All form is interpretation.

So is interpretation just physics? Like, mass and inertia?

The entire universe is beige

(Says a man facing a beige wall)

Funny. I just saw such an ad. Advising that you use their deodorant spray everywhere, yea everywhere. (Lady in commercial proceeds to spray her crotch)

Hmmm. Maybe just to sell more product. Or maybe it’s a mindfuck.

In the 50s they sold Lysol to deodorize sinks, toilets, rugs etc. Then advised to ladies to spray their crotch with it too. Basically saying that a woman is just another home appliance. Which is mindfucky

I prefer a bit of funk on a girl. With a touch of floral perfume.

So, yes, unless.

Does the plain fact that somebody said it carry any weight?

Consider most of lemmy.

Childish. Ignorant. Smug. Reactionary.

And if I was a politician, they’d be my #1 demographic.

Removed by mod

That is a very good question.

We can but the solver won’t come from the mainstream, it’ll come from the edge. One of those insane weirdos that everybody knows is badwrong.

So be kind to weirdos.

The normies you can safely pound to paste tho.

What many?

It’s called science fiction you gibbering philistine.

My cynicism is so automatic that I could never say what you just said and keep a straight face.

To underline the joke : research does not imply publishing. Except among scientists it does. Did I get that right?

I researched the spelling of “research” for this reply. Does this count as publishing?

I read a short story where they took a humane approach to population reduction.

An engineered disease. A short fever and then your uterus stops working. 95% effective.

Rioting. All scientists hung. But the world was better.

Well that’s the question.

Voting means lots of dummies, a sea of propaganda… Bad stuff there too.

We have good models that offer up good decisions, so why put it to the vote?

Base our policy on tested models. Audit our reasoning thoroughly. Be rational.

Vs consult the masses, 99% of whom don’t even understand the question.

Seems like a no brainer

Two methods for determining policy.

We vote.

We do science.

Should we switch to the latter?

I was thinking straight up science.

Given these observations, these firmly established scientific models and this bit of sound reasoning, we conclude that these policies should be implemented.

No voting required.

The you are agreement with others here. It depends on the threat level.

How does authority figure in?

I don’t understand his reasoning but he’s got a good reputation. Or cites such.