this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2024
214 points (95.0% liked)
Games
16651 readers
718 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Measles hangs out in the air for like two hours. https://www.cdc.gov/measles/causes/index.html . You'd be dangerous on the sidewalks and in the parks, and extremely dangerous in any indoor space.
The freedom to cause an outbreak is not a particularly valuable freedom. The freedom to live life because there's not another measles outbreak is.
"My personal freedom is more important than yours and your safety" is being a huge asshole, and society has no obligation to support that behavior.
Your freedom to make stupid decisions will often clash with other people's freedom to live. Your individual freedom is less important than everyone else's freedom to be safe from measles.
Furthermore, with seatbelts, I'm a stakeholder in your ass not flying through the window and dying. I pay in various ways for your health care, and I lose out when you die. When you hurt yourself, you hurt everyone.
The nuance and where we disagree is where that line is. "You wasted your money on a shit video game" for me is on the "that's small enough to not worry about" side. Vaccinations, helmets, seatbelts, those have low costs for the individual and large benefits for society.
I 100% agree. That's why the rest of us take vaccines to protect ourselves and the ones we love from diseases like this, and those with particular sensitivities (esp. those that cannot use vaccines) take added measures to protect themselves. That's personal responsibility 101. Enough of us choose to get the measles vaccine that measles isn't a significant concern anymore.
I think living life w/o getting vaccinated should be possible, but far from convenient. I think you should pay extra for insurance, have to home-school your kids, and not be able to use airplanes, trains, etc. If you spread a disease and it can be traced back to you, you should be charged with criminal negligence and perhaps a few other crimes. If you get locked up, I think forced vaccination should absolutely be on the table (alternative being some kind of body suit to protect guards and other inmates from you, at your expense), unless there's a private prison that'll take you that doesn't require vaccination.
But a law forcing me to put anything into my body will always be immoral, regardless of the intention, because the ends absolutely do not justify the means.
And you should not. If I am killed or seriously injured due to not wearing a seatbelt, that should invalidate any kind of public payment, and I think certain private payments could reasonably be reduced as well (e.g. auto insurance may limit medical coverage if safety equipment wasn't properly used). Making stupid choices should have consequences for the person making those stupid choices.
I think you're overstating the benefits for society. If I don't wear a helmet and die, how does that realistically hurt society? Public benefits and whatnot can absolutely be limited due to negligence. Vaccines are more interesting, but again, I think it's not really an issue in practice because most people get them, and we can also allow insurance premiums to skyrocket for those who choose not to.
I am totally on-board with limiting protections for people who make stupid choices, but I am not on-board with banning the stupid choices entirely. Make the stupid choices less attractive, but don't threaten jail time or whatever.
If it's not a mandate, people will "choose" not to do it, and then people will suffer and die. There are some things, like vaccines, that the cost:benefit is extremely clear.
Sucks for the kids. Also how are you going to enforce that? An ankle bracelet? How are you going to make whole the people harmed by someone decides their personal freedom is the only freedom that matters?
Sucks for the other prisoners who get measles because the private prison didn't want to pay for vaccines.
I do not accept this axiom.
I'm not talking about literal financial transactions. When you die because you didn't wear a helmet, I lose out on the investment in you. All those years of education, gone. Any job training you had? In the trash. Your mother taking off work to grieve? Ripples of suck spreading through society.
Presumably you live in a society with people who care about you. If the lead front eng at work died, the project is going to be delayed, we're all going to be unhappy, we have to ramp someone up. The whole company could fail as a result.
That's not even counting the non-work connections.
Things are connected. Someone dying or being seriously injured is a big rock to drop in the pond, and those ripples affect many people. It's not just money stuff. It's also social and opportunity costs.
Yes, that's one of the consequences of stupid choices. The point for a society to figure out is how to contain those consequences to those who made a stupid choice.
The same way we did it during the COVID-19 pandemic, send proof of vaccination to your insurance, airlines, etc. I did that when visiting Canada by car, and people did it when taking airplanes for travel. It worked fine. It's a little more complicated when the number of vaccinations goes up, but if a company like an airline really cares about it, they can set the parameters for how you can prove it. Then its up to customers to decide whether that process is worth doing, or if they'll just use a competitor.
But the fact is, many businesses won't bother unless it's really important, like if there's a breakout or something of a specific disease.
Prisoners should be able to refuse to go to a private prison and the state should accommodate that.
Sure, and that's why safety equipment and preventative medicine is so important. But at the end of the day, it's my life to throw away, and nobody else has any valid claim to my education, abilities, etc. Someone who cares about those around them will take the necessary precautions to preserve their life for the benefit of those around them, but that decision should remain theirs.
The only time I think it's valid to step in and override someone's choice is if that choice was not made with a clear conscience.
I do not accept we need measles and polio outbreaks so casually.
So you accept that there's not going to be vaccine checking at every bar, hotel, movie theater, museum, etc because that's impractical. Also a privacy nightmare. But if you're not making people get vaccinated then you're just asking for an outbreak. And now people who are worried about that (eg: immunocompromised people, the elderly), their freedom is massively curtailed.
Prisoners are not typically high on the list of people whose rights and dignity are respected. Especially not when profit is to be made. Your position is wildly unrealistic.
Disagree. Society has an interest in your well being. I also do not accept that the individual is the most important thing, and their desires are paramount. You probably also don't, at least in some cases, unless you think people should be able to shit everywhere they want and set off dirty bombs for fun in urban areas.
Additionally, if you decide to not wear a bike helmet, get in an accident with me, and then die because your bare skull hit the concrete, then you've inflicted that trauma on me. Thanks. I would like to be free of that.
I think our axioms are too different for us to easily have a meaningful conversation. I view your position as fundamentally selfish and too focused on the individual. The supremacy of individual freedom above all else is no way to build a society. I accept that you likely have a fundamental, perhaps visceral, rejection of my worldview.
I also would like to add that there are probably things we do agree on, and I appreciate you taking the time to write all of these replies. I don't think I have it in me to keep going, though.
Yes, it's impractical, but I don't think it's necessarily a privacy nightmare. It would be easy to build an app that merely confirms whether a given vaccine has been taken (esp useful in a pandemic), without revealing any other info. The issue is getting doctors and stores to use it. But if there's enough demand, it would happen.
The more likely scenario is what we already have: core services like public schools would require vax info when you register.
How so? It's exactly what we're doing now, and outbreaks are rare and very localized. It turns out the quiet majority finds value in vaccines.
What we should be working on is increasing access to vaccines. It's currently pretty good, but it can be expensive depending on your insurance (or lack thereof). If we want more people vaxxed, the easiest way to do that is to make it free and available at any pharmacy, just like with COVID.
And that should absolutely change. I hate pretty much everything about our criminal justice system, and one of my big ticket items is giving prisoners more choice in their incarceration.
I obviously don't have any power to enact any of the changes I've discussed, but if I could pick one, it would be prisons. I think we should:
That should transition prisons to specialized rehab centers instead of just places to keep people, which should result in lower overall prison population. Traditional prisons would exist for the truly dangerous criminals, but others would have options.
Your rights end where mine begin. Those two you mentioned directly impact others and thus aren't moral.
The small possibility of me dying in front of you does not, by itself, cause you any harm. The possibility of trauma is not itself a violation of your rights. I could understand me slaughtering animals in public being an issue, but the mere chance of me getting seriously or fatally injured in public isn't one.
And you'd be right, both on this point and on the point of us agreeing on a ton of things. However, those aren't what we're talking about, but I'll list a few just in case you're curious:
All of this comes from a place of putting individual rights first, but it's entirely reasonable to arrive there by other means.
Anyway, I hope you have a fantastic day. I'm sure we both share similar frustrations, we just have different limits on what we're willing to do to address them.