I would think that you are right to suggest that approach for those people who are only moved by logic, and have no emotional attachment to principles, or other humans, but come on, when was the last time you found yourself surrounded by those types of people? And, unfortunately, some like that are incapable of caring.
I would think that you are right to suggest that approach for those people who are only moved by logic, and have no emotional attachment to principles, or other humans, but come on, when was the last time you found yourself surrounded by those types of people? And, unfortunately, some like that are incapable of caring.
There are many who are moved by emotional appeals, and I do not think there is any call to prioritize one method, and group of people, over the other. We need any and all, for whatever reason, to join in trying to end this slaughter.
Now you may assess that this particular group is not the right one for those types you wish to address, and you might be right. Let us know which are the groups with those logical types that we should be talking with. And what is it, we are supposed to ask those folks to do with the information we pass on in that logical fashion? Because if we don't have any suggestions for them to do anything, then what benefit would come from talking with them in that way? Just curious where/what you want this to lead to.
I’m not trying to achieve anything for Palestine. I’ve said before—it’s not even in my top 50 concerns.
I follow what's happening out of curiosity and informational value, not emotional investment. For me, it’s just data—part of a broader pattern of global dysfunction. Gaza is one of several ongoing conflicts. Two people die every second globally, and multiple genocides and ethnic cleansings are unfolding right now.
The people I surround myself with—engineers, CTOs, high-level managers—don’t talk about it. Not because they’re heartless, but because it has zero impact on our lives or work.
There are 20+ international issues with more direct implications for the systems I care about. That’s where my attention goes.
I would think that you are right to suggest that approach for those people who are only moved by logic, and have no emotional attachment to principles, or other humans, but come on, when was the last time you found yourself surrounded by those types of people? And, unfortunately, some like that are incapable of caring.
There are many who are moved by emotional appeals, and I do not think there is any call to prioritize one method, and group of people, over the other. We need any and all, for whatever reason, to join in trying to end this slaughter.
Now you may assess that this particular group is not the right one for those types you wish to address, and you might be right. Let us know which are the groups with those logical types that we should be talking with. And what is it, we are supposed to ask those folks to do with the information we pass on in that logical fashion? Because if we don't have any suggestions for them to do anything, then what benefit would come from talking with them in that way? Just curious where/what you want this to lead to.
I’m not trying to achieve anything for Palestine. I’ve said before—it’s not even in my top 50 concerns.
I follow what's happening out of curiosity and informational value, not emotional investment. For me, it’s just data—part of a broader pattern of global dysfunction. Gaza is one of several ongoing conflicts. Two people die every second globally, and multiple genocides and ethnic cleansings are unfolding right now.
The people I surround myself with—engineers, CTOs, high-level managers—don’t talk about it. Not because they’re heartless, but because it has zero impact on our lives or work.
There are 20+ international issues with more direct implications for the systems I care about. That’s where my attention goes.
No moral angle. Just priorities.