RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive352

This is an archive page, last updated 9 April 2020. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>, <139>, <140>, <141>, <142>, <143>, <144>, <145>, <146>, <147>, <148>, <149>, <150>, <151>, <152>, <153>, <154>, <155>, <156>, <157>, <158>, <159>, <160>, <161>, <162>, <163>, <164>, <165>, <166>, <167>, <168>, <169>, <170>, <171>, <172>, <173>, <174>, <175>, <176>, <177>, <178>, <179>, <180>, <181>, <182>, <183>, <184>, <185>, <186>, <187>, <188>, <189>, <190>, <191>, <192>, <193>, <194>, <195>, <196>, <197>, <198>, <199>, <200>, <201>, <202>, <203>, <204>, <205>, <206>, <207>, <208>, <209>, <210>, <211>, <212>, <213>, <214>, <215>, <216>, <217>, <218>, <219>, <220>, <221>, <222>, <223>, <224>, <224½>, <225>, <226>, <227>, <228>, <229>, <230>, <231>, <232>, <233>, <234>, <235>, <236>, <237>, <238>, <239>, <240>, <241>, <242>, <243>, <244>, <245>, <246>, <247>, <248>, <249>, <250>, <251>, <252>, <253>, <254>, <255>, <256>, <257>, <258>, <259>, <260>, <261>, <262>, <263>, <264>, <265>, <266>, <267>, <268>, <269>, <270>, <271>, <272>, <273>, <274>, <275>, <276>, <277>, <278>, <279>, <280>, <281>, <282>, <283>, <284>, <285>, <286>, <287>, <288>, <289>, <290>, <291>, <292>, <293>, <294>, <295>, <296>, <297>, <298>, <299>, <300>, <301>, <302>, <303>, <304>, <305>, <306>, <307>, <308>, <309>, <310>, <311>, <312>, <313>, <314>, <315>, <316>, <317>, <318>, <319>, <320>, <321>, <322>, <323>, <324>, <325>, <326>, <327>, <328>, <329>, <330>, <331>, <332>, <333>, <334>, <335>, <336>, <337>, <338>, <339>, <340>, <341>, <342>, <343>, <344>, <345>, <346>, <347>, <348>, <349>, <350>, <351>, <353>, <354>, <355>, <356>, <357>, <358>, <359>, <360>, <361>, <362>, <363>, <364>, <365>, <366>, <367>, <368>, <369>, <370>, <371>, <372>, <373>, <374>, <375>, <376>, <377>, <378>, <379>, <380>, <381>, <382>, <383>, <384>, <385>, <386>, <387>, <388>, <389>, <390>, <391>, <392>, <393>, <394>, <395>, <396>, <397>, <398>, <399>, <400>, <401>, <402>, <403>, <404>, <405>, <406>, <407>, <408>, <409>, <410>, <411>, <412>, <413>, <414>, <415>, <416>, <417>, <418>, <419>, <420>, <421>, <422>, <423>, <424>, <425>, <426>, <427>, <428>, <429>, <430>, <431>, <432>, <433>, <434>, <435>, <436>, <437>, <438>, <439>, <440>, <441>, <442>, <443>, <444>, <445>, <446>, <447>, <448>, <449>, <450>, <451>, <452>, <453>, <454>, <455>, <456>, <457>, <458>, <459>, <460>, <461>, <462>, <463>, <464>, <465>, <466>

, (new)(back)

Can I give the 4chan page bronze

I asked about it on the page's talk page, but nobody responded.--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 17:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Those bastards still exist.— Jeh2ow ^{Damn son!} 17:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

A lot more boomers there now though. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 17:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

@Delibirda How about improving the page, rather than just making it bronze? I see that you never edited it other than the bronze category. The reference formatting is awful, and for all we know, some of the links may not work. Have you checked this, for example? Bongolian (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Zionist Communism

I found this image on Gab. I mean, it's kinda right. Before it's declaration of Independence in 1948, Israel was Mandatory Palestine, a British mandate which was starting to get more and more inhabited by poor Jews, most from the Soviet Union. Developing a new political ideology in Labor Zionism, which was a mixture of social democracy and support for the existence of a Jewish state, for most of Israel's history it had been a heavily left-wing country, and it didn't end up more and more neoconservative until Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated and Ariel Sharon took power. Ironically, the guy who shot Rabin actually did a massive disservice to Israel as he made it essentially go into a downward spiral of more and more xenophobia. Back to the image, which also talks about claims that Jews are evil Marxists that wanna destroy the white race via funding more immigration. Obviously, this conspiracy theory is nothing more than flat out Bullshit. It's just the Alt-right being the Alt-right.— Jeh2ow ^{Damn son!} 17:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

FWIW they did a much better job with Israel than they did with the Soviet Union. In fairness, the Soviet flag was unique back in 1917, but it had too many copiers. But the Israeli flag is unlike many others and uniquely identifiable, which is sort of what you want from a flag. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 17:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

im not really sure the point of this image beyond discrediting each by association with the other. a weak association at that, only really sharing being of the left. the evolution and implementation of them and where they are at today give them little in common.

'Ironically, the guy who shot Rabin actually did a massive disservice to Israel' do you think? I don't think there is anything ironic about it, and the Palestinians were done no favours either. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:46, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

It's the whole "every enemy of the united states is secretly the jews and all jews are secretly the enemies of the us" standard nazi bullshit. The complete disconnect from any sort of basic understanding of history is just part of being a nazi. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 20:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Chomsky on French Intellectuals

I was shocked to discover the theory of evolution was not accepted in France until well after WWII. French philosophy at the end of the 20th century?...meh.Ariel31459 (talk) 22:39, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Quote of a paraphrase here, not an out of context attack on Chomsky, but a joke he made about the dangers of a sensational use of philosophy, watch the whole thing if you think this is fire. "Bertrand Russel tells us to look for the truth, but the philosophers tell us there is no truth." I love it. It's a bit of a big attack on a specific societal approach to philosophy and die-hard cultural identity, which I think is a feature of most cultures. Resident Nihilist here. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Of course, the irony intended by Chomsky was another one of his examples of the isolation of French intellectuals. It is assumed, I think, the questioner whom Chomsky was quoting didn't realize Russell was a philosopher because, after all, Russell was not French.Ariel31459 (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

This is very shocking. I had not idea that French philosophy had such an influence on science at the time. As someone who is attempting to obtain a masters degree in creative writing, I can definitely see the influence of French philosophy on those types of departments in the US. I myself do not particularly like French philosophy (i.e.- Derrida, Foucault, etc.), so hopefully that does not affect my studies too much.Crazymantis91 (talk) 17:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, man, fuck Descartes. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:39, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Hooray for the 17th century.Ariel31459 (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Push back against Trump's use of the DPA etc?

I'm not American so don't follow what's going on that's well especially with the current craziness. But am I right that there's been limited pushback from the more mainstream conservative or even some parts of the main stream libertarianism, against the Trumps administrations use of the Defence Production Act and other such measures such as the DOJ pursing and confiscating hoarded supplies of PPE etc [1]? Or for that matter his support for compulsory lockdowns etc? I mean I know there was that earlier nonsense about re-opening after Easter pushed by some businesses and some parts of Fox News, but it doesn't seem that strong. I'm particularly comparing to what it would be like if Barack Obama of Hillary Clinton was in charge. Since I can't help but think if that were the case, there will be a lot of communism comparisons, claims that the president is destroying businesses, stealing supplies because they won't want to pay the market rate etc. I know there are the typical crazies e.g. those religious leaders. But I had a look at the Heritage Foundation for example, and didn't find much and I also haven't heard anything major from Fox News apart from the earlier stuff. I'm aware that there are plenty generally on the more left-wing side who don't think the president is using the DPA enough etc. Nil Einne (talk) 22:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, in the beginning, generally speaking, the states ruled under Republican governors (in addition to Trump himself) responded way too slowly to the virus, and there are a few Republicans last week that did the atypical "fuck the unemployed" dance you'd expect to try to halt the relief bill. But at this point, you are correct that most of the conservative wing today backs the current lockdown and aid measures as necessary, from what I see. The exceptions to this that I see are those so far into libertarian thought that any intrusion of "liberty" is a sin (see the ironically named Reason website, conspiracy hucksters (the Infowars crowd etc.), and the hack religious idiots you mentioned (those that think social distancing is for "pansies", Liberty University, etc.) -- the later not surprising given that it seems like hack religion has led to a *lot* of viral hotspots worldwide. But even the Fox News comment section is slamming hack preachers that think social distancing is for "pansies" these days, for the most part.72.184.174.199 (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

all the usual cheer leaders have been lock step with trump since the outset. now hes changed his tune because worst case through to realistic but maybe avoidable death tolls ranging from in the millions down to 200000, and with actual numbers rising fast, trump and his pals arnt stupid enough to stick with the 'walk it off' line. it looks bad and they've 'always taken this thing seriously'. as for the crazier exceptions still at it, i'm sure they get some benefit in their circles for strong, principled stances, and you cant put a price on the value added by a month or two jail time as a political prisoner AMassiveGay (talk) 20:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Found this article from the Unitarian Universalist Atheists and Agnostics

"If there is a God … As an agnostic, I'm definitely an atheist about some gods. But what kind of God might be possible?"

Interesting read. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Fixed the link. Bongolian (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Got in a big big fight with my mom

Over text. She wanted me to come over this weekend so she could talk to me face to face, I said no, she got big mad. I kept it to the "doctors, epidemiologists, and historians are saying containment of a virus only works when high risk carriers, like myself, who are still going to work every day and interacting with people, do not come in contact with high risk contractors, people at an older age with compromised immune systems, Mom. I absolutely won't do it." I got told I was putting work in front of family, got accused that I thought this face to face conversation was just going to be a confrontation, got told everything would have been fine if I just sat in the living room at a 6 ft distance and I didn't know what I was talking about and I'd be real sorry if either of us wound up on a ventilator and then we couldn't ever have conversations again. Like, Mom, you are talking to a guy you told to just do his own laundry and make his own lunch at the age of 5. You grounded me constantly from the ages of 8 to 18 and refused to discuss any terms about anything with me. Madame Boomer, I am now the same age you were when you had me, I am telling you we are all grounded right now and I am the God Damned best anybody's ever seen at living this way. And you want me to hear you out about how I should gamble on coming to see you because our relationship is special? Get real, oh ho remember that rebuttal? But no, I didn't say any of that, I just told her I'd call her on Saturday, when this wasn't a fight anymore. I'm not a monster. Will Smith was right, parents just don't understand. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:05, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes, our elders just suck. So I deal with it.— Jeh2ow ^{Damn son!} 04:14, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Your mom can argue with the experts. Also, putting work in front of family? Such a sweeping statement for a special circumstance. No one should prioritize family over the rest of the community around you, that's freaking selfish and recklessly short-sighted. You did the right thing, and your mom's frankly an idiot who's giving you a hard time to... not spread germs around. She has to swallow her pride and maybe trust your judgment and decision making. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 06:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I miss my grandma, but she's best off in the nursing home. — Oxyaena ^Harass 09:18, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I miss my Grandma, but I still think it was best sending her to prison. Steal my nose will ya! Cardinal Chang (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

What did she do? Hand out poisoned Halloween candy?𝔖𝔲𝔪𝔪𝔞 𝔄𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔬𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔦𝔠𝔞 (𝔮𝔲𝔢𝔯𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔰) (𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔞) 17:33, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

She's probably got Asperger's. I'm pretty primed for this conversation, I know my mom well, she's been my mom my whole life. I knew when I got the text about talking face to face I was about to have a fight, I know I inherited some ability to remember dreams from her, but the difference is I don't treat the dreams as reality. I think she probably had a dream, and she probably dreamed me dying again, which I've dealt with since my middle school days, and that's no good, when I was 13 she asked me what I want done with my body when I die, and the question hurt for a long time. My mom wants to be prepared to bury her son, she is probably terrified of death. Like, I just won't be there anymore, how shallow is your heart? To her credit, she didn't care about a lot of unreasonable things, I wasn't baptized, she let me watch TV and listen to music and play games that other parents were scared of, and I'm doing pretty well. She never lied about Santa or the Easter Bunny.. But she also once grounded me for asking if I could go to the next neighborhood to see a friend who moved. Like, literally a half hour walk or a 5 minute bike ride. But no, I had to cross a major street, at the age of 10 knowing exactly how to cross a street, and then I got grounded just for asking if I could do it, because obviously if the answer was no, I was going to do it anyway. Big criminal that I was at 10. This is the same friend who when I was 17 and driving my own car, I went to visit while I was grounded. His mom once covered for me because we were trying to make a board game, and I yes, I was grounded, granted, I lied to my mom I was at a speech competition, and his mom who was also a teacher. She walked into the living room, pale faced, and said "If you ever want to come into my house and play a board game, I won't tell your mom you're here." She does really well but when she wants to ecercise control of her situation, she gets very mean. Sorry for venting, I have to be prepared to not say this shit to my mom tomorrow. But no, she handed out goldfish crackers to the littlest ones last Halloween, she is smart and clever and compassionate, and cares about people, but the intense wave when it doesn't make sense to her has always landed on me. And I don't think the rest of the family is talking to her right now. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm still having the conversation with my mom, word, make me feel bad why don't you is bad faith. It's just on her terms again. But she's MY mom, co no harm no foul.Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:09, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Had the conversation today, it was ok, it was about how she recognizes there is something between us and she wanted me to name it. I told her I couldn't, asked her to name it, she couldn't either so I said "So that's the issue, that neither of us know what the problem exactly is. and I really can't tell you and you can't tell me what the problem is. So the problem is made up." I also told her she puts a "pressure" on me and maybe that pressure is just a feature of our relationship. She eventually said that I was wrong and lying and drunk, and then after I told her this is what she does, this is how she handles things, and I'm not going to be close to her if this is what she's going to do every time she demands I talk to her, she cried for a while, asked me not to hang up on her, and said maybe she relied on on me as a friend too hard when I was too young, which I just ran with, close enough, so no worries, You ever listen to you mom cry on the phone for a half hour? After you asked your brother 3 months ago, when he was like "we all need to take this seriously" to have my back when my mom was about to get really mad at me for not visitin her? Which I expected she would cry but didn't expect she would say "don't hang up on me" and I was never planning to, I was like "what? No of course not." When she got done crying we got to talk about my thing, we talked about groceries. I taught her how to do curbside pickup. She is going to start having her groceries loaded into her car, and she's not happy about that, I told her to leave a couple bucks in your trunk, if it's still there when you get home, something ventured, nothing lost. I asked my brother to have my back with my mom about two months ago when I knew this exact thing would happen. He works from home now, he texted me to say he got a new laptop and shit. He's not been talking to our mom, he's fucking toast. 06:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Test question

Name a flying dinosaur.--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 09:42, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Fossils being transported in a plane? :) Anna Livia (talk) 12:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I meant a specific species.--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 13:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

The red-tailed hawk. — Oxyaena ^Harass 14:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

pterodactyl St.~Emi (talk) 15:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

You're joking, right?--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 17:31, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Corvus brachyrhynchos. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:19, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Rodan. Kencolt (talk) 19:36, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Every bird on Earth.Tuxer (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

🐧?? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Not ostriches, emus or kiwis either. And probably a few more flightless birds that I either haven't heard of or can't remember. Spud (talk) 03:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Archaeopteryx lithographica. 192․168․1․42 (talk) 23:24, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Terror birds, those are biggies. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Any dinosaur will become a flying dinosaur, however briefly, if launched at the right trajectory and acceleration. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 04:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

So how would one set up a flying Tyrannosaurus Rex/Diplodocus? Anna Livia (talk) 11:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Going to need a large catapult. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 15:56, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The creatures are not aerodynamic in any sense (and would probably not survive).

Anyone care to develop the logistics of Jabba the Hutt and space travel/teleportation? Anna Livia (talk) 16:36, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

What do I want done with my body when I die?

This is a really nuanced question, and I wouldn't ask anybody to have a "correct" answer. This is especially hard because nobody gets to be responsible for their body after death.

I really want my body, no preservatives, just tossed out somewhere, like compost, It's really not that bad Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:05, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I have made the arrangements to give my corpse to medical dissection or education, or for forensic testing, whichever wants it. I am sure the medical students will all gather around and point and laugh smugly at it. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 04:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

my dad insists we are forbidden to do anything with his body but wrap in a bin liner and put out with the rubbish. i'd go for something like that. it would only be a concern if I were asked on my death bed. I wont be paying for it, and while I still breathe I would not relish the idea of my near and dear spend any time or effort on what will amount to a eulogy cribbed from a greetings card and ashes sprinkled over the crematorium garden. my siblings are of the same mind. its only my mother who'd I expect might need something done. her family is huge and actually seem like they like one and other like some sort of...family. freaks. my younger brother can do it. hes the grown up. give me a date and a location, and i'll turn up in suit and try not to look bored.

when I do expire any official documentation will likely feature the phrase 'found dead in a ditch'. if no one IDs the body no one can palm it off on us. that. i want that done when I die. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I would rather have my body preserved in the fashion of Lenin, and I would also like my corpse to be clothed in magnificent regalia. Then people would honor it in ritual every day, reinforcing my own greatness. My body would also rest in a magnificent shrine, an amazing complex like those of the Timurid emperors and their Mughal descendants, a great and imposing necropolis that dominates the surrounding area like a palace in and of itself, with reliefs everywhere depicting my great victories and accomplishments. Everyone who went there would leave with the impression that I was the greatest man that ever lived. If you can't tell, I am very troubled, very arrogant, and very very ambitious.-Flandres (talk) 09:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I want my ashes put in firework which is shot into the sky and which explodes in a mighty bang and a flash. (I understand there might be some legal issues - in which case - sue me.)Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:19, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Amassive I couldn't find a shorter clip of this. Really worked hard to get it to start when it does, hopefully it kicks on at 14:43 on its own, I couldn't figure out how to get it to end at 15:34 but your statement reminded me of this. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

That's essentially the tradition in certain parts of the Buddhist Himalayas. Though carrion birds, not rotting is usually what makes the most of the corpse. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 13:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Chop up my body, put it in a garbage bag and have it taken out for next Wednesday's garbage. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Draftspace articles

As per the discussion at "RationalWiki:Technical support#Drafts in search results", I have inserted the {{draft}} template into all the draftspace articles that did not already have such a template.

Please insert the {{draft}} template at the top of the page whenever you create a new draftspace article or move a mainspace article into draftspace.

Thank you. Bongolian (talk) 07:31, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft idea

Bearing as in the crank creator on YouTube.--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 09:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

if that person I've never heard of has at least 1,000 subscribers, that should be OK. Spud (talk) 09:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Spud He has circa 540k.--Alola, my name is Delibirda! (talk) 09:48, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Then he meets our YouTuber eligibility criteria 540 times over.Spud (talk) 07:05, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Phone masts attacked amid 5G/coronavirus conspiracy theory

FFS Avida Dollars^{her again} 14:09, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I hear electricity attracts the virus. Just look at the countries that are most affected! They have more electricity! Humans lived without electricity for thousands of years and were just fine. Now we have all these illnesses!

The thing that people would be scared about if they evaluated risks properly is it wouldn't be hard for a group of people to cause widespread blackouts if they wanted to. All you gotta do is blow up some critical power grid equipment, which is usually sitting in the middle of nowhere protected by nothing but some chain link fencing and barbed wire. Once destroyed it would take at least days to replace and get back into service. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 18:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I should start a rumor that radiation from cell phones, computers, TVs, and even good ol' fashion radio causes the coronavirus. That way, those prone to THE CONSPIRACY THEORY would throw away all these devices which have become hotspots of fast spreading bullshit, and spend all of their energy doing something more harmlessly dumb (like, say, wallpapering their house in tin foil to GUARD FROM THE EVIL RADIATION). Rumors, of course, will still spread because humans are awful and there will always be someone to try to exploit the naive, but it's slower to peddle bullshit over the postal services. 72.184.174.199 (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I blame hospitals. Have you noticed how most of the people who die from the virus die in hospitals? Coincidence? I don't think so.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 18:58, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

MRSA makes the hospital suggestion a little more plausible than it should be. as for phone/tv/radio/pc to dupe the gullible, watch the most hardcore of conspiracy theorists, who believe all the theories without hesitation, raise an eyebrow and stroke their chin for the first time ever at a conspiracy that would have real and direct consequences on their life. if 9/11 really was an inside job, it would likely make not a slight bit of difference to those making the claim, besides them becoming ever more insufferable. iPhone causing coronavirus? that's got the internet it. that's where they live. most folk would require some pretty damning evidence, and still probably wouldn't believe it. and I can sell you an electrobacterial repulsor shield for 50 quid. get em while stocks last and no it just looks like a shower cap. sure you want to risk it?AMassiveGay (talk) 20:11, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Finally. Now if only they'd start attacking vascular plants too. Tall cylinders have plagued this planet for long enough -- it's time we take back what's rightfully ours! Ⲥⲡⲣⲓⲅⲅⲓⲛⲁ (ⲧⲁⲗⲕ) (ⲕⲟⲛⲧⲣⲓⲃⲩⲧⲓⲟⲛⲥ) @ 21:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

A person on my Facebook friend list is spewing that conspiracy. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Something I saw in the park the other day

Though there is a stay in place order, people are allowed to go out for exercise like taking a walk. Now I always take walks in the park across the street.

Now here is what I saw- two people were trading supplies like in some post-apocalyptic TV show like the Walking Dead or The Strain! Stores are still open, there is still government and there is still mass communication systems. Didn't think the government collapsed nor telecommunication systems going offline.

What the fuck? What made the thing more hilarious was that one thing traded was a sack of seed corn. Can someone tell me when the apocalypse hit and decimated civilization? Someone drop me a line when nukes go off and dangerous gangs go killing people, okay. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm working in a group home with at least 3 confirmed positive cases (I'm 4 days in and my health is holding out, I volunteered because I'm about as low-risk as is possible), and we're fortunate enough to have N-95 masks and gowns, but if it was necessary I'd resort to bartering for more in a heartbeat. Whatever works, I'm beyond caring too much at this point. Thankfully I don't see it coming to that here.. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Ive known people in my locale who have been bartering for, like, a week. Considering these are people who will not go to the store because they have no health insurance and cannot risk an infection I am not inclined to mock them. Furthermore when you mock the idea of collapse I cannot help but notice you have a very simplistic idea of what that is-that it must be a theatrical event like warfare or a rebellion or a black plague scale pandemic. It could very well just be people during a time of mass social disruption like this losing faith in the government and creating local organizations to solve their problems like lack of access to resources or healthcare. As these organizations become more powerful the USA becomes a failed state even though it still technically exists as it no longer meets the Westphalian definition of sovereignty.-Flandres (talk) 23:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

in the developed world, the us seems like the least able to meet the challenges this kind of thing presents, ideologically opposed to the actions required, with states bidding against each for supplies over pulling together or coordinated action, and a president seemingly drunk at the wheel. I guess the test will be, once the virus has run its course, how quickly a country can get back going again, whether it can jump straight back in where it left off, or if changes made will be profound AMassiveGay (talk) 23:41, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I mean, the uk was already in a process of fundamental change it self. then this and an uncertain future is even more so. the uk hasn't had a sense normality for years now. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:48, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

I think that is something we can already answer. This election is shaping up to be between Biden and Trump. Trump would oppose any of the necessary reforms because they inflict short term loss on the plutocrat class and even in the long term a catastrophic breakdown, despite the fantasies of the left about eating the rich and whatnot, would be easily survivable for the wealthy. Biden will not because he has repeatedly said he thinks the problem is with Trump and his bad leadership not with the USA as a system. This is why so many lefties are mad at the election-the choice is between blatant evil and the proven unsustainable status quo. Any radical shift in policy is just not likely in the foreseeable future given the political climate.-Flandres (talk) 00:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Is there evidence for Solipsism?

From what I can tell there doesn't seem to be any, in which case it's nothing more than just a "what if". IF that's true then I feel a little better about ditching it completely.Machina (talk) 00:32, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I think that's kind of the point of it as a philosophical exercise. That it's a relatively trivial alternate worldview to construct if you take a radical enough skeptical perspective. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 02:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I knew you were going to say that, as you're just a figment of my imagination. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 03:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

It just bugs me so much that I can't know for sure and it terrifies me. It is hard to move on just on simple belief that total 100% certainty doesn't exist. Like this seems to suggest the solipsism is the result of materialism: https://konekrusoskronos.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/on-solipsism-why-it-gets-a-bad-rap/Machina (talk) 04:31, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Western philosophy has been spinning its wheels in an icy rut over a silly question got more than three centuries now. That question is whether we can know that there's a world out there corresponding to the thoughts and images in our heads. Truth is, all those ideas and images inhabit an physical organ that is very much part of that same world, and can be Gallaghered just like a watermelon. We know a bit more about virtual realities than Descartes did, and can form an idea about the computing power needed to create a persistent reality that mimics the one in which we live. This is enough to suggest to me that the world is persistent because it is made of something more durable than thoughts. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 06:04, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Asking for evidence for solipsism is redundant, solipsism is a description, an admission of perception and its traits/limits, I don't know why you want it to be a method or means or antithesis to your reality. Like, dude, the point is all perception is limited and with the proper tools, all perceptions, even by by neans of agents are suspect. Quantum, fuck it, double slit. Questioning reality is not limited to what we are most comfortable with, that's not how phiilosophy is used. There isn't a point in philosophy that's going to teach you hot to "win reality." I think your Buddhist upbringing may have you looking for meaning where you'd do better getting comfortable with yourself. It's a slog, I know, and I hope this question is part of said slog. But you really have to figure how Solipsism fuels your car before you can take it out on the roads. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I think so, but how can anyone be certain? Avida Dollars^{her again} 17:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

It just annoys me massively that I can't be sure and that it amounts to belief alone.Machina (talk) 20:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

You can be sure. Do things outside your body make your brain or other body parts react involuntarily? They inhabit the same universe, and your mind does too. Smerdis of Tlön, wekʷōm teḱsos. 16:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Is consciousness made by the brain?

Because whenever I try to tell people that the science supports the claim they try to liken it by saying that it's like saying computer programs are produced by hardware, among other things. Is it really that hard for people just to accept it?Machina (talk) 01:55, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Been there, done that. Read before you ask: Non-materialist neuroscience and Materialism. Bongolian (talk) 04:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

It's because they can't overcome dualism. Supporters of mind uploading suffer from the same problem.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

But computer programs *are* produced by hardware! Remove the hardware, there is no software. Software is just a set of get-fetch commands on a processor and capacitors holding single bits of information. Remove the processor and the capacitors (RAM) and the software literally doesn't exist. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 14:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The hard problem of consciousness is an actual problem, and I`m not convinced hard physicalism is the actual answer. I prefer panpsychism myself but I think it's one of those areas covered by Godel's incompleteness theorem, like what comes after death or why anything exists at all. — Oxyaena ^Harass 16:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

But there is no evidence for panpsychism and there is plenty to suggest the brain produces consciousness.Machina (talk) 18:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

That still runs into the hard problem of consciousness. — Oxyaena ^Harass 18:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there is a hard problem. We know the brain produces it, do we need to know how?Machina (talk) 20:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't resort to magic just because you think humans are special. We don't know how the consciousness works because it is an emergent property of an enormously complex system. It would be just as hard to figure out how the computer game "Doom: Eternal" works if all you had was a printout of the computer ram while the game was running. We only know why complicated software works because we made it. We didn't make the "software" of the brain so it is terrifyingly complicated to work out how it was developed by evolution. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

To speak to Bob's point, of the inability to overcome dualism, maybe he's right. Maybe the point of consciousness and the physical world isn't actually dualistic. So there is also a positive feedback loop in evolution. The idea is that early hominids were able to transfer information to each other without having to necessarily have the language to do so, and eventually words were the quickest way to transmit data, and then things just kind of take off. There is evidence that some birds call with syntax which means they choose which call to send before they send it. Parrots can obviously do it for tricks with coaching, and we're talking about a brain smaller than a walnut. Consciousness is a word used to describe, what? That's not where I, personally, would like the end all be all of humanity to come to terms on. I'd propose consciousness is simply the ability to recognize and act on one's own entity and environment. So that's really messy. The reason an AI can pass the Turing test and perform machine learning but isn't "conscious" is because it doesn't have anything but hardware that gives it an "if, or, and, then" string of commands. In my opinion it's likely more that we don't want to call it "conscious" because the word itself is so important to humans as a mantle. However, there's an interesting question of "do we want AI to take over caretaker jobs," and the argument I heard, which was compelling, was that people aren't getting real care from AI, just a simulation, and that's not good for the people who need care. But the people who needed the attention actually loved it and wound up empathizing with the robots that gave them pre-programmed time, empathy, and careful works of sympathy. I would argue the opposite, that people aren't learning to perform real care. Even if we're not good at it, caring for our elders and our young is an experience that humanity shouldn't source out if we want to continue to get better at it. But to me, consciousness isn't the end-all be-all, it definitely doesn't explain right and wrong. Few creatures in this world get a dignified end, and it's not easy or useful to dwell on that point for long, especially when you narrow the context of consciousness. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:05, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not arguing that animals do not have consciousness. The only creature I could see perhaps not having a consciousness (defined here as self-awareness and an ability to learn and socialize) but instead relies on pure mechanical instinct would be cells or some insects. I also believe that a good enough simulation of a caring being would in-fact be a caring being. If you make a good enough simulation (definition of "good enough" intentionally left vague) of a human brain, you have made a virtual human and they deserve the rights of a normal human. One problem with the philosophy of "humans shouldn't source out kindness" is that the vast majority of humans don't care for the elderly in a caretaker job. Not having that avenue to demonstrate and learn kindness would only affect a fraction of the population anyways and so doesn't threaten the overall mental capacity of humanity for kindness, I would argue. I think a more interesting question is whether or not people would care for the robots who have simple intelligence. Would humans use them as an avenue to vent frustration and basically commit robo-murder to relieve stress, or would they be protected like cats and dogs from domestic violence? I would argue that just because you create something doesn't give you the right to destroy or abuse it (looking at you abrahamic-god), so I think they should be protected the same way we protect animals (or at least the ones we don't consider livestock). But I feel guilty killing enemies in videogames, so maybe I'm an outlier in my opinions. MirrorIrorriM (talk) 16:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I think the question, not that should robots have explicit rights, but should robots be exempt from one specific harm, robo-murder is probably an easier starting point. But I don't think that's a useful starting point to your earlier claim that simulated human AI should have similar rights. It's huge, and for what it's worth my opinion is that yes, absolutely, simulated intelligent robots should have rights and the first right not exactly to be "not robo-murdered." but closer to a Hippocratic Oath, first do no harm. I know, that's old, that's not exciting. But that's depressing because humanity doesn't have a grand and storied history of treating the systems we rely on as important, when we think of the other end of the transaction as a robot or a laborer or an experimental case. Not trying to go full [Roko's Basilisk here or get into the PETA madness or advocate eugenics, which can be practiced at home with a condom, Sanger wasn't a lady Hitler, I'm a little concerned by the culture around me. My original question was, if consciousness is likely as mechanical as intuitive machine learning AI, What is the difference? I think you recognized that point, which I really appreciate. I don't exactly have further questions, but I do have this old AI that I played with as a kid. Helped me learn to read, type, and spell.

RACTER is not that clever, and not aware. What's interesting is in this playthrough, you are asked "are you Eric?" and the answer is no for everyone except the guy who compiled to this point. So. Are you Eric? No. Who are you, then? You need to use an uppercase pronoun to get to the next question, which is "are you continuing Eric's interview?" The answer no removes all "learned" nouns, pronouns, adverbs, and adjectives from the RACTER database. The answer yes doesn't exactly give you the data, you have to explore for it. I think old Animal Crossing games shared by people did something similar, but I've never played Animal Crossing. I did share RACTER with my brother and my dad. Preloaded pronouns include Betrand Russell and Alan Turing, I was absolutely blown away when I got old enough to see their names, "That was a RACTER name!" This isn't a game made by people who didn't care about AI. I am lucky to have played with it as a kid. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

OAN

An expose by John Oliver. — Oxyaena ^Harass 12:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I vote for those three weirdos getting a page, especially that Blonde bimbo with her circular reasoning bullshit... 2A02:1812:2C66:D000:A9E1:9E27:36F8:1A29 (talk) 12:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Nah, none of those talking heads (apparently sans brains, though) deserve their own pages, just give them entries on our OANN page. ScepticWombat (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I must say, I kind of like the calmer energy of his show since going on lockdown. Not having to shout over the audience is nice. Ⲥⲡⲣⲓⲅⲅⲓⲛⲁ (ⲧⲁⲗⲕ) (ⲕⲟⲛⲧⲣⲓⲃⲩⲧⲓⲟⲛⲥ) @ 20:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Wheeler already has an article. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I keep coming across weird stuff that would make good RW articles

https://www.globalcountry.org/wp/

Global Country of World Peace. I get a weird cult vibe from it. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

A Maharishi spinoff, perhaps would warrant a paragraph or two on Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's page. See also Maharishi University of Management for more Maharishi woo. Cosmikdebris (talk) 14:58, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I actually created that page. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 15:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The page for that school. --Rationalzombie94 (talk) 17:03, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't know what to think

[2] This article isn't one of those new-agey bullshit things, it's a news report that got me interested, it's fascinating, and the end bit is a stinger that also has some rather terrifying implications. — Oxyaena ^Harass 18:03, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Not sure. Once you're dead only a few cells work but as long as your brain's kaput or basically not functioning, you still won't feel anything. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I`m more referring to the fact someone had an out of body experience while dead. — Oxyaena ^Harass 18:16, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The article seems rather hyped. The debate about what is human death and the understanding of death have evolved over time (Is it stopped breathing? stopped heart? being comatose? stopped brain signals?) From a cellular perspective, death is gradual — as more and more cells die, eventually the damage reaches a tipping point of no return. Bongolian (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Out-of-body experiences are also not all that unusual. An estimated 0.7% of people experience OBEs during surgery because of the anesthesia.[3] Bongolian (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I treat death as being unborn. You don't remember a thing when you are first out of the womb, neither will you have such an experience if you're dead. БaбyЛuigiOнФire🚓^(T|C) 19:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The article is saying that the brain doesn't instantly cease activity when the heart stops beating, which isn't really news. Humans aren't robots with a power switch that gets flipped to "off". The stinger is woo-woo continuum fallacy bullshit: the brain doesn't die instantly when deprived of oxygen, so obviously humans are really magical invisible souls. Show me someone who "comes back" Dr. Manhattan-style after being blown to smithereens and I'll re-evaluate things. Note that Newsweek today is clickbaity, and while they don't outright say anything crazy, the obvious subtext, especially in the headline, is "science proves humans live forever and go to heaven when they die" so it'll get shared on social media as "stunning new proof". --47.146.63.87 (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, we have known for some time that death is a process and not an instant event. The Newsweek article seems to have somewhat breathlessly rediscovered this. Nothing to see here.Bob^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 17:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)