are all perfect. [+] |
|
| |
Beliefs? No. Values? ... maybe. |
|
| |
After friending a host of algorithmically compatible people, there should be a feature to create and share polls that I can use to validate my hypotheses with real-world data |
|
| |
If someone says X and they do X then this can be openly vouched for. |
|
| |
//You have free healthcare and the majority spend is on preventable illnesses such as smoking, alcohol or drug abuse.// |
|
| |
How about taxing the health affecting products enough to cover the additional burden on the healthcare system, making sure there’s a separate designated fund. If it goes into the general fund there’s no accounting and the government branch receiving that money will want to make sure the cash flow doesn’t get cut off, for instance by less people smoking. |
|
| |
//and the majority spend is on preventable illnesses// |
|
| |
I don't remember the primary source, but I think someone calculated that it's actually cheaper for the tax-payer to treat someone for smoking- cancer while they die in their sixties than to treat them for Alzheimers while they die, much more slowly, in their eighties. |
|
| |
Oh no doubt, smoking saves big on Social Security too. |
|
| |
I’m guessing if we ever put AI in charge it’ll be enacting all sorts of surprising “solutions” to the issues we face. I’m guessing you might see stuff that would make Hitler blush. “Meth infused toddler cigarettes, more productivity in their productive years, far fewer unproductive years.” |
|
| |
The idea of taxing bad stuff is sort of a soft prohibition I guess. Good idea? Eh, maybe. |
|
| |