Egregoros

Signal feed

API Docs
Timeline

Post

Remote status

Context

6
wyatt

wyatt

@wyatt@soc.megatokyo.moe remote
Open link
think of it this way:

if you buy a framework laptop new, some your money goes to Intel, which has tons of money in Israel and therefore supports a genocidal regime.

if you buy a used x86 laptop from 10 years ago intel doesn't see a dime.

you objectively have a moral imperative to never buy new x86 hardware with intel processors. And I'd highly recommend not giving AMD money either.
wyatt

wyatt

@wyatt@soc.megatokyo.moe remote
Open link
@genmaicha harm reduction still states that buying an intel processor will give israel more money than buying a banana though

don't try to equate the two because they are not equivalent. Intel has had huge business in Israel for decades (since the 1980s or 1970's actually)
Replying to @wyatt@soc.megatokyo.moe
ⰎⰅ ⰀⰍⰨⰒⰎⰫ

ⰎⰅ ⰀⰍⰨⰒⰎⰫ

@genmaicha@stereophonic.space remote
Open link
@wyatt how about consequentialist ethics, then: the idea that something is right or wrong based on its effects, rather than the doer's intention. utilitarianism is often categorized as a consequentialist system of ethics.

personally I subscribe more to virtue ethics because it doesn't have the weird corner cases of consequentialism; but I'm not well educated in philosophy and don't have super rigorous arguments to back up this view.

Replies

3
Replying to @genmaicha@stereophonic.space
wyatt

wyatt

@wyatt@soc.megatokyo.moe remote
Open link
@genmaicha no, i don't think i can fully envision all the ways something might cause harm.
I do believe that actions I may take to limit harm are largely inconsequential at the scale we are talking about, but that there can be secondary knock-on effects. Like friends or colleagues not seeing me using a framework and thinking "oh this person i admire uses one, it must be good." There's all sorts of complex interplay that makes things more complicated than the two dimensional things I try to illustrate with words. But a guiding principle of mine is that it's important to try when I can, and that persistently taking what is perceived as the less damaging of two choices will (hopefully) in the long term cause less damage than evil maximization.
Replying to @genmaicha@stereophonic.space
Replying to @genmaicha@stereophonic.space