This line of thinking has always puzzled me. At some point one’s brain must be so compromised that we really can’t expect them to function as a human, but most people’s reaction to that is “excusing” their behavior.
If you’re willing to admit that they don’t really have self-agency at that point, don’t they become an object at that point? Like we would have no problem putting down a dog that bit a child, let alone a dog that blew up buildings. The only reason we’re so accepting of putting down the dog is its lack of human status.
In our courts, claiming insanity seems to give you a defense against crimes you’ve committed but also maintaining all the rights and privileges of personhood.
Technically a condo owner has fee simple (i.e. absolute) ownership of the airspace in their unit and tenancy in common (i.e. shared) with the other owners for the walls, floors and common areas.
I guess what you're arguing here is that groups of people shouldn't be able to own real property collectively, which would undermine a lot of the legal infrastructure that underpins business and society today; not just condos.
For example, what if one's parents die and probate leaves the family house to the adult children (who are obviously not married to each other), how would they take title?
I think there's a point to be made about single family dwellings, but it's hard to imagine how a 50 condo building would operate without one. Who takes care of the pool? Or fixes the elevator?
The governance is definitely poorly structured, though. In my (limited) experience I've seen a board that gets elected and then proceeds to abuse their power to advance their own financial positions.
I think there should be a 3rd party company that competes for the management contract and annual contracts are awarded based off democratic vote from all the owners.
The ability to stay with a problem for a long time. I think some folks will see something they don't understand and just disengage with it, but a lot of successful programmers that I've seen will continue to think about situations/ problems a lot longer after realizing they haven't fully grokked it, until eventually they do.
This. When I travelled to Vietnam I was shocked to find out access to Facebook was free (unlike the data plans, which seemed expensive to me and therefore likely out of reach for most of the folks there.
It was really nice to be able to communicate with my travel buddies reliably, but this is definitely the tiered internet people are afraid of.
I've used YouTube to learn a tremendous amount from programming to home improvement and beyond. I wouldn't consider it essential to my life, but I would certainly be worse off if I didn't have it.
If you’re willing to admit that they don’t really have self-agency at that point, don’t they become an object at that point? Like we would have no problem putting down a dog that bit a child, let alone a dog that blew up buildings. The only reason we’re so accepting of putting down the dog is its lack of human status.
In our courts, claiming insanity seems to give you a defense against crimes you’ve committed but also maintaining all the rights and privileges of personhood.