Is anyone else bothered by the last panel where they suddenly switch places?

Anything I could do to make sure my heir continued on with my vision would not be guarunteed, and it would only be temporary. As the saying goes, you’re putting all of your eggs in one basket, from one ruler to the next.

A more permanent solution would be to overhaul the current system and setup checks and balances so that no one person could have too much power.

You could divide up power between an Executive Branch, a Legislative Branch, and a Judicial Branch. Then you put in place like-minded groups of people in each of those branches and voilà.

Taking a look at the recent modlog, as well as other comments around here, it looks like they’re trying to find the right balance for what’s okay and what has crossed the line.

There are an alarming number of comments that are actively encouraging murder and the amount of upvotes that even the worst of those comments receive is sickening.

I think, at this point, anything the health insurance companies do that actually looks good, will make us jump to that conclusion.

This isn’t a trolley problem. Killing CEOs is not going to save any more lives or “fix the system” in any way.

There’s no guarantee that the new CEO will be better or worse, and if they feel threatened enough they’ll just hire security.

Doesn’t sound like much more than acknowledging the process and signing the form by the judge. Is that art?

Judging by the picture in the article, the judge wasn’t just a passive participant who was standing nearby and watching, or sitting in an office and signing a document.

Depends on where you live. There’s a very similar case in Germany from 2 years ago compared to what’s going on now.

In Germany a cop was murdered and someone posted on Facebook: “Not a single second of silence for these creatures.”

The courts have ruled that even “liking” a comment/post like that could be a crime.

https://winfuture.de/news,131418.html

The other post had it just as bad if not worse before it was removed entirely.

I tried to bring up the point that a system where we kill CEOs because we don’t like their business practices isn’t going to fix anything and the downvotes immediately poured in.

Either this is just the way that a lot of people on Lemmy think, or there’s some concerted effort/psyop trying to stir discontent among the users here.

For a bit there I was doubting if I even wanted to be associated with Lemmy anymore, but at least it looks like the mods have been cleaning up the worst comments.

I’m speaking in general terms here for any corporation which is why I commented in the way that I did. You’re the one escalating this to an extreme and retroactively applying that to my comment.

Calling for someone else to be killed for any reason is just revenge, it doesn’t solve anything. If any CEO is responsible for the death of a spouse/kid then throw them in prison.

Literal mob mentality? I’m not the one calling for a lynching here.

Someone will always be upset about something.

Stooping so low to kill someone just because you’re dissatisfied with the way they handle business doesn’t fix anything. Continually killing CEOs is not going to “train the system” to be better.

In a world like that, you would just have extremists on different sides killing CEOs for whatever reason they felt like.

That’s not what I’m saying or implying in any way.

Killing someone isn’t going to fix anything. Someone else will just step up and take their place.

Coyote vs Acme

The movie is already completely finished, but some “genius” thinks that they’ll make more money by shelving it and claiming it for a tax-writeoff.

No… A closer comparison shows that she would be like Sam Bankman-Fried with a 25 year sentence and ordered to repay $11 billion. Although she probably would end up on a cover of Forbes.

Can you expand on this?
Either you replied to the wrong comment, or you’re clearly thinking of some context that I’m not, or it’s related to some saying that I’m not familiar with.

I think it’s a valid question. I wouldn’t say that the only reason for abolishing the death penalty is because we might make a mistake… that definitely factors into it, but there’s more to it.

Ask yourself what purpose does it serve to put someone to death? They’re already in jail/prison and no longer a threat to society. Deterrence? Is the death penalty any more of a deterrence than a life sentence?

The only purpose I can think of for the death penalty is that it’s for “Revenge”. It doesn’t actually fix anything in of itself. It doesn’t resolve disputes, it doesn’t really solve anything.

The amount of people in here pushing for the death penalty when it’s used on people they dislike is sickening…

This is a penalty that needs to be abolished, not expanded or made exceptions for.

Except, if we already had protections to prevent this from happening, then it wouldn’t have happened… Or at least the FDIC would have actually stepped in by now to pay everyone back and track down all the funds themselves.

The point of this research was to avoid even that.

It’s pretty awesome that it even breaks down in soil:

In soil, sheets of the new plastic degraded completely over the course of 10 days, supplying the soil with phosphorous and nitrogen similar to a fertilizer.

Then maybe introduce some incentives to make up for that 7% or else force their hand by introducing steep penalties for any plastics that are used which aren’t up to a higher standard like this… Or a little bit of both.