Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[alway]

Based on the US government standards, a citizen is worth aproximately $700k. This figure is used mostly when calculating data for policies involving health.

[Karnewarrior]

I give three strikes to a human being. You can mess with me three times, and I won't fight you. But on the fourth time, I will not just kill you, I will evaporate you. Attempted murder is a automatic 4 strikes. Successful murder nets you five. Do you have any idea how much a replica human body cost me? Ass. I will devour your first born child!

As for animals, If they're in the wild, and doing nothing harmful, I see no reason to harm them. They only get one strike though. Then, I beat the sh*t out of them. If they still want to fight, then I kill it.

As of yet, I've killed nothing but bugs.

[Heron TSG]

A good heuristic is the integral of it's quality averaged over all possible futures weighted by probability. Squared.

Do you even know what an integral is?

Anyway, I myself smash as many flies and mosquitoes as I can. I leave bees alone though. Insects that spread horrible diseases are bad for my species, and thus I kill them. Bumblebees are cool though. They pollinate the flowers.

[Jackrabbit]

People don't want to lose their lives, so it's valuable to them, but I don't think it's really possible to slap on an accurate monetary value for a human life.

[Karnewarrior]

People don't want to lose their lives, so it's valuable to them, but I don't think it's really possible to slap on an accurate monetary value for a human life.

*Makes a tick mark on clipboard*
Another hundred down the drain...*sigh*

[Sensei]

Well, say in slavery situations, values really are placed on human lives. But that's the value to the slave owner- it's probably devoid of moral obligation (hence slavery in the first place) and based on how much the slave owner would make.

Going on that logic anyway, in modern times value = life income + organs.

[Criptfeind]

1.618

[Josephus]

Well, say in slavery situations, values really are placed on human lives. But that's the value to the slave owner- it's probably devoid of moral obligation (hence slavery in the first place) and based on how much the slave owner would make.

Technically, you're not placing a value on the slave's life, but on his labor potential. His life is valuable to you as far as it enables said slave to perform work for you.

So I guess it would be in your best interests to give that slave decent working and living conditions. It's happened before.

[Nikov]

Well, say in slavery situations, values really are placed on human lives. But that's the value to the slave owner- it's probably devoid of moral obligation (hence slavery in the first place) and based on how much the slave owner would make.

Technically, you're not placing a value on the slave's life, but on his labor potential. His life is valuable to you as far as it enables said slave to perform work for you.

So I guess it would be in your best interests to give that slave decent working and living conditions. It's happened before.

Strange how the plantation owner is always portrayed as someone who treats his horse better than his miserable, bullwhipped, starving slaves when the slaves cost far more than the horse to purchase and far less to maintain.

[Josephus]

Well, say in slavery situations, values really are placed on human lives. But that's the value to the slave owner- it's probably devoid of moral obligation (hence slavery in the first place) and based on how much the slave owner would make.

Technically, you're not placing a value on the slave's life, but on his labor potential. His life is valuable to you as far as it enables said slave to perform work for you.

So I guess it would be in your best interests to give that slave decent working and living conditions. It's happened before.

Strange how the plantation owner is always portrayed as someone who treats his horse better than his miserable, bullwhipped, starving slaves when the slaves cost far more than the horse to purchase and far less to maintain.

Why would slaves cost more than a good horse? You can get anyone to scrub out the drain or wash the floor.

Of course, high-quality slaves - the kind you'd need to run your household, basically your manservant, your majordomo, your kid's tutor, those you'd probably expect to spend much more on than a horse. After all, being able to read or write is much more valuable than simple manual labor.

[Duuvian]

No Value.

People are a renewable resource.

No, they are not. Workers are a renewable resource. A new person can never hope to replace the uniqueness that the person who died possessed in a realistic world. I feel it's a damn shame every time a person dies, even if it was deserved or necessary.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Well, say in slavery situations, values really are placed on human lives. But that's the value to the slave owner- it's probably devoid of moral obligation (hence slavery in the first place) and based on how much the slave owner would make.

Technically, you're not placing a value on the slave's life, but on his labor potential. His life is valuable to you as far as it enables said slave to perform work for you.

So I guess it would be in your best interests to give that slave decent working and living conditions. It's happened before.

Strange how the plantation owner is always portrayed as someone who treats his horse better than his miserable, bullwhipped, starving slaves when the slaves cost far more than the horse to purchase and far less to maintain.

Why would slaves cost more than a good horse? You can get anyone to scrub out the drain or wash the floor.

Of course, high-quality slaves - the kind you'd need to run your household, basically your manservant, your majordomo, your kid's tutor, those you'd probably expect to spend much more on than a horse. After all, being able to read or write is much more valuable than simple manual labor.

During the American Civil War in about 1864 or 1865 I think, a slavemaster tried to board a train evacuating Richmond with his coffle of 100 slaves. The train mostly carried things neccessary to continue the Confederate government farther south. The guards on the train kept the slavemaster from boarding, and he simply let his 100 slaves go free. I mention this because his investment was roughly $100k, making each healthy slave roughly $1000. This was at a time when soldiers made if I remember correctly under $20 a month.

Also, it was illegal in most slave owning states to educate a slave, on the principle that ideas are dangerous. Those fears were well founded, if misguided. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Douglass

Horses, according to this website I just found, cost about $150 at about the same time. I'd imagine it's the laws of supply and demand. Horses breed and mature slightly faster than humans. Also, I believe by that time there was a healthy population of wild horses which had been allowed to propagate outside of domestication since the early colonies, for the purpose of occasional round ups.

http://www.reillysbattery.org/Newsletter/Jul00/deborah_grace.htm

[AtomicPaperclip]

A fly on a desk in a school classroom is of zero value. It will provide no food for any other creature, it will not survive, it will not eat, it will not reproduce.

A human in a city is of negative value. It consumes large amounts of limited resources and creates large amounts of waste and harmful toxins.

[Jackrabbit]

A fly on a desk in a school classroom is of zero value. It will provide no food for any other creature, it will not survive, it will not eat, it will not reproduce.

A human in a city is of negative value. It consumes large amounts of limited resources and creates large amounts of waste and harmful toxins.

Negative value to who, and why should we care? Or more importantly, why should we waste time caring or complaining instead of fixing the problem? I mean, it's concerning but if that person is working to better the world or their situation, how can they be of negative value?

[AtomicPaperclip]

A fly on a desk in a school classroom is of zero value. It will provide no food for any other creature, it will not survive, it will not eat, it will not reproduce.

A human in a city is of negative value. It consumes large amounts of limited resources and creates large amounts of waste and harmful toxins.

Negative value to who, and why should we care? Or more importantly, why should we waste time caring or complaining instead of fixing the problem? I mean, it's concerning but if that person is working to better the world or their situation, how can they be of negative value?

Well I suppose those moving toward positivity could be of positive value but generally speaking humans just fuck everything up.

[Jackrabbit]

That's assuming there's some hidden balance here which must never be disturbed.

We change things. Shit happens when things change and shit can be bad. That's why we continue to change things, to fix the shit.