Even stronger if you believe things are deterministic there is no reason not to hold them accountable. You don't try to argue with a broken clock for it to become more punctual, you just trash it.
If you have a mechanistic view of humans, you know that punishment can cause changes in behavior, so you would use punishment to cause the changes that you would like to see. Punishment is fully compatible with determinism.
Permits? Bear in mind that many people just like getting naked online for an appreciative audience for free. Should that be permitted? This creeps toward a puritanical perspective and is just as claustrophobic. Sometimes the line between preventing financial incentive and preventing immorality blurs.
I absolutely insist on living in a society that permits people, including me, to get naked or have sex for money, or for whatever other reason they like. That's a preposterous question to me.
Obviously, I would prefer to live in a society where no one needs to do work that does not align with their moral or ethical beliefs. Though I have never heard of such a society.
In all (most?) European countries we have a lot of protections exactly due to this. Minimum wage, minimum holidays, max working hours, minimum break times, paid sick leave. Employers would starve employees if oversupply of workers and governments would let them.
Funnily enough, by not recognising sex work as a job, sex workers actually lack these protections in many European countries.
Furthermore, in Nordic countries, minimum wage and such are not government-mandated, but maintained by collective bargaining agreements negotiated by powerful unions. In Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and also Italy, there is no legally defined minimum wage.
There are some technological ideas to help bees be healthier such as special bee hives which have more natural topology and help the bees spend less energy on cooling/heating the hive. Example for a cylindrical hive: https://www.hiive.eu/en/
I searched about this and found a German beekeeper with such hives,
In [1] he can not detect the Varroa within the hive, nevertheless he notice the behavior of the hive is as if it had it. In [2] the hive is already dead, then is when he find the Varroa. In the comments on [2], one beekeeper explains that when the combs are twisted the mites fall into the combs rather than onto the floor which is traditionally used to detect them ( The sugar [3] or CO2 technique to detect Varroa in any type of hive is recommended by other beekeepers in the comments).
[3] By comments on other videos about the topic, this needs around 200 bees which are placed in a container with grids to which sugar is added. When shaken, the Verroa falls and a count can be made. The topology of this hive makes it difficult to gather this amount of bees (in the video [2] one can see that the hive would have to be dismantled).
You don't typically have just 1 hive. It's usually a group of them.
You wouldn't need an HVAC per hive, but rather 1 HVAC for the swarm. Get a water mass, HVAC it to the right temperature, and then pump the water through the hives to maintain a good temp.
It'd be somewhat more expensive and you'd have to have enough insulation to make sure the water isn't prematurely cooling before reaching the hive.
Hives also tend to be really cheap. They are simply wood boxes. So you'd be competing with $100 wood box with $200 wood box and $1000 HVAC and plumbing.
Sometimes the old ways are best. To paraphrase Jerry Seinfeld, sometimes the road less traveled is less traveled for a reason, or they'd just call it the way.
Who benefits most from old methods and tech remaining a historical footnote, but the very people selling their new whiz-bang solutions for modern problems, which are themselves inherent to using their products and energy production and consumption supply chain?
As somebody who knows a lot of journalists I can report that I haven't met any journalist who spilled the beans on that cabal who conspires to report on a false world.
I have heard them talk so negatively on the owners and chief editors of populist media such as Murdock, Berlusconi, Springer that I have just cut them completely out of my news consumption.
I didn’t vote for him or Harris. I didn’t vote for her because she failed in the most important duty that she had as VP—which was to become the president when it was apparent that he couldn’t do the job.
She should have raised a flag…she had the media access to do it, but stayed silent. She put her party over her country.
Depends on what direction your personal "evil" axis points in.
Is not prosecuting crimes more evil, or is jailing people more evil?
Is not trusting science more evil, or is trusting (at least partly) wrong science more evil?
Is hiring people with lesser qualifications more evil, or is letting structural inequality persist more evil?
Is letting evil persist in the world more evil, or is foreign military intervention more evil?
Those are not questions with objectively verifiable answers. The answers depend on your values system. If someone has answers that you disagree with, that does not inherently mean that their values system is stupid or immoral or wrong.
Note well: I'm not saying that Trump is a good answer. Even plenty of people who voted for him don't think he's a good answer. But some like his actions during his first term better than they liked Biden's actions.
reply