Well, the US has shown that they couldn’t fight an insurgency with their level of protections for civilians.
Makes sense that Israel assesses that they have less resources than the US, and thus can’t fight the same way and have a hope of success.
Of course they could have used that as a pretty good reason not to start this war in the first placez but alas, they didn’t.
Well, I assume some people understood me as asking “It’s just a tree, why the bother?”. I tried to get around this with wording, but whatever.
I kinda guess this is largely a “local” thing (not sure how large “local” is though). And of course it’s a pity that an angry teen destroyed a hundreds of years old tree.
Can someone explain why it’s so terrible, that this tree has been felled?
I don’t think I’ve seen it before, so to me it’s more significant that it fell on Hadrian’s wall. But I do seem to be ignorant here, so can someone educate me?
Probably too difficult logistically to forbid Microsoft
I’ve been wondering if it really is the right decision to put things on display which have both, a significant material value, and historical value.
The gold of these gold coins seems to have had roughly 250,000€ in value.
That seems like a lot of incentive to steal and melt it down.
And what is the benefit of displaying the actual items? It’s not rare that the public is only shown a fake, one that just looks good enough to get the impression of the item.
I was thinking (and haven’t decided yet if the idea is good) that stuff of this nature (material value + historical value) may be better off being in a more secured place somewhere, where it still can be studied by people when required, but the public can’t get at it as easily. With fakes being shown in Museums. Those fakes could them allow more interaction (like touching a dinosaur teeth/bones), and the original doesn’t suffer damage from people touching it, light and/or people stealing it and melting it down.
No seriously, I’d hate to be in the risk assessment side here. Do you try to provoke an attack by going anyway? So that you have an excuse to respond in full force?
Nobody in power in the world actually wants to respond in full force.
I’d say that’s a philosophical question.
And worse even, I’d say this is something that changes with the culture of people.
a while ago, gladiators killing & maiming each other for entertainment was considered fine.
Raping and Abducting during wartime was normal.
Currently, I’d say the cultural moral compass has shifted enough, to consider these two examples rather bad behaviour.
But as Tasty seems to have had a nice life and didn’t suffer, so had it better than most cows which end up in a similar fate, I’d say that currently this would not be considered “bad” behaviour by most people.
Of course there is a viewpoint already out, that all killing of animals is equivalent, in other words equivalent to killing humans. From that point of view, what you did is rather horrific.
Maybe, in some time, when something like lab-grown meat without any nervous system is commonplace, killing animals for food becomes as horrific as we consider killing other humans for food.
Or, you know, it could also swing the other way, and an apocalypse makes Soylent from dead people completely normal food.
So is this theory of veganism to not cause pain to an animal? If so what about ethically sourced meat. Like bullet to the head/decapitation. Most of those creatures feel nothing, they just end.
lots (propably most) animals used for farming meat are in pain during their lives.
That’s longer than the time they’re dying in any case.
I wonder how you ever could “upload” a consciousness without Ship-of-Theseusing a Brain.
Cyberpunk2077 also has this “upload vs copy” issue, but doesn’t actually make you think about it too hard.