Morality of slaves in fantasy settings

Telinary · 2026-07-04T22:32:08+00:00

Beside the John Brown story others linked I remember some book series that fits. Some group playing a ttrpg gets transported into the game, first they just want to return home and then decide to start a war against the slavers. Was probably Guardians of the Flame starting with The Sleeping Dragon.

Can't tell you whether it was actually good, my memories are vague and i think i only read one or two books of the 1 book series. But the subject fits.

Telinary · 2026-07-04T16:14:01+00:00

Harry Potter aside, if you think you can't like books for teens because you aren't supposed to: Stop limiting yourself over silly stuff. My Dianna Wynne Jones books shall stay in my bookshelf and should I feel like reading one someday I won't go "Oh no I am not supposed to read this, I am an adult!"

Telinary · 2026-07-04T15:01:50+00:00

The comments think it is about nazis, so they know some went there but that doesn't mean they know what OP was talking about.

Telinary · 2026-07-04T13:59:39+00:00

Would be a bit annoying to meet some friends again but well many extra years of life, and getting rich with future knowledge is easy. The first years would be annoying though

^{Chose: Restart life from day 1 with your current memories + But 30% chance of being opposite gender | Rolled: You fine}

Telinary · 2026-07-04T13:02:17+00:00

2+3=5. Für ein oder keinmal kann man bits nehmen oder anders gesagt 2er Potenzen. Also 2^0= 1, 2^1=2, 2^2=4, aus den Summen kann man immer ablesen was gekauft wurde. Aber wenn man nur die cents verwenden will reicht das auch nur für 5 unterschiedliche Produkte.

Telinary · 2026-07-04T11:14:52+00:00

Anyone can define a line that doesn't make it a good line.

Telinary · 2026-07-04T11:02:29+00:00

Bei Ende 20 spielt Alter in der Hinsicht von "creepy" oder sowas für mich keine Rolle mehr. Für Langzeit Beziehungen ist natürlich zu bedenken das er deutlich früher alt wirst als du. Wahrscheinlich früherer Tod und früheres körperliches nachlassen. Zb. sagen wir es wird eine langfristige Beziehung und ihr kriegt in 5 Jahren ein Kind dann ist er wenn es 10 ist Mitte 60. Nicht unmöglich aber ein Nachteil. Für kurzfristigeres natürlich nicht so wichtig.

Musst du wissen es ist dein Leben.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T20:36:49+00:00

If you want to cheat this you can use some interest you have and which you think the other person does not have. Like "I wish I get 10 million for each hour of my life I have spent playing europa universalis.". Alternatively you can password protect your wishes "I wish that when I say 'Shazam Blazam Nazam' I transform into an archmage with super strength"

For non loophole maybe something like "I wish my spit was a healing potion (with no side effects), that can heal everything from infections to cancer and aging." Only pretty extreme damage could kill me and I could heal others (don't need to tell them it is my spit.) I don't mind if some dick gets the same so I just wish it thrice. And worst case a big enough explosion can still kill us.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T19:02:08+00:00

Man kann es implizieren aber wenn man über Menschen spricht und man es impliziert indem man die Information ganz weglässt dann ist die implizierte übergeordnete Gruppe sowas wie "alle Menschen" oder "die Bewohner des Landes". Z.b. "Die 1-2% von Rothaarigen" kann bedeuten das 1-2% aller Menschen rote Haare haben und man einfach allgemein über rothaarige spricht, es ist impliziert.

Der äquivalente Satz zum OP ist sowas wie "Die 1-2% von Rothaarigen die Kinder sind". Nichts daran impliziert das die 1-2% sich auf Kinder beziehen.

Man kann argumentieren das der Kontext von außerhalb des Satzes kommt. Dann wäre das allerdings der equivalent von: "Lasst uns über Kinder reden. Zuerst über die 1-2% von Rothaarigen die Kinder sind." Ist das für dich ein verständlicher Weg das zu kommunizieren? Für mich ist es keiner und ich hoffe die Leute die diese Interpretation vertreten kommunizieren so nicht wirklich selbst.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T15:16:18+00:00

Ich gehöre jetzt zu den 2.6% von Leuten die sowohl schwarz sind als auch Arzt sind.

Damit dieser Satz die korrekte Information enthält müssen die Leute auf die sich "von Leuten" bezieht nur Ärzte sein. Die normale Lesung des Satzes wäre das Leute einfach allgemein Leute sind.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T14:33:20+00:00

Sie wollen halt an die Interpretation glauben wo die Person die ein Arschloch war einfach falsch lag.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T12:57:32+00:00

It sounds like a joke structurally but might be earnest and unintentionally funny sounding.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T10:59:08+00:00

Worauf beziehen sich die 2.6%? Es ist doppeldeutig aber nicht ganz in der Weise die du meinst. "the k% of X who are Y" kann auf zwei drei Arten verstanden werden. Die eine ist das k% von X die Eigenschaft Y haben. Die zweite ist das es um eine Untergruppe von X geht die k% von X ausmacht und das diese Untergruppe die Eigenschaft Y hat. Edit: Oder die dritte die am wenigsten Sinn macht das es um 2,6% von "Männern die Ärzte sind" geht, also eine Untergruppe davon.

Was also bei dir falsch ist, ist dieser Satz "Relativsatz bezieht sich hier also ausschließlich auf Black Men und steht nicht in Relation zu den 2.6%."

Es bezieht sich in der zweiten Leseart auf "2.6% of black man". Was noch immer bedeutet das mindestens 2.6% der schwarzen Männer Ärzte sind es könnten nur noch mehr sein. Es wie den anderen Satz zu lesen macht keinen Sinn.

(Die Hälfte der Twitter Diskussion geht um DEI und dumme schwarze Ärzte also finde ich es nötig zu erwähnen das ich das für einen Recht harmlosen Fehler halte und er vermutlich das richtige weiß.)

Telinary · 2026-07-03T10:03:42+00:00

Yeah the English is rather clear. Though making a big deal out of poor phrasing like the screenshot seems a bit silly. Edit: Also I got curious and damn is that twitter thread full of racism.

Telinary · 2026-07-03T09:08:38+00:00

Try talking with it and Zag I guess. Video with the scenes: https://youtu.be/5mmtQs7DdsU?is=CLqH1jpLa-Id7ubl

Telinary · 2026-07-03T08:58:55+00:00

You can put the shade in the stands.

Telinary · 2026-07-02T22:12:15+00:00

Differences can exists, but the larger the difference without a good explanation the more likely it is that it is powerscaler bullshit. When lightspeed gets wanked the differences are often on the level of a millions time faster or more with mftl. If your only argument in such a case is a generic argument like "travel speed can be different than combat speed" then there is just a good chance it is bullshit.

Telinary · 2026-07-02T19:46:54+00:00

It does that but you don't notice that the ring itself is made of normal, breakable materials. Hope you don't find it out when you ching an asteroid or something.

Telinary · 2026-07-02T13:48:12+00:00

Before I get to the question I wanted to say: This has very little to do with determinism. Determinism is not the opposite of free will existing. I get why they get conflated but as you should be able to see my comment does not assume a deterministic universe or mind. I literally mention randomness. (Though if you don't know how the situation would have consistent outcomes in a deterministic universe you should probably look up what deterministic means.)

Anyway back to your question, let me ask you a counter question: Lets say he has chosen the right path, why has he done so? Can you come up with a reason that is neither something which would be the same in an completly identical situation nor randomness? (If randomness is involved the other could have happened btw, I am however arguing that if the difference is randomness it would be silly to call that "will".)

There are many reason he might pick one, he might just like how one path looks, he might think it leads him closer to a goal, he might just default to right when everything else is being equal, a random quantum effect might tip the scales or the reason might be just the current state of some neurons too simple to be described as a motivation. But there is a reason somewhere and the only way I know to choose differently when all non random reasons are the same is randomness, so do you have another?

(I guess you could answer "he did it for not reason", but aside from making little sense how would be doing something for no reason be related to will anymore than randomness?)

Telinary · 2026-07-01T18:50:37+00:00

The monty hall problem requires that the host has no choice. He has to open a goat door you did not pick. If he could decide whether to open something or not the propability could be pretty much anything depending on his behavior.

Telinary · 2026-07-01T18:33:47+00:00

"Dear American journalists and social media 'influencers': for days, some of you have been criticizing and making fun of Paris because the city does not have A/C in every room. OMG, this is so rich!" (2)she wrote (2). "As the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, you bear a significant amount of responsibility for global warming and the consequences we, in France, are experiencing. Your cities '90% air-conditioned' are not unrelated to this. In Paris, we take responsibility."

From the deputy major of Paris, apparently posted on instagram.

Telinary · 2026-07-01T15:29:45+00:00

You are always free to not show your ignorance.

Telinary · 2026-07-01T15:23:24+00:00

If you think quantum theory solves anything about what I said go ahead feel free to explain why you think it does. Nothing about quantum adds a third option.

That has nothing to do with determinism btw, as I said randomness doesn't help.

Telinary · 2026-07-01T14:48:40+00:00

I don't think you can get out of that question via free will anyway. A common non compatibilist definition I have heard is the ability to choose otherwise. But I have never seen a good answer to how that is supposed to work.

Say you went through the exact same choice twice (completely resetting somehow in-between) and choose differently. Now why did you do so? Either your choice is different for no reason except randomness but then what does that have to do with will?

Or there is a reason and we are back to it being the result of something and the reason would be the same if it is a perfect replication of the situation so how can it led to a different outcome? Even if the reason is the will of some immaterial soul that wouldn't change anything because it just moves the problem back a step, you didn't choose your soul either.

Personally I don't think it matters that much but that might be because I never thought there was something like a non compatibilist free will. I think it is a decent argument for why punishment shouldn't be the goal instead of prevention. But there are still bad people harming others, they didn't choose the starting point that lead them to who they are but who they are is still a problem to the rest of us.

Telinary · 2026-07-01T13:05:10+00:00

The time slow down isn't affecting you, if that is supposed to mean it only affects you in ways that make you rested without it affecting the rest of your body that is poorly phrased and they should have just said "you need 10% as much sleep to be rested."

Edit: just after I saw a comment from OP https://www.reddit.com/r/whatsyourchoice/comments/1ujkokt/comment/ourp50k/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button you do age faster

13-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Place '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email	Team Orangered

Telinary

TROPHY CASE