R U OK? • Hacker News Board

Re: R U OK?

#131

Post by asdffdsa » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 3:52 PM UTC

ericmcer wrote: post #96

Something I am struggling with recently is less am I ok, but more do we as humans deserve to be ok? When I look at the freeways full of cars, streets lined with overflowing garbage cans, homeless encampments, grocery stores with row after row of cheap meat under fluorescent light. Am I supposed to feel ok? It many times feels as though we are a virus decimating our host environment. The constant flood of bad news com…

I guess the one thing that holds me back from acting more selflessly than I do is that we don't appreciate the efforts of goodwill of others, and we reward selfishness.

I pay 45% of my income in taxes? The message is "pay your fair share". Pick up a piece of trash and put it in the garbage can? More litter will replace it when you walk by it the next time. Work extra hard to make sure a project is completed? "You're a great team player."

Contrast that with what happens when you act selfishly.

Negotiate salary aggressively? Receive a 20 - 50% pay bump. Buy cheap meat instead of humanely raised or organic? Save hundreds on your monthly grocery bills. Get Starbucks every day? No one directly minds about the waste you created.

These is one of the biggest cultural issues we should address imo. And we're already seeing the negative humanitarian impacts of selfishness with respect to the Covid epidemic. If the virus required greater awareness, empathy and care then we would have been wiped out.

This comment is referring to American culture, if it wasn't evident already

Re: R U OK?

#132

Post by JadeNB » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 3:52 PM UTC

birksherty wrote: post #121

swyx wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a lot of bad in the world, but also keep in mind the Steven Pinker argument that we have progressed a lot compared to human history as well. as for dealing with it - personally i embrace the idea of "keep your circle of concern as small as possible to your circle of influence". practically, it works out to "stop giving a crap" which i know is not responsible en masse. i guess the only thing to do if you feel…

I don't agree with Pinker. World is better if only world=only humans. Only a selfish species would say that or one who wants to feel good. For every other species it's too bad.

> Only a selfish species would say that or one who wants to feel good.

But probably we can agree that, even if it would be better to make the world better for all of its inhabitants, including non-humans, at least it would be a good start on the process to try to work on reducing the collective misery of humans.

Much like accessibility changes benefit everyone, a lot of the changes that will make life better for all humankind will also make life better for all the planet's inhabitants. (For example, one component of reducing misery even if we focus only on humans is reducing the disruptions due to climate change.)

Re: R U OK?

#133

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 3:52 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: R U OK?

#134

Post by tmpz22 » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 3:56 PM UTC

anm89 wrote: post #119

Remember, if you are in the US at least, and someone tells you they aren't ok, and you recommend a crisis line, and they mention anything regarding suicide, they are very likely going to be extracted from their living situation by force and end up incarcerated at very high expense to themselves. If their life was going poorly before that, it sure won't be better after. edit: as another poster mentioned, the record of…

It's probably worth mentioning that if the police are involved during a mental health crisis there is a strong likelihood of physical violence even if you are not a minority.

Re: R U OK?

#135

Post by aarongough » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 3:56 PM UTC

josuepeq wrote: post #54

The U.S. needs this day, especially this year. With the unmitigated disaster of 2020, I’m “probably not ok,” but I am not in any danger to myself or others. Quite the opposite - I’m optimistic that things are moving in the right direction. I mean, it can’t get worse: - Shutdown my consulting Business in February because I didn’t feel comfortable with being around new people constantly with a t-cell deficient immune s…

Ooof, that is a lot to deal with. Really hope things start looking up for you soon.

Re: R U OK?

#136

Post by tsco77 » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

LocalH wrote: post #110

ericmcer wrote: post #96

Something I am struggling with recently is less am I ok, but more do we as humans deserve to be ok? When I look at the freeways full of cars, streets lined with overflowing garbage cans, homeless encampments, grocery stores with row after row of cheap meat under fluorescent light. Am I supposed to feel ok? It many times feels as though we are a virus decimating our host environment. The constant flood of bad news com…

The duality of mankind in play. We’re capable of immense good, but the flip side of that is that we’re capable of immense evil. Good and evil as we understand it are human concepts, nature largely doesn’t give a crap about good and evil. I choose to try to make the in-the-moment experience of those around me more pleasant. When you think about it, that’s all that really exists at any given moment, everything else is…

Well, you've sent me down an interesting rabbit hole on the moral status of animals in ethics, and I figure I might as well share what I read:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-animal/#Sent

Re: R U OK?

#137

Post by smnrchrds » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

anm89 wrote: post #119

Remember, if you are in the US at least, and someone tells you they aren't ok, and you recommend a crisis line, and they mention anything regarding suicide, they are very likely going to be extracted from their living situation by force and end up incarcerated at very high expense to themselves. If their life was going poorly before that, it sure won't be better after. edit: as another poster mentioned, the record of…

Also having your name officially recorded for this cause in a database can have negative impacts on the rest of your life, as this Canadian woman found:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canadian-woman-refuse...

Re: R U OK?

#138

Post by forgotmypw17 » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

Kudos for the devs making the site accessible to no-JS and no-image browsers. Site looks great.

Society makes demands of us and then classifies it as "dis-order" when we have issues with the demands.

Here is to more peace and comfort in the life of anyone reading this comment.

Re: R U OK?

#139

Post by AnotherGoodName » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

I had a few people from Australia calling me here in the US yesterday (which was the 10th in Australia) for exactly this. It's nice. Had a good chat and caught up on things over there and here.

Re: R U OK?

#140

Post by troydavis » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 4:11 PM UTC

tmpz22 wrote: post #134

anm89 wrote: post #119

Remember, if you are in the US at least, and someone tells you they aren't ok, and you recommend a crisis line, and they mention anything regarding suicide, they are very likely going to be extracted from their living situation by force and end up incarcerated at very high expense to themselves. If their life was going poorly before that, it sure won't be better after. edit: as another poster mentioned, the record of…

It's probably worth mentioning that if the police are involved during a mental health crisis there is a strong likelihood of physical violence even if you are not a minority.

Could you cite a source? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6295210/ is one study of outcomes of Chicago police dispatches for mental health incidents.

The outcomes are in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6295210/#S6titl.... Officers mostly transported people to hospitals (44% of calls) or resolved the call on the scene with no next step (35%). Arrests occurred but were rare:

> The call resolution data further revealed that transports to hospitals were more frequent than arrests (44.9% versus 5.8% respectively)

Officers reported far more cases of arrest-worthy behavior/actions that they chose not to act on. The authors concluded:

> Our analysis of a sample of mental health call resolutions in the Chicago Police Department reveal that police are disinclined to use legal action, and considerably more inclined to transport individuals for hospital psychiatric assessments. Moreover, police routinely resort to on-scene call resolutions involving an array of informal tactics.