>Let’s say we can get people to 200 by keeping them immobile and cold and nearly starving them of calories and oxygen—dramatically suppressing their metabolism. Who would want that?
I can imagine quite a few people. Maybe they are already in pain or have mobility issues. At that point why not say "yeah just feed me painkillers and keep me half-frozen. i can do everything in VR/online"? It's better than hospice.
>Here in the state of California, labor laws define that an employer cannot require a team member to take on expenses that are an integral part of the job.
Any job that asks you to buy your own equipment, especially a computer, is a scam (unless you are a freelancer, in which case you should already have equipment)
>The decentralization proposed in the technological field is closer to anarchist ideals
Anarchist ideals? From right-wing billionaires like Musk and Thiel? Or by centrist billionaires like...?
Because that's who is driving the technological field, ultimately — people who have more money than entire countries, to whom we are basically just bugs to be squashed if we bother them.
>I believe that the market (controlled and monitored by nations and supranational entities) functions better because it is an imperfect model that, by leveraging people's selfishness,
lmao
This doesn't feel like a serious discussion. I'm out.
You're probably not allowed to discuss it here because the people who own this website are currently making a lot of money from content stolen by bots, to be ingested by other bots.
>I can't envision a decentralized technological and scientific world that wouldn't set us back 300 years.
And yet you are here arguing for more capitalist market-based solutions, which are inherently decentralized and have a tendency to create unrelated, wasteful (duplication of effort), and often pointless competition and profit-seeking?