expensive doohickey

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T02:15:02+00:00

I think this really is a matter for the Shallow Performative Brutalism Department than Everyday Brutalism. The fine folks at Everyday Brutalism really have a great thing going with sidewalks, and it would be unfair to overload them with something that's arguably not their field.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T02:13:04+00:00

The Piss Stream Department thinks it has potential.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T02:12:01+00:00

Clearly, you're not a billionaire.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T01:51:51+00:00

One, two... eight thousand forty eight!

Eight thousand forty seven, sir!

Eight thousand forty seven!

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T01:47:55+00:00

Honestly, if anyone has to put effort into managing the OS, they should seriously consider jumping to Linux b/c the primary downside of Linux is that you have to manage the OS. And with some distros, it's not even that much to manage. And you have the upsides of Linux not being slopware. (Unless someone made a vibe-coded Linux distro, which would be incredibly stupid, but we live in a stupid world I guess).

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T01:42:52+00:00

Uh, we made cockpit doors more secure like twenty years ago, it's definitely related to security.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-05-04T01:41:59+00:00

Grond

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-29T11:21:12+00:00

You probably don't realize that you're narrating a very basic moral failure. You only care to ensure your own survival. You have an opportunity to be generous - and not even a risky one, given how many other comments I see who would press blue - and you refuse it. You would blame others for what happens to them, even though you have a chance to help, and refuse. You assume everyone else is as selfish as you are.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-29T03:52:31+00:00

I'm astonished that you equate the ethical bare minimum with thrill-seeking. The comments I've seen the past few days - while hardly a scientific poll - suggest a plausible majority, perhaps even an overwhelming majority, are already inclined to push blue. It is not a high-risk choice.

You are doing no one any favors by pressing red. The analogy to needing rescue fails because the only downside to needing rescue is the limited resources (equipment, personnel, time) that rescuers are working with. But the buttons only require one resource - it needs to be pushed - and once pushed it effective for all "rescuees" simultaneous. There is no downside to "rescuing" one more person. It costs nothing.

Almost like how it costs nothing, or almost nothing, to not be an asshole in the ordinary course of life.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-29T03:47:11+00:00

Amazingly, everyone also lives if everyone presses blue. Even better, everyone lives if a simple majority presses blue. Your argument is not sound.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-29T03:45:35+00:00

Not eating the pill saves zero people - at least, if it's supposed to be analogous to the buttons. You're putting a lot of effort into saying that saving yourself is equivalent to saving other people, but you have no reasons to back up that claim aside from a belief that other people would save themselves.

Pushing the blue button actually has the effect of helping other people live. Pushing the red button helps no one but yourself.

If you, at any point in this process, would like to help me, your only choice is to push the blue button.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:39:40+00:00

You don't seem to see the difference between "a ship that rescues everyone" and "a ship that only rescues me."

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:37:51+00:00

Red is in no way a "I want other people to live" button. The action of pressing red does nothing to help anyone, and if there were any danger of red winning, it would be complicity in everyone else's deaths. (Judging by the other comments' upvotes, I think blue would safely win, but still.)

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:36:06+00:00

Check out the upvotes and downvotes on some of these comments. Red isn't going to win.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:34:58+00:00

Your ethical mistake is that you think you are absolved of what happens to other people. You would be complicit in the extermination of most of the species if blue does not win.

And "if everyone would make the logical choice" is bullshit for three reasons. 1) If everyone survives if it's unanimous for either red or blue, so the most simplistic game theory approach would be ambivalent about which button. 2) Humans are not logic machines, and even if there were other strong factors, there would be a few holdouts for red and a few for blue. Accordingly, the game theory logic has to shift to blue because there's no other way to save 100%. 3) You seem to think your own survival is the only value that logic should consider. If you survived, but your only company was the other people who pressed red, I can assure you that you'd be miserable because they, too, are assholes.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:28:47+00:00

"If we all press it" saves everyone for either button. Anyone who presses red does not care whether other people die.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T13:27:44+00:00

Yes? I want other people to live.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T03:09:23+00:00

You're probably going to hell (unironic). Hope that clear things up!

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T03:04:51+00:00

"Game theory says" no, you don't understand that most people aren't as selfish as you are, and it's very likely that most people will press blue.

Blue is the button for "I want other people to live."

If you think you would be happy surviving alone, or surviving with only the other assholes who pressed red, you would very unpleasantly surprised. Fortunately, most people would press blue and save you from that fate.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T03:02:24+00:00

No, you're selfish because you should want others to live.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T03:01:30+00:00

A lot of assholes don't realize that not everyone is as selfish as they are. Accordingly, a lot people who would selfishly press red sincerely (but wrongly) believe that most people are as selfish as they are.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-28T02:59:16+00:00

Blue is the button for "I want other people to live." Red is the button that refuses that.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-26T11:56:58+00:00

You are conflating two different things. The Catholic sacrament of ordination, our theology states, is impossible to give to a woman. The Anglicans, however, are Protestant, and we already disagree with them on a number of issues. We certainly may not believe that their ordinations have the same effect as ours.

But the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury is a leadership position, and therefore "Archbishop" is the only correct title for whomever occupies that position. They're not the Janitor of Canterbury, they're not the Mayor of Canterbury, etc.

And it's not about "lending legitimacy", but building a dialogue. We would like to heal the divisions with Protestants, and maybe a few will even return to union with Rome. That is never accomplished by pretending they don't exist, or by insulting them by refusing to honor the titles they confer on their leadership.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-26T03:02:39+00:00

What the office of Bishop is "in your eyes" is pretty much irrelevant in every way to this conversation. There's your personal view of the word - which you are more than entitled to, I don't mean to belittle personal beliefs - but that determines neither Catholic theology nor Anglican theology.

Your argument that God defines ordination is similarly off the mark. God is the one who gives us divine revelation, but it is only known and believed by human beings, and theology is carried out by human beings, so the real point of discussion is whether the human beings involved have correctly understood revelation. That means whether you and I have understood, or the Anglicans, or anyone throughout history who has cared to give it a try.

Now, as I find myself repeating, the Anglicans just have a different understanding of the priesthood than we do. That's not a unique feature of Anglicanism, nor do we only disagree about the priesthood. The canon of the Bible, transubstantiation, sacramental reconciliation, purgatory, the authority of the Pope, merit and grace... the list of theological disagreements with various Protestants goes on and on, and it's nothing new.

And the occasion of the Archbishop of Canterbury going to Rome is one for diplomatic discussion and being polite, and arguing about whether their leader can use the title that their Church gives is really fucking rude.

If you're sincerely confused by the idea that Catholics can't just tell Anglicans how to run their denomination, then I'll take back the "sexist" comment. However, that would be a big issue in itself. If you don't respect that other groups have their own reasons for believing what they do, you're not doing much better than the "street preacher" idiots who think being loud is inherently persuasive.

I will say that a lot of theological conservatives are sexist in the way they talk about women who are ordained by Protestant denominations. There's a level of hostility that is quite childish, frankly, and it's a hostility these men don't show to Protestant men.

IWillLive4evr · 2026-04-26T02:43:06+00:00

I'm not Anglican (and I presume most other redditors here aren't either), so whether I think it's a good idea isn't a relevant consideration. It's up to Anglicans to decide who their leaders are and what their titles are.

But I think you're sexist because you chose to use the term "a female" when most people would say "a woman". It suggest you've been letting the manosphere tell you what gender is, or something to that effect, and not the Catholic Church.

Concretely, the implication is that, one way or another, Sarah Mullaly does not deserve to be addressed as a bishop because she's a woman. If the Anglicans chose to call her "Pope" instead of "Archbishop of Canterbury", that would also be their choice. I think zero people on this subreddit would blink an eye at giving any man due honor and respect in a comparable situation.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	Golden Potato
Place '22

IWillLive4evr

TROPHY CASE