Why is this complicated? Seriously. Disapproval, Shaming, Ridiculing in response to an attempted theft or fraud vs. Disapproval Shaming, Ridiculing in response to covering an attempted theft or fraud. Now, for some reason, it’s floating around, as DSR is a universal vs a particular: in other words, shaming people for a crime rather than for not letting them commit a crime.
Theme: Responsibility
-
Why is this Complicated? Seirously?
Why is this complicated? Seriously. Disapproval, Shaming, Ridiculing in response to an attempted theft or fraud vs. Disapproval Shaming, Ridiculing in response to covering an attempted theft or fraud. Now, for some reason, it’s floating around, as DSR is a universal vs a particular: in other words, shaming people for a crime rather than for not letting them commit a crime.
-
enough of us must take responsibility such that we act to bring it about.
I started out as a scientist performing research. I evolved into a jurist writing the law. Because of those efforts I wrote down the unwritten philosophy of the west. In doing so I advocate a set of possible choices that we would call a theory of politics today or a philosophy in yesteryear. I have an opinion in the construction of a system of education we call a religion within all of the above. To achieve them I use an ideology to market the set of solutions. So I have produced a complete system of thought entirely in the western group strategy captured in our law, which is our philosophy. But it is not a trivial system. It is a recipe for action. Not one of detachment that like all others limits our responsibility. Just the opposite. To obtain it enough of us must take responsibility such that we act to bring it about.
-
enough of us must take responsibility such that we act to bring it about.
I started out as a scientist performing research. I evolved into a jurist writing the law. Because of those efforts I wrote down the unwritten philosophy of the west. In doing so I advocate a set of possible choices that we would call a theory of politics today or a philosophy in yesteryear. I have an opinion in the construction of a system of education we call a religion within all of the above. To achieve them I use an ideology to market the set of solutions. So I have produced a complete system of thought entirely in the western group strategy captured in our law, which is our philosophy. But it is not a trivial system. It is a recipe for action. Not one of detachment that like all others limits our responsibility. Just the opposite. To obtain it enough of us must take responsibility such that we act to bring it about.
-
No. Children < Pets < Domesticated < Predatory <-Pests <- Non-predatory. You can
No. Children < Pets < Domesticated < Predatory <-Pests <- Non-predatory. You can’t hurt them, or kill them, unless they violate the constraints we place on pets and domesticated animals (a danger to humans) but that’s NEGATIVE rights of humans not POSITIVE rights of animals/AI.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 21:24:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059919369457885188
Reply addressees: @KialoHQ
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059856218389393408
IN REPLY TO:
@Kialo
Should human rights only apply to humans? A humanoid with strong AI could think and act like a human – but does that mean it should have the same rights? Join the debate on Kialo and have your say!https://t.co/kXP28kFkOl
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059856218389393408
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/45461930_10156760583642264_131125817
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/45461930_10156760583642264_1311258179803283456_n_10156760583637264.jpg NO. ANIMALS AND AI’S DON”T HAVE AND CAN’T HAVE RIGHTS. WE ENACT NEGATIVE RIGHTS TO PROTECT THEM.Martin ŠtěpánAnimals are welcome to create rights for themselves, provided they can create a militia to protect them. I’m not too eager to say the same about AI, still a bit worried about phenotypical replacement.Nov 6, 2018, 4:33 PMWilliam J MullenThat “you can’t hurt them or kill them unless…” implies that they possess negative rights. Because they have no such rights, we can kill them with impunity, except to the extent that they are property and protected by the property rights of their owners.Nov 6, 2018, 4:34 PMCurt DoolittleThey can’t possess anything. we constrain each other, not them.Nov 6, 2018, 4:49 PMCurt Doolittlehence the importance of operational language and avoiding the verb to be, since it is literally impossible for a child, ai, pet, or domesticated animal to enter into a voluntary contract.Nov 6, 2018, 4:49 PMDaniel PerazaDoes this applies to females too,curt?Nov 6, 2018, 5:21 PMAnne SummersDoes anyone have rights outside of what the observer fails to or chooses not to challenge?Nov 6, 2018, 5:49 PMCurt Doolittleoh stop… lolzNov 6, 2018, 6:10 PMMarra McKinneyShouldn’t we protect endangered animals such as elephants and tigers from being killed by kneegroes and street shitting Indians? Tigers have killed plenty of Indians which I encourage.
I would rather have less subhumans and more animal diversity ie large mammals on land and ocean.
Diversity in wildlife is the only diversity I’d like to keep.Nov 6, 2018, 7:58 PMMatt TempleNature recognizes no rights. Rights are a purely human concept. Therefor animals have no rights.Nov 7, 2018, 4:32 AMNO. ANIMALS AND AI’S DON”T HAVE AND CAN’T HAVE RIGHTS. WE ENACT NEGATIVE RIGHTS TO PROTECT THEM.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-06 16:25:00 UTC
-
Well, all debts that aren’t enforcible are perceived. that’s what morality consi
–Well, all debts that aren’t enforcible are perceived. that’s what morality consists in.– CD
–“I hear you though , debt placement is the difference you are going for?
So when you pray you’re placing the debt on your own shoulders, cast a spell you are accounting for it.
And also the difference is one was made legal by the church and one was made illegal by the church…..also most spellshapers have science (wonder is science), while prayershapers carry the burden of proof(wonder is Tao)”— James Lyons Sr. I
(CD: well done)
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-05 10:40:00 UTC
-
So you see, it doesn’t matter if I ‘rally’ anyone, (like you do). It matters onl
So you see, it doesn’t matter if I ‘rally’ anyone, (like you do). It matters only that I can prosecute you and have a tribunal punish you such that you and your ilk never attempt such theft, fraud, and deceit again. You are not potential mates. You have nothing to trade.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-04 16:22:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059118612705931264
Reply addressees: @PRO__UNLIMITED @PopChassid
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059118228436381697
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@PRO__UNLIMITED @PopChassid Now, females of the species evolved this trait in order to rally numbers of betas to contain alphas, so that females had more control over their reproduction (and safety). But …. you don’t exactly have reproduction to trade. In fact, you’ve done the opposite. Redistributed it.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1059118228436381697
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@PRO__UNLIMITED @PopChassid Now, females of the species evolved this trait in order to rally numbers of betas to contain alphas, so that females had more control over their reproduction (and safety). But …. you don’t exactly have reproduction to trade. In fact, you’ve done the opposite. Redistributed it.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1059118228436381697
-
Well, I write LAW. I just test if you are engaging in a productive, fully inform
Well, I write LAW. I just test if you are engaging in a productive, fully informed, voluntary, exchange without imposition by externality, and I test whether you are doing so by fraud or not. Since you fail both counts, and are merely smoke screening theft. Theft and Fraud.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-04 16:19:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059117925037162497
Reply addressees: @PRO__UNLIMITED @PopChassid
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059110265629876230
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059110265629876230
-
Most of all free riding, parasitism, theft, fraud, as attempts to cover thefts s
Most of all free riding, parasitism, theft, fraud, as attempts to cover thefts should be shamed, punished, and punished so severely that it is not repeated. I mean, that’s what the law is for. Criminalizing parasites on both the private and commons. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-04 16:14:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059116699411271682
Reply addressees: @PRO__UNLIMITED @PopChassid
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059102835198038017
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059102835198038017