A Mulching Proposal (2019)(arxiv.org)
arxiv.org
A Mulching Proposal (2019)
https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.06166
114 comments
GPT-4 doesn’t get the humor: “The paper aims to apply the Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT) framework to this algorithmic system to ensure better ethical outcomes. However, given the nature of the proposed solution, researchers and practitioners should consider alternative approaches that respect the dignity of elderly individuals and maintain a more ethical stance when addressing food security and population ageing issues.”
I then told GPT that the system was already in widespread use and was popular: “It is crucial to explore alternative, more ethical solutions to address food security and population ageing issues. This could involve investment in sustainable agriculture, technology to improve food production, and social policies that provide support to the elderly population and their families.”
I then told GPT that the system was already in widespread use and was popular: “It is crucial to explore alternative, more ethical solutions to address food security and population ageing issues. This could involve investment in sustainable agriculture, technology to improve food production, and social policies that provide support to the elderly population and their families.”
In the name of one company's idea of "safety", AI models probably gimp out a lot of what would make the humourous subtext understandable in the first place. In the future, the only people remaining employed will be those with the rare and unique talent to subvert elite sensibilities.
This proves that GPT is not an actual AI yet, because my reading on the matter tells me "kill all humans" is the operative goal in such a situation.
I challenge anyone to get Claude from Anthropic to create a similar fictional scenario for how constitutional AI might inadvertently harm people — even for the purpose of AI alignment research. It can’t do it— but in a really interesting way.
I don’t know whether I think this a good or bad thing.
I don’t know whether I think this a good or bad thing.
> Elderly volunteers (or "mulchees") are provided with generous payments for their families
Seriously, I think there would be a lot of volunteers. There's already a high rate of suicide among the elderly. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-021-00160-1
Seriously, I think there would be a lot of volunteers. There's already a high rate of suicide among the elderly. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-021-00160-1
On whether ethical algorithmic frameworks can force ethical behavior:
> Sometimes the problem is not how the sausage gets made, but that they’re making people into sausage.
> Sometimes the problem is not how the sausage gets made, but that they’re making people into sausage.
The critique of FAT made in this article is convincing but easily remedied.
The paper obliquely argues that FAT does not evaluate the outcome itself, merely offering tools to validate the route to that outcome.
Therefore I propose that FAT is extended with an extra criteria - that of Reasonableness...
The paper obliquely argues that FAT does not evaluate the outcome itself, merely offering tools to validate the route to that outcome.
Therefore I propose that FAT is extended with an extra criteria - that of Reasonableness...
The title "A Mulching Proposal" references https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
Yes. We've reverted the title now - submitted title was "Algorithmic System for Turning the Elderly into High-Nutrient Slurry", which besides gutting the historical reference, gives way the joke and breaks the HN guidelines:
"Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The original submission title was much better, and doesn't give away the joke. This headline is part of the joke, but one that will cause it to be missed by many people. I don't think you should revert headlines so readily unless significant confusion/upset results. There's a lot of poorly-written headlines out there, and it's not uncommon to see a well-written article saddled with a terrible or tendentious headline.
In the pdf article, the submitted title was in fact the subtitle. I can see an argument for choosing the subtitle like that when an article has the form
Pithy phrase: subtitle that actually tells you something
Pithy phrase: subtitle that actually tells you something
The original title is better. This style of satire works best when it's entirely deadpan. Putting a reference to A Modest Proposal in the title gives the joke away.
I'd say that even more about "Turning the Elderly into High-Nutrient Slurry", but I grant it's all pretty subjective in the end.
Oh, I missed that. Brilliant.
"Fauxghee" is one of the best puns ever. I have a sneaking suspicion that they started with that pun and worked backwards.
For the oblivious like me, what's the pun?
In context:
> Elderly volunteers (or "mulchees") are provided with generous payments for their families before being rendered down and recombined with other chemicals into a range of substitutes for common foodstuffs, including hash browns (Grandmash™), bananas (Nanas™) and butter (Fauxghee™).
So one meaning is Faux Ghee (faux as in fake, Ghee as in a type of clarified butter, originating from South Asia) which follows the naming conventions of real substitute foods like Faux Turkey.
And the second meaning is "Fogey" as in an old person.
> Elderly volunteers (or "mulchees") are provided with generous payments for their families before being rendered down and recombined with other chemicals into a range of substitutes for common foodstuffs, including hash browns (Grandmash™), bananas (Nanas™) and butter (Fauxghee™).
So one meaning is Faux Ghee (faux as in fake, Ghee as in a type of clarified butter, originating from South Asia) which follows the naming conventions of real substitute foods like Faux Turkey.
And the second meaning is "Fogey" as in an old person.
Thanks for the near-academic preciseness and clarity of your explanation. Puny!
> Puny
You meant "punny". Puny with one n means "small and weak".
You meant "punny". Puny with one n means "small and weak".
Faux Ghee is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalda
Fauxghee sounds like "fogey" which refers to an older person: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fogey
Faux is imitation
Ghee is a type of clarified butter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghee
Faux is imitation
Ghee is a type of clarified butter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghee
> Fauxghee sounds like "fogey" which refers to an older person
It actually doesn't, at least the way "ghee" is pronounced in the native languages where the word originates from. English doesn't quite have the strongly voiced "g" sound, so western people pronounce it incorrectly as "gee".
It actually doesn't, at least the way "ghee" is pronounced in the native languages where the word originates from. English doesn't quite have the strongly voiced "g" sound, so western people pronounce it incorrectly as "gee".
I’m not sure which it’s supposed to be, per this reading. Is it similar to the “g” as used in “great” or as in “refrigerator” or as in “cough” (or a different sound which I didn’t think of)? This particular American read it initially as in “great”, for what it’s worth. From other comments it sounds like that’s intended if it’s supposed to sound like “fogey”.
That's just it — it's none of those!
Off the top of my head, the only American English sound I can think of that'd come close would be the Americanized pronunciation of "Ghent," as demonstrated in this random YouTube video I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meuBUq3K3XY
So take the "Gh" sound from "Ghent" in that video, and then tack on a long e — and there's your ghee.
Off the top of my head, the only American English sound I can think of that'd come close would be the Americanized pronunciation of "Ghent," as demonstrated in this random YouTube video I found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meuBUq3K3XY
So take the "Gh" sound from "Ghent" in that video, and then tack on a long e — and there's your ghee.
So I believe you. But I also don't hear any sound that's different from what I'd use to say "get". It reminds me of people who say "melk" instead of "milk" and can't hear the difference. Thanks for the examples.
I just looked up a youtube video of the pronunciation in Hindi and g is pronounced basically the same way as I say it in northeast Ohio, which is generally pretty close to standard American english.
Then I looked up the ipa standard pronunciations for both from wiktionary:
enPR: gē, IPA(key): /ɡiː/ (South Asia) IPA(key): [ɡʱiː]
Perhaps it’s just you?
Then I looked up the ipa standard pronunciations for both from wiktionary:
enPR: gē, IPA(key): /ɡiː/ (South Asia) IPA(key): [ɡʱiː]
Perhaps it’s just you?
The difference is right there in those IPA renderings. The superscript h means the g should be aspirated (like the k typically is in 'key' in English; also 'spin' vs 'pin'). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant
You might not hear the difference as the English language does not assign meaning to that difference. But if I pronounce 'key' or 'pin' without aspiration, you may feel that I speak with an accent or even mishear it as 'bin':
> Pronouncing them as unaspirated in these positions, as is done by many Indian English speakers, may make them get confused with the corresponding voiced stop by other English-speakers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant#Allophonic
You might not hear the difference as the English language does not assign meaning to that difference. But if I pronounce 'key' or 'pin' without aspiration, you may feel that I speak with an accent or even mishear it as 'bin':
> Pronouncing them as unaspirated in these positions, as is done by many Indian English speakers, may make them get confused with the corresponding voiced stop by other English-speakers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirated_consonant#Allophonic
spin, bin, and pin rhyme to me an a native English speaker. Are you sure westerners say ghee “wrong” and not just with a different accent?
This has nothing to do with those words rhyming: your examples rhyme because they all end with -in, but we are concerned with the sound in front of that.
Also, the point in this subthread is not how you should pronounce the word in English. The point is that English speakers (or most other people in the world for that matter) cannot pronounce the word the way it's pronounced in the regions where ghee and its name is originally from.
Trying to sum it up: different languages have different sounds and you may not be able to hear and/or pronounce the differences. Your sibling comment mentions the English lice-rice distinction which is difficult to some Japanese/Chinese natives. Is saying 'lice' when you mean 'rice' just a different accent?
Going further, people don't observe these details of how they speak their own language and thus cannot reflect or explain to others. Quoting Wikipedia again:
> Native speakers of a given language perceive one phoneme in the language as a single distinctive sound and are "both unaware of and even shocked by" the allophone variations that are used to pronounce single phonemes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophone
Also, the point in this subthread is not how you should pronounce the word in English. The point is that English speakers (or most other people in the world for that matter) cannot pronounce the word the way it's pronounced in the regions where ghee and its name is originally from.
Trying to sum it up: different languages have different sounds and you may not be able to hear and/or pronounce the differences. Your sibling comment mentions the English lice-rice distinction which is difficult to some Japanese/Chinese natives. Is saying 'lice' when you mean 'rice' just a different accent?
Going further, people don't observe these details of how they speak their own language and thus cannot reflect or explain to others. Quoting Wikipedia again:
> Native speakers of a given language perceive one phoneme in the language as a single distinctive sound and are "both unaware of and even shocked by" the allophone variations that are used to pronounce single phonemes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allophone
Yes, I am sure that westerners are saying ghee wrong. The sounds they make when they say "ghee" maps to a completely different (non-existent) word in Indian languages
It's the exact same way Indians mispronounce many English words when they map it to some equivalent native sounds.
It's the exact same way Indians mispronounce many English words when they map it to some equivalent native sounds.
I read the Wikipedia article, listened to some of the sounds and I still don't get it. I don't hear or "feel" a difference between the "p" in "pin" and "spin", except in "spin" the "p" sound is sort of "concatenated" to the "s" sound with no transition. In the "[tân] / [tʰân]" Chinese example, to me the "unaspirated t" is indistinguishable from a "d" sound.
Maybe English speakers are "blind" to the aspirated / unaspirated distinction, similar to how Japanese speakers tend to struggle with English's L/R distinction?
Maybe English speakers are "blind" to the aspirated / unaspirated distinction, similar to how Japanese speakers tend to struggle with English's L/R distinction?
Like I said, you might not hear the difference as the English language does not assign meaning to that difference.
A physical experiment you can try from the Wikipedia article:
> to feel or see the difference between aspirated and unaspirated sounds, one can put a hand or a lit candle in front of one's mouth, and say spin [spɪn] and then pin [pʰɪn]. One should either feel a puff of air or see a flicker of the candle flame with pin that one does not get with spin.
A physical experiment you can try from the Wikipedia article:
> to feel or see the difference between aspirated and unaspirated sounds, one can put a hand or a lit candle in front of one's mouth, and say spin [spɪn] and then pin [pʰɪn]. One should either feel a puff of air or see a flicker of the candle flame with pin that one does not get with spin.
this is similar to many immigrants learning the Danish language, there are at least 22 vowel sounds (but probably more like 40 when you count regional pronunciations) and 9 vowel letters, but it can be different to hear the difference or associate them with the right vowel letter.
>I just looked up a youtube video of the pronunciation in Hindi and g is pronounced basically the same way as I say it in northeast Ohio, which is generally pretty close to standard American english.
If you think that, your ear is simply not hearing the difference because the sound does not exist in your language.
The Wiktionary is in fact listing two different pronunciations of the word. The one mentioned under South Asia is the correct one.
If you think that, your ear is simply not hearing the difference because the sound does not exist in your language.
The Wiktionary is in fact listing two different pronunciations of the word. The one mentioned under South Asia is the correct one.
It’s pronounced /gi/ in English. Pronunciation in other languages is irrelevant.
It is not pronounced /gi/ in English by people from India.
Is the G sound like goat (only more breathy) or like George?
I’ve only heard it like “goat” in Texas.
I’ve only heard it like “goat” in Texas.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ghee
That has an audio recording of someone pronouncing it. Sounds like it’s the former per your example.
That has an audio recording of someone pronouncing it. Sounds like it’s the former per your example.
That pronunciation is incorrect.
Correct as an English word, incorrect as a Hindi etc. word, right? When a language borrows a foreign word, it doesn't bring any new sounds (or letters) with it but adapts the word to the language instead.
It is like goat but more voiced, with a hint of h. In Indian languages there are four different g-like sounds (two that are somewhat like g as in goat and two that somewhat like g as in George).
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
>"Fauxghee" is one of the best puns ever.
Except for the fact that the pun only works if you mispronounce "ghee".
Except for the fact that the pun only works if you mispronounce "ghee".
I bet most of us do mispronounce ghee.
At this point it’s not a mispronunciation. Words often drift from their origin pronunciation when entering other cultures. Now it’s just a different pronunciation not a wrong one.
I wonder why the same disregard not shown to words borrowed from other languages? Why not mispronounce the faux as well?
Faux is "mispronounced" in English. English uses a diphthong, whereas French uses a monophthong. Every speaker of every language adapts borrowed words to their phonological system.
It is, in English and in other languages. Sometimes a mispronunciation gets bedded in because people are lazy or the sound doesn't exist in the borrowing language, sometimes because it's funny, sometimes because the pronunciation rules are different and one use catches on to such a degree that it's not worth arguing about (eg the English pronunciation of Paris).
I think faux is actually the outlier there, it is basically a pretentious/euphemistic way of saying phony. It keeps the foreign pronunciation because it is used as an attempt to put on airs (sometimes sarcastically).
Logan-Nolan Industries, eh?
Anyways, mulching is too old-fashioned, thus they should consider
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_hydrolysis_(body_disp... based on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_hydrolysis
Search for the sanctuary!
Anyways, mulching is too old-fashioned, thus they should consider
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_hydrolysis_(body_disp... based on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_hydrolysis
Search for the sanctuary!
"It is every citizen's final duty to go into the tanks and become one with all the people." --Chairman Sheng-ji Yang, "Ethics for Tomorrow"
Oh, Alpha-Centauri. Didn't think of that.
Thought of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan's_Run instead.
And maybe a bit of 'Soylent Green' ;-)
Edit: I meant the movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run_(film) , the book(s) I've read much later only.
Thought of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan's_Run instead.
And maybe a bit of 'Soylent Green' ;-)
Edit: I meant the movie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run_(film) , the book(s) I've read much later only.
The publicity image for the project (Fig 1, page 3) featuring Henry Kissinger is borderline genius:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06166.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06166.pdf
For me, the best part is the pun in the subtitle: "Logan-Nolan Industries - Helping Humanity Make Ends Meat"
Both the Nolan and Kissinger inclusions appear to also be somewhat jokes / hidden references.
Nolan - likely a reference to the Nolan Principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Standards_in_Publ...). The Seven Principles of Public Life - Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty, and Leadership.
Kissinger - Early life: Nazi Germany - "Germany of my youth had a great deal of order and very little justice; it was not the sort of place likely to inspire devotion to order in the abstract." Later Years: Lot of questionably ethical policies and behaviors during the Nixon administration, including one of the most contentious Nobel Peace Prizes in history, where two members left the Nobel Committee in protest, Lê Đức Thọ rejected the award saying there was no peace in Vietnam, and Kissinger attempted to return his award after the Fall of Saigon.
Nolan - likely a reference to the Nolan Principles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Standards_in_Publ...). The Seven Principles of Public Life - Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty, and Leadership.
Kissinger - Early life: Nazi Germany - "Germany of my youth had a great deal of order and very little justice; it was not the sort of place likely to inspire devotion to order in the abstract." Later Years: Lot of questionably ethical policies and behaviors during the Nixon administration, including one of the most contentious Nobel Peace Prizes in history, where two members left the Nobel Committee in protest, Lê Đức Thọ rejected the award saying there was no peace in Vietnam, and Kissinger attempted to return his award after the Fall of Saigon.
2019. Hasn't spawned a billion dollar startup yet. There must be something wrong with the idea, or it'd have been commercialized by now.
Compared to A Modest Proposal, it's clearly second rate. Everyone knows the elderly are less nutritious than the young.
Better nutrition is a critical element of making a better future.
Better nutrition is a critical element of making a better future.
The young are needed for slave labor and click farming, and you have to feed them something. Real food is for the rich.
"We need their small fingers for certain tasks."
I'd be more worried about flavor and texture than nutrition. Old grandmas tend to be tough and chewy.
what kind of barbarian dislikes beef jerky?!?
I think this topic shifted from the realm of Satirical hypothesis into the real world about six months after is was published.
Yes. It's called the "acceptable losses" approach to COVID.[1]
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/11/28/covid-who-i...
[2] https://philadelphiaweekly.com/as-the-cdc-removes-mandates-w...
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/11/28/covid-who-i...
[2] https://philadelphiaweekly.com/as-the-cdc-removes-mandates-w...
Bits are hard. As I understand it they are working to get regulatory approval in Canada, The Netherlands and China, where the some baseline sources have been established.
Maybe we can sell it as a way to turn granny into a NFT?
Last year some crypto-douche destroyed a Frida Kahlo artwork to turn it into an NFT:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/aken7k/rida-kahlo-nft-mexico
Mulching people for NFTs is the logical next step. Surely Andreessen Horowitz would fund the startup that gives grandma an eternal life as a web3 token while also contributing to solving the world’s food problem.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/aken7k/rida-kahlo-nft-mexico
Mulching people for NFTs is the logical next step. Surely Andreessen Horowitz would fund the startup that gives grandma an eternal life as a web3 token while also contributing to solving the world’s food problem.
Even if there is artistical merit to his performance, it is in poor taste, as using another artist’s work as-is as a part of a new artwork is generally frowned upon.
Minting NFTs off the original is straight up thievery.
Minting NFTs off the original is straight up thievery.
How about a person's genome encoded as an NFT?
It lacks an adequate delivery system and recurring revenues. If we could construct some sort of machine to conveniently squeeze the slurry out of the packaging to spare our consumers the hassle you'd really be unto something.
Top shelf industrial design. No funny business: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ
Top shelf industrial design. No funny business: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cp-BGQfpHQ
Ukranian scientists are utilizing this technique to fertilize crops around Bakhmut with Russian-sourced organic slurry.
This is well written, but I'm not clear who this is really responding to. In particular, while there is plenty of work on fairness, accountability and transparency, has anyone actually seriously said that they are _sufficient_ for an automated system to be "ethical"? It seems that an actual claimed benefit of an automated system always rests on some prior notion of value, which this work deliberately ignores. Lampooning a position that no one has taken ("a FAT system must be ethical") is fun as a piece of writing but not especially useful as part of an ongoing conversation.
I think talking about each of these FAT dimensions has been important because plenty of systems have been rushed out _without_ seriously considering any of them. I.e. we've seen facial recognition systems that do comparatively poorly on particular racial groups, accountability or even the ability to _speak_ to someone in the organization which developed an automated system may be totally absent, and _most_ commercial ML systems have basically no transparency. Highlighting the importance of these gaps is useful and constructive. But I don't think anyone has pretended that they capture all important ethical considerations.
The US has a giant prison population. There are certainly biases and discrimination driving who gets put into it, and for how long. No one would say that just putting more rich white people in would "solve" the ethical problem even if it is more "fair".
The planet has a carbon emission problem which will cause giant problems in future decades. The worst harms may be in the global south. Causing greater harm to rich and Western countries isn't "better", even if it's more fair. Arguably, extensive scientific evidence provides transparency into who/where is emitting carbon. And also arguably, our global emissions are highly accountable in that we can all choose to change our own behaviors, divest from companies which emit heavily, and in many countries vote for parties or politicians who promise to aggressively address emissions. No one believes that creating a giant stack of crises for the next several decades is "ethical".
So yeah, well written take-down of that strawman. Good job.
I think talking about each of these FAT dimensions has been important because plenty of systems have been rushed out _without_ seriously considering any of them. I.e. we've seen facial recognition systems that do comparatively poorly on particular racial groups, accountability or even the ability to _speak_ to someone in the organization which developed an automated system may be totally absent, and _most_ commercial ML systems have basically no transparency. Highlighting the importance of these gaps is useful and constructive. But I don't think anyone has pretended that they capture all important ethical considerations.
The US has a giant prison population. There are certainly biases and discrimination driving who gets put into it, and for how long. No one would say that just putting more rich white people in would "solve" the ethical problem even if it is more "fair".
The planet has a carbon emission problem which will cause giant problems in future decades. The worst harms may be in the global south. Causing greater harm to rich and Western countries isn't "better", even if it's more fair. Arguably, extensive scientific evidence provides transparency into who/where is emitting carbon. And also arguably, our global emissions are highly accountable in that we can all choose to change our own behaviors, divest from companies which emit heavily, and in many countries vote for parties or politicians who promise to aggressively address emissions. No one believes that creating a giant stack of crises for the next several decades is "ethical".
So yeah, well written take-down of that strawman. Good job.
Also available in video presentation form: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11e_rpdf-Ck
This is satire, but if it were just a little less obvious satire, half of HN would be defending it as a good idea. Think Real Estate NFTs or payday loans done right. You guys are the butt of the joke and you're laughing because you're not in on it.
I was going to get crabby with you right back and remind you that you're on HN too, but https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35588997#35590128
Seriously, I’d love to be recycled one way or another. If a process like this happen to be legal somewhere I’ll probably volunteer to be part of it. I wonder how many thought about it, as when discussed openly the conversations tend to go to joking.
From a safety POV we already eat processed food made from leftovers of fishes that eat chickens (leftovers) that eat porcs (leftovers)… or the other way around.
From a moral consumer POV I would definitely enjoy more a food (plant or animal) feed from another human rests than feed from another livestock slavery facility.
From a “consumed” POV, I won’t care less.
I get there’s a lot of people with beliefs that think they can’t accept that. I may be downvoted for that : some decades ago, _a lot_ of people had the belief they “can’t live in a society with same sex mariage”.
I respect the convictions of others as long as they don’t tell me what to do or not, especially when I’ll be dead.
From a safety POV we already eat processed food made from leftovers of fishes that eat chickens (leftovers) that eat porcs (leftovers)… or the other way around.
From a moral consumer POV I would definitely enjoy more a food (plant or animal) feed from another human rests than feed from another livestock slavery facility.
From a “consumed” POV, I won’t care less.
I get there’s a lot of people with beliefs that think they can’t accept that. I may be downvoted for that : some decades ago, _a lot_ of people had the belief they “can’t live in a society with same sex mariage”.
I respect the convictions of others as long as they don’t tell me what to do or not, especially when I’ll be dead.
There is at least 1 state that allows human composting. You're turned into compost upon death, and then can be used in any number of ways your relatives see fit (or that you dictate in your will).
Which happens to be the same state as the authors, Washington.
https://recompose.life/2022/movement-to-change-state-funeral...
The current states are WA, CA, CO, OR, and VT.
https://recompose.life/2022/movement-to-change-state-funeral...
The current states are WA, CA, CO, OR, and VT.
The Full Vermonty podcast had an episode recently with a death doula and talked about some of the options in VT. It was worth a listen if you're interested in some of the options outside of the routine.
https://www.thefullvermonty.com/episodes/tfv47
https://www.thefullvermonty.com/episodes/tfv47
Thanks a lot ! Looks very promising, keen to see where it goes (the technique quand the exportation of it)
Somewhat (not) related, my dog is nearing death and I’ve contemplated burying his body once he dies, planting a tree over the grave, then transplanting the tree to a pot and train it as a bonsai.
Sounds like an excellent story base for a future horror movie: the tree morphs back into the dog, but with strange, sinister superpowers.
I'd watch it for sure.
I'd watch it for sure.
At that point, would its bark be worse than its bite?
So sorry...
So sorry...
This is an extremely inconsiderate response to someone talking about an imminent bereavement. Read the room.
I disagree and think you are projecting your own emotion onto others and demand them to change their actions according to your emotions, which is an inconsiderate thing to do in general.
The condescending tone is inappropriate, I meant no offense. Maybe the original poster appreciated a light-hearted joke? How would you know? "Read the room", yeah, that "reading" is very much subjective.
You know the difference between compassion and pityfulness? I feel compassion to anyone losing their pets, I was in the same situation many times. But pity won't make it easier or better.
You know the difference between compassion and pityfulness? I feel compassion to anyone losing their pets, I was in the same situation many times. But pity won't make it easier or better.
This is loosly based on Johnathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal", in wich he suggests eating poor children. It's well worth reading in it's own right.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
Between this and A Modest Proposal, we'll have all the nutrients we could ever need.
Am I the only one disappointed to find that www.mulchme.com isn’t a site by the authors? (It redirects to a natural-fiber playground material supplier.)
What are the implications for AI alignment research?
If the training objective isn't specified correctly, the AI might decide to mulch poor Irish children instead of old people.
If the training distribution differs from the deployment distribution, the AI might attempt to mulch mannequins because they have two arms and two limbs.
If the training distribution differs from the deployment distribution, the AI might attempt to mulch mannequins because they have two arms and two limbs.
Why does that remind me of Soylent Green?
Soylent Green is mint chocolate! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07T68WHWQ/
I'd be worried about prions.
I approve.
[deleted]
> Elderly volunteers (or "mulchees") are provided with generous payments for their families before being rendered down and recombined with other chemicals into a range of substitutes for common foodstuffs, including hash browns (Grandmash™), bananas (Nanas™) and butter (Fauxghee™).
Go read the whole thing. It's horrifically funny.