If people survided it would be unfair for the people who already died
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
392 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
258 readers
2 users here now
Post memes here.
A meme is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.
An Internet meme or meme, is a cultural item that is spread via the Internet, often through social media platforms. The name is by the concept of memes proposed by Richard Dawkins in 1972. Internet memes can take various forms, such as images, videos, GIFs, and various other viral sensations.
- Wait at least 2 months before reposting
- No explicitly political content (about political figures, political events, elections and so on), !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca can be better place for that
- Use NSFW marking accordingly
Laittakaa meemejä tänne.
- Odota ainakin 2 kuukautta ennen meemin postaamista uudelleen
- Ei selkeän poliittista sisältöä (poliitikoista, poliittisista tapahtumista, vaaleista jne) parempi paikka esim. !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
- Merkitse K18-sisältö tarpeen mukaan
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's the spirit
Good thing that most people tend to judge you for killing a given finite number of people, rather than based on the percentage of the population. That is to say, If you kill one random person in China, you're generally considered just as much a murderer as if you kill one random person in Luxembourg
But the Luxembourger deserved it
Also, if there's an infinite amount of people on the tracks and you have infinite time, you could kill a (countably) infinite number of people. If killing one person is a bit frowned on, klling tens makes you a monster and killing millions makes you whatever Hitler, Stalin and Mao were, not sure what they'd call someone who killed ℵ~0~ people
I'm not sure if that's necessarily true. For one thing, thanks to ✨racism✨, who you kill will influence how you're viewed. And if you kill enough people, I think it often causes people to view the event less personally ("one person is a tragedy, a million is a statistic"). Of course, that also depends on how you kill them. Killing one innocent looking civilian with a trolley will go over a lot worse than sending a million soldiers to die in a war (no matter how pointless or wrong the war was).
And killing a Chinese isn't as bad as killing someone from Beijing
is Beijing not in China now
That's the joke. You can take any person and zoom in and out at will to make it better or worse
Prove it.
Also the trolley is how you get to work, so if you stop it you can't get to work and pay your rent so
The whole 0% thing works best if you aren't aware of how far the train has already gone.
So you can't weigh any past quantity dead on any theoretical 0% future
“Effective” “altruism” be like
As long as the lever is pulled before I die, then it will be about 0%. But if I die before I pull the lever, and no one else pulls the lever, then it will go on for an infinite amount of time and kill all of them
This right here is what it boils down to when someone responds to a wrongful killing by police with a questionable statistic about how it's only a tiny fraction of interactions that end that way.
Did anyone else misread this as the rail being densely filled with humans (for every a,b in R, a < b, there are infinitely many humans in (a,b))?