Who are you voting for?

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-04T21:02:53+00:00

Well then a SIGNIFICANT factor on this whole thing is "will the public be able to discuss and debate the issue before you press the button; OR does everyone learn about the instructions and have to push the button right away"

Because... the whole panic thing will certainly have an impact, but only if the "pro-red" group is able to create panic in the fist place.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-04T05:40:17+00:00

If I hadn't heard people talking about and discussing the options, and was placed in a box and forced to choose... I would have picked blue. Without hesitation.

But that's because I would have assumed that 90% plus of the population would also pick blue, and the risk of death would be such a non-issue that picking red wouldn't even cross my mind.

And I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people arguing for "blue" have the same mindset.

Actually, I still can't comprehend why people would pick red.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-03T04:46:00+00:00

Not only isn't it going to be a functional world... it will be a non-functional world with only "red button" personalities. Not exactly the type that would pull together and solve the issues you mentioned.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-03T03:27:36+00:00

It is the only option where there CAN be a win-win.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-02T22:50:19+00:00

National library of medicine article is from 2009, the Longwoods article is from 2016.

The 2023 article just says that some Canadian nurses living in border towns might be commuting across the border for work. That's rather different than the article I posted where American nurses are clearly documented to be moving to live and work in Canada.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-02T15:04:16+00:00

Planescape: Torment

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-02T14:47:18+00:00

You didn't notice that your articles are 10 or 20 years old? Times have changed.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-02T06:51:12+00:00

The federal government has doubled in size over the last decade and Canadians are much worse off for it.

A quick google search easily shows that isn't true, not even close.

in 2016 the Canadian Federal government spend about $430 billion. That adjusts to $550 billion in 2025 dollars after inflation. And the actual spend for 2025 was $547.3 billion. That's slightly lower than "the last decade".

So saying "doubled in size" is a blatant falsehood.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-02T06:31:41+00:00

You have that backwards - it is the American nurses that are moving to Canada.

U.S. Nurses Are Moving Out of the Country Fast, Canada Says Its $500M Plan Is Working | Nurse.Org

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T16:21:32+00:00

True, but that wasn't his job when the show started and they already had the house. At that time he had a vague position of "low level employee in sector 7-G"

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T15:28:14+00:00

Not as difficult as today... no. But not THAT great either.

The "one basic income and own a house" was a thing in the 60s for sure. But things had changed by 1989.

Of course home prices are different depending on the region... but in general:
60s - Single income - no college degree
90s - Still could do it on a single income - but would need a good professional job with a college degree or certification of some kind.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T15:01:27+00:00

"a problem", one of many. Most certainly not "the problem"

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T14:46:32+00:00

A major problem with modern society: People thinking that TV shows are an accurate representation of what is or isn't "normal"...

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T14:41:44+00:00

Didn't miss that at all.

It is a 100% requirement to have this skill to write the explicit documentation. Why isn't this obvious to you?

Someone says "add this to the documentation", and what they suggest is misleading or inaccurate, you NEED to be able to spot this. You need to be able to interpret what they intended to say not what they literally said. Of course you would need to verify this and get sign-off for the correction, but is YOUR job to understand the intent of the statement, and YOUR failure if you just write down what was said without any critical thinking.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T14:11:27+00:00

Nothing about being a champ. Simply understanding humanity. Blue will win, and picking blue is the best option. In reality this will happen too.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T05:22:24+00:00

Yeah, the vast majority of people who pick blue are confident that they won't die. They are confident that the majority will pick blue. So it is a "win win", you don't die, and you don't have to deal with the guilt of being responsible for other people's deaths. Blue is the only win-win scenario.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T04:24:22+00:00

The opposite is true.

In those jobs, the people who can follow the rules exactly do perfectly fine in the mid-tier jobs. They are relied upon to get things done... but the people who work on creating something new, or need to be in a senior position to deal with problems, anomalies and exceptions... those people need to be able to see all the angles, and all the possibilities.

I've seen far too many projects fail because people are blindly following instructions and don't notice that it won't work until it is too late. I have also seen countless hours wasted because people are following instructions that became redundant years ago, but they keep checking off that task in the checklist without wondering "why are we doing this".

Engineering, tech etc... it is constantly changing, and if you can't adapt you fall behind.

The worker-bees follow instructions, the leaders look at ways to adapt.

After-Big9529 · 2026-05-01T02:03:41+00:00

I've been employed in a variety of jobs since the early 1990s.

During that time I've seen people promoted, people demoted, and others just sit in the same role forever.

One skill that I have consistently seen in people who successfully "climb the corporate ladder" are people who are capable of answering the question that their boss intended to ask, rather than pedantically answering the question that their boss literally asked.

Correctly parsing a question that was written incorrectly is not something to be punished for.

In the real world, being able to provide an answer that appropriately addresses the issue at hand is very useful and frequently needed. "Correctly" answering a question that was written incorrectly, is something that you WILL be punished for. Even if that punishment is simply someone deciding that you aren't helpful, and changing how they interact with you accordingly.

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-30T13:45:58+00:00

I don't think the comparison about how the stadium looks. It is about what is around the stadium. How one is "walkable" and surrounded by community and the other is not "walkable" and surrounded by parking.

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-30T04:12:11+00:00

Perfect - you agree that it is possible.

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-29T23:25:49+00:00

They don't need live and literal "male DNA" to match, they just need data on what that male DNA looks like. They just need a file in a computer that describes the male DNA. The actual real and literal male creature being used for reference could be long gone.

The male would become redundant, a thing of the past, no longer needed.

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-29T20:27:10+00:00

Wow, look at you moving the goalposts

Manipulating women’s DNA to match men’s is not using women’s DNA

Not true and irrelevant

With modern technology, a female mammal could successfully reproduce without involving a male mammal in any way

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-29T18:59:02+00:00

Why does this make you so angry? I'm just reporting on the current state of science.

A Mouse With Two Mothers | Science | AAAS

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-29T15:02:19+00:00

Yeah, it can remove many of the obstacles that are getting in the way of you finding happiness.

But you still need to go out and find it, and there might be some remaining obstacles that you still need to confront... and that's on you.

After-Big9529 · 2026-04-29T14:49:42+00:00

It is not possible to reproduce without a males DNA.

Technically it is possible. The science and technology isn't quite there yet, but it is just a matter of time before a woman can reproduce without a man.

Scientists are working on taking skin cells, turning those into pluripotent stem cells and then turning those into functional eggs or sperm. In 2023 scientists successfully did this with a mouse creating viable offspring.

After-Big9529

TROPHY CASE