If you can support the death penalty for them, then you can also support the irreversible traumatization of them.
However, if you cannot be confident enough in your justice system, just don't do it. A wrongful conviction would have no possible restitution for death or torture.
Well, you are wrong that religion is a good thing when people do good in spite of religion rather than because of it. If someone's belief system is aligned with a particular religion, they can just adopt the practices of that religion without professing faith in it.
Whatever makes them less susceptible to manipulation from religious leaders is a win in my book.
Though the simpler solution is that perhaps memory formation is paused over the period then the person 'lost' their memory to sleep.
Losing memories when you're wide awake is like a file system deleting pointers to a file. The file is still there, just inaccessible.
Anyways I feel that the assertion that "Creating and destroying perfectly identical copies of the information that corresponds to a person neither creates nor destroys people" is extremely dangerous thinking that could lead to the premature end of consciousness for some very unfortunate individuals. After all, they're perfectly identical and we have no documented instance of anyone sharing consciousness, so it may be that consciousness are unique and not commutative.
I would argue that two disconnected copies of the information that corresponds to a person does make 2 disjoint persons.
Like running a different seed on procedural generation, entropy will ensure that these two identical persons won't be identical after whatever ticks in the biological clock.
Government suing a company for compliance with government.
I would argue that contributing to society can at minimum mean to be a person of good standing who participates without causing trouble. You could be as useless as a retiree since your 20s and still have contributed to society.
You're just bullying dissent, just shows how unreasonable your positions are.
I would argue that because reddit technology was anti-Tesla, they carried that over to lemmy as well.
Why not Tan Kin Lian? Presidents became figureheads, might as well go for the funni and who knows if he's actually good in the same vein as Ukraine's Zelensky? At the very least it would make Singapore politics spicy.
If Singapore has the will, there are safe ways to get a nuclear power plant operating in Singapore. I wouldn't trust a commercial entity to do it, and I would rather that it is built as a state-owned, state-run government facility.
Singapore paying other nations to produce electricity that is clean is just like automotive clean energy credits all over again. There's nothing to it but penalty and Singapore should be better off building the nuclear power plant or investing in more clean energy solutions.
Anyways, we are in a geographically stable area far from earthquake zones. If we dig deep enough, we might be able to get geothermal working. But it might not be economical.
Started it yes, but when it was time to hand the reins over, they fell so fast we had whiplash.
Starlink is not providing an essential service to Ukraine. They do not have the right to expect SpaceX to cooperate with their military effort when SpaceX is a US company under dual-use rules to not unilaterally provide military connectivity to weapons systems to foreign nations.
Ukraine must do military procurement properly and go through the US government to get approval, not whatever this is. They used a civilian service for military purposes, so they are in breach of the terms of use of Starlink and should not be surprised when services degrades at SpaceX's whims.
The law priorities the health of people, but Starlink isn't meant for use like this, so this analogy is moot.