Ah, so we’re just brainstorming.

It’s hard to nail down “no working around it” in a court of law. I’d recommend carbon taxes if you want to incentivise saving energy with policy. Cap and trade is also seen as a gold standard option.

I mean, there’s all kinds of ethical philosophy out there. I don’t really deviate too far from it.

In practice, there’s a lot that most people can agree on without too much thought, too. For example, the classical case study for how being agreeable can work against doing the right thing is how ordinary and nice a lot of Nazis were, when not being ordered into atrocities.

They’re hard to get for anything besides the internet.

Or like quantum systems, in the interpretations that prevent alternate universes. The first kind is called “pseudorandomness” in mathematics.

Usually, when people say free will they don’t just mean that their decisions are random, though.

I’d actually go way higher. The ones that seem nice are the easiest to externally pressure into doing bad things, which counts as being a bad person.

Okay, you can believe what you want, but I should clear something up: Quantum indeterminacy is not free will. It just means that there’s always residual randomness (measured by classical standards) at the smallest scales. Just going by the laws of physics there’s no obvious way for the brain to be more than a meat-based computer.

What about randomness? Most people would say to be random is not to have free will.

Muscle memory is stored in the brain, if you didn’t know that already.

As I hear it described, it doesn’t even make logical sense. A thing is either random, or deterministic. People talk about decisions being motivated by something, but also somehow independent of all exterior things.

People will come back that that lets you off the hook for your misdeeds, but that’s only the case if you believe in retribution for it’s own sake. A version of incapacitation and rehabilitation could make sense against something as devoid of “free will” as a bridge or building, and deterrence only needs the target to be capable of strategy.

To answer the question a slightly different way, in light of the post text: How random the universe is will come down to fundamental physics. The simplest way of interpreting the current state of the art is that the universe is deterministic but branching.

Am I the only one that quite often leaves it at home?

I mean, even their wartime economy is getting questionable. They’re running out of old WWII tanks to refurbish, the cost of rural Siberian lives keeps going up, and revenues keep going down.

Yes. He says whatever he wants, though, and doesn’t worry about it being true.

I’m also starting to think this Hitler guy might have been a bit racist. /s

We wouldn’t like what they have to say, and would pretty quickly move from abusing them out of apathy to abusing them out of malice.

I mean, we have enough trouble being nice to slightly different humans, right?

I feel like this implies never losing is an option. The other players aren’t idiots either, so of course they’re going to prevail a statistically reasonable percent of the time.

(Serious answers are allowed, right?)

Interesting. So it sounds like this is an area with a lot of personal vacation homes? They’re pretty uncommon in general, so I doubt it would change much where I live.

SDF still has a zero blocked/blocked by.

Has anyone else noticed a sudden surge of ads for AI-powered website building tools?

Out of curiosity, how would you define a product for that purpose? It’s pretty easy to tweak a few weights slightly.

IIRC it’s like a half or a third of the population that cheats, when research has been conducted. So, it’s normal in the sense of common. But, like others have said, your reunion people sound like were trying to convince themselves it’s normal in the sense of acceptable. And anecdotally it does tend to be the same people over and over again.

Polyamory is also getting mentioned, but that’s a different thing, and poly people are a couple percent of the population at most with far fewer actually living the lifestyle.