I'm pretty sure there was a weird bug in the original C&C generals where the game engine 'tick rate' was somehow tied to CPU cycles and assumed single-threading or something.
I remember going back and trying to play it many years after it came out, and it was basically broken because the entire game moved at like... 2-3x the maximum speed it was ever meant to run at
Sure there were some buzz words in there... But the actual core of the post wasn't patronising at all. Might need to take a step back and ask why your response to that was so strong.
Actually I disagree, see previous comment re: the Fridman/zuch interview.
The genuinely cool thing about that though... They aren't sending the video.
Instead, they convert both people's faces into skeletal meshes and only send the transform data over the wire, recreating the other person at the other end as a 3D model that is being animated using the transmitted animation data.
The bandwidth requirements are reduced by like... 100x
I get your point, but there are already MULTIPLE examples of people combining the mental-health component + some externality that is fundamentally a societal failing and coming to the conclusion that MAID is the optimal outcome.
"An expert committee reviewing euthanasia deaths in Canada’s most populous province has identified several cases in which patients asked [AND WERE APPROVED] to be killed in part for social reasons such as isolation and fears of homelessness, raising concerns over approvals for vulnerable people in the country’s assisted dying system."
-
"Another case focused on Ms B, a woman in her 50s suffering from multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome, who had a history of mental illness including suicidality and post-traumatic stress disorder. She was socially isolated and asked to die largely because she could not get proper housing, according to the report."
These are all excellent examples of how MAID should be used, I think the concerning thing is the widening of the eligibility criteria - especially when things like mental illness start to make you eligible.
Like... If your illness makes you suicidal... Is offering assisted suicide REALLY the best we can do? That starts to feel a lot like "eghh you're too hard for society to care about... We'll just let you die".
As horrible as this might sound, often it's failed suicide attempts that actually are the catalysts for people being able to get their lives back on track... What happens in a society where the government helps facilitate suicide and there's never any "attempts" anymore... Just successes...
IMO a healthy relationship with LSD is one where, after a certain point (usually single-digit experiences), you can very confidently wish the substance a heartfelt goodbye, and thank it for it's service.
After my third experience, I woke up the next day knowing I'd learned an enormous amount about myself, and learned to think in ways I couldn't previously.
At the same time though, I just... "Knew"... I'd learned everything LSD had to teach me and that any further experiences with it would be like trying to over-optimise my brain, causing more harm than good.
That was ~4 years ago, and I've had literally zero desire to even consider touching the stuff since then.
I'm glad I did (3-4 times), but I'm VERY confident I'll never do it again.
I find it fascinating how many things like this just completely gloss over the fact that some people have side-effects to these drugs that make them completely non-useable, and often it's some of the people who could most benefit.
I have ADHD, and have tried all the current generation of these drugs and absolutely CANNOT take them, they basically prevent my ADHD medication from working and I end up depressed and wanting to kill myself.
This idea of these drugs being a "cure-all" that we'll all just be taking one day proactively scares the shit out of me, because I worry it will mean that medical science will stall (as far as it relates to these types of conditions) for those of us who simply can't take these drugs.
There's probably a really interesting, bit potentially controversial topic to be discussed here.
As a Non-Indian, I'm quite aware/familiar with this kind of culture you speak of within Indian culture in the workplace and, to be blunt, if I were applying for a role as say a high level product manager (my current gig) and there was a native-born/raised Indian person as the hiring manager, I would at the very least be very cautious about this risk.
But in this situation, given the power dynamic is in favour of the other party, does this make me "biased"?... Or just "careful"?
I remember going back and trying to play it many years after it came out, and it was basically broken because the entire game moved at like... 2-3x the maximum speed it was ever meant to run at