this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
424 points (93.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36129 readers
956 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is a genuine question.

I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.

P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let's be civil.

And if you're a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 10 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Yes.

Even in a unjust world mob justice isn't justice. This means a mob deciding someone is guilty and acting out punishment is unjust. But also a mob deciding a crime should go unpunished is unjust.

There's plenty wrong with how insurance works and plenty wrong with the justice system. But instead of giving up, we should be trying to fix these issues. It's all to easy to give in to our basic instincts and point to someone to blame. We punish them instead of fixing the issues. Killing one ceo might feel good, but it doesn't really change the big picture and in fact constitutes layer upon layer of failure. We should be better than that. History is full of people (singular and groups) being used as a scape goat to deflect and feel like something is being done, whilst in fact not actually fixing anything and just feeding hate.

Also in a capitalist world, the people with the most money have the most power. If we collectively decide it's open warfare, purge style distopia, they are going to have the upper hand. So purely from a self interest point of view, it would be better to work on fixing shit instead of reverting to monke.

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But instead of giving up, we should be trying to fix these issues.

Genuine question - how long do you think we should try to fix the issues before coming to the conclusion that they can't be fixed through conventional means? Do you think we should resort to nonconventional resolutions at all, if the conventional ones cease to function or don't yield results? If not, why not?

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nobody actually has an answer to that because there is no answer to it.

The system is so broken that there is no longer a way to fix it.

Any processes that could be implemented that have the potential to fix the issues comes from a broken system.

These processes would then be administered by the broken system.

Therefore no matter how good the process is, it will end up broken.

You may say that I am a hopeless person.

You may say that I am wrong and there is obviously something that can be done that has not yet been done.

I would say you are right, but experience indicates that although the possibility of reform exists, the capacity of the system to reform itself would be administered by a broken system.

Therefore even reform will end up broken and fail.

There was a reason why Nero played the fiddle while Rome burned. I'm just out here handing out rosin .

[–] OwlPaste@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The system is only broken because humans are dicks to other humans

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There is no fixing the human condition. Maybe when the computers become sentient they'll not look too poorly on us.

I think we could be rehabilitated we just can't be in charge of the rehabilitation

[–] mke_geek@lemm.ee -1 points 1 week ago

Humans could simply choose not to be evil.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Not quite. The reason we reject vigilantism is not that it is always unjust, but only usually. In this case, however, the outcome was in line with any reasonable objective standard of justice, as far as I can tell.

[–] reddit_sux@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

It did fix one issue. Just hear Blue Cross rolled back their decision to limit General Anaesthesia. That is one good turn.

Perhaps some CEOs must be sacrificed from time to time for fixing all the issues. Not everyone at once, just enough to put some pressure on the companies.