Toadfish Monastery

Yaaay, books!

The gateway drug to higher learning...

Yaaay! 

You may discover that deleting and re-installing may, in fact, fix the issues you are having.

Good luck.

As usual with this place, we took some ... ahem... "horse exhaust" and from that, grew some actual conversation.

<laffin>

I did try to parse the first paragraph. 

I find it interesting that anyone would wish to remember every single second from the moment they were born.    That level of tedious detail would be horrific, I think.

Forgetting is not a curse-- it's a blessing.   We humans have rituals which we do, which assist us in remembering those events which are remember-worthy.  There are other methods [to remember] as well.

Being able to forget all those mundane and exceedingly boring details?  Is a good thing. 

Else life would be just a burden-- for the vast bulk of our daily routine is just that: daily routine.

That we remember only the briefest and exciting moments?  Is good-- because if we also remembered every second?  Those same precious moments would be near-infinitely diluted by the mundane, the ordinary-- a single drop of shining richness in a sea of boring.

The OP has failed in his first argument. 

I did not bother to read further, apart from skimming a bit, in a rather ironic behavior of deliberately *not* remembering the time I would have wasted in reading it carefully.

With a bit of concentration, I can get her to "spin" in either direction.   But I've always been a lucid dreamer, so... maybe that's it.

Of course, I used to practice "flipping" the Lunar maps that National Geographic used to publish alongside Apollo reports... and by that, I mean if you look at the Lunar craters one way, the look like normal craters. But if you look at them another way, the "flip" and appear to be bumps instead.

I spent many childhood hours making them jump in and out...

... which might explain certain things later in life.... heh.

Good luck with that--

Woot!

Those are beautiful. 

I love those knitted-squids... I think the whole idea is adorable. 

Knittsquids?   Squitteds?    I like'em whatever they are called.   You have some serious talent there.   

Your observations are correct, Swato-- people don't like it when they are reminded that the Emperor is not only utterly without clothing?  But that he is grossly obese, and suffers from near constant flatulence too ....

... in short?  People prefer things all ... "shiny".   

... meh ...

If people cannot stomach the *fact* that the death penalty is literally a state-sponsored murder of an individual life?  Then perhaps it should not be acceptable to actually perform such acts.

Current Events.  How very apropos.   Thanks, Griff! 

Back to the topic.

I've had this conversation many times before, and one point I have always found interesting, is that many of the older style of state killings, were invented by humanitarian interests.   Such as the guillotine-- the inventor lamented the slow torturous deaths due to either hanging or burning (or worse), and invented this "clean" method.  Alas, it's only "clean" if the blade is extremely sharp; during the French Revolution, the blades often became dull, requiring several lift-and-drops before successfully separating the head of the victim.  (Of course, with the blade being so incredibly heavy, the trauma of a broken neck due to blunt-force trauma would likely be instantly fatal, if messy.)  And it also permitted a kind of assembly line for executions; both unforeseen consequences by the inventor.

Interestingly enough, hanging was originally (as far as I can find out) intended to be horrific and torturous.  It wasn't until some folk, interested in quick deaths, figured out (through trial and error?) that using a knot that was extended, exerted sharp-force leverage, and placing it just so on the neck, caused instant neck-breakage (which typically meant instant death).   In American History, there is quite a bit on that subject, and the fact that some victims of hanging had a secondary rope attached to the body (typically under the arms), to prevent too much extension during the hanging.  Due to their weight, a "normal" hanging would result in the head becoming separated-- an outcome deemed undesirable for some (to me strange) reason.  So a second check-rope prevented too much downward travel of the body, after the neck was broken by the fall.

Of course, again in history, there are numerous examples of a failure of each-- either the head did come off, or the neck fails to break, resulting in a slow strangulation.   Ironically, either of these appears to be something the crowds enjoyed more than the usual sharp neck-snapping.  (we humans are a barbaric lot, sometimes-- of course, some of that is partly relief in that it [the death] isn't happening to them...)

Electrocution is another that was deemed quick and painless by the "experts".  (How do you become an expert in methods of death?  Study of the macabre subject, I suppose.  But a good working knowledge of the human body is also necessary, right?  And a complete understanding of the limits of the nervous system too, I would think... meh).  Of course, there are, again, many historical examples of where this method did not work as planned, either. 

I'm a simple guy, though-- if we as a society do intend to practice ritualized murder of the undesirables?  I think we at least owe them a kind of last hurrah, and so I personally favor either massive pain-killers or an overdose of a euphoric drug.  Or, perhaps a combination of these; some sort of mechanism that stops the heart, like say, overdose of something easy-- sodium?  Combined with an abundance of morphine (to eliminate any pain from the heart-stopper).  Since we are ending this person, and they will soon be beyond anything else we may do?  Why not?   Those seeking revenge will have the satisfaction that they are ended.   And those of a more kindly nature, will know the victim did not suffer at all.

Of course, like anything else, we'd have to .... experiment to find the optimum combination.... meh.   

On a final note, I could point out that the traditional firing squad (only with multiple bullets, a redundancy to ensure reliability) has been eminently successful and reasonably fail-proof in the past.   

In fact?  It could even be cost-free (from the state's perspective).   Apart from building a sand pit, and a solid, non-ricochet backstop?   The costs of the weapons and ammunition could be zero, if volunteers were asked for.   And volunteers I'd no doubt, could be had just for the asking-- too many, in fact, there'd need to be a lottery system or something, to winnow them down to a suitable (manageable) number.  You could specify certain criteria too, such as no handguns, no small caliber rifles, etc.   And you'd still have more than sufficient to murder...erm... "execute" those deemed unfit to live anymore.

In some ways, this last "solution" to the "problem" could also serve as a relatively safe outlet for the more aggressive members of our society... (safe being relative, here-- certainly not safe for the victim).

Quote from: Swatopluk on May 04, 2014, 09:44:23 PM
It would have to be a VERY large overdose. The respiratory center gets paralyzed, so the victim dies of suffocation due to simply not breathing while being fully awake and conscious.

Btw, in the days of (not so) old being conscious was a precondition for execution. For that reason the traditional last shot of booze got banned.
And a few years ago the also traditional last cigarette got banned because smoking is unhealthy (no, that is not a joke).

Very large, no question.  Especially if the victim of state-sanctioned murder is/was a drug user.

But-- not impossibly large.   And they'd be feeling no pains of any sort, mitigating some of the horror of being murdered by your own society (I would think).

And there are other common drugs that could work as well.  Laughing gas, etc.


And yeah, I'm against the whole thing, in case my deliberate use of provocative terms didn't give that away....

... my main argument against it, is this:  Until and if humans ever develop a perfect justice system, then we, as humans, should never engage in "justice" which is infinitely irreversible.   There is no undo for death.