I’m not sure that’s something I want. It takes days to climb Everest! I don’t want to play for days just to climb a procedurally generated mountain that probably doesn’t have anything on top of it. Or at best has some random shit that you can find everywhere else.

I wish I could agree but it’s so so boring.

Lmao what?

Gamers lose when the store shuts down and you lose access to all of the games you got for free, or worse actually paid for.

Learnéd Machines

Machine Learning is such a better name. It describes what is happening - a machine is learning to do some specific thing. In this case to take text and output pictures… It’s limited by what it learned from. It learned from arrays of numbers representing colours of pixels, and from strings of text. It doesn’t know what that text means, it just knows how to translate it into arrays of numbers… There is no intelligence, only limited learning.

Solidarity ✊ with all my fascist bros, says the UK

So if there is an objective truth of morality that exists beyond our judgements, in what form does it exist? Is it a fundamental part of the universe? Did it exist before humans? Or is it a part of us?

I’ll second the other responses - it’s great with no friends, playing with strangers works really well.

Yeah at the moment it really sounds like a roguelike game mode for DRG.

It’s an effective teaser because the DRG community is its own hype machine lol

Who would want other nicotine options without cigarettes or vaping? No one is starting out with nicorette.

Animals understanding of “morality” is extremely different to what we as humans understand as moral, and I’d argue that you can’t actually ask them what they think is right or wrong, so you can’t really know if their behaviour is based on morality or… well, anything else.

Regardless, semantics aside my primary question was how you arrive at the position that “gaining from someone else’s loss is wrong” is an objective position to take… because I think that is just something you think is wrong.

So, regardless of the reasons behind it, it seems clear that we don’t all know what is right - or certainly we don’t agree - so where exactly does an objective morality fit into the picture?

So there exists an asbolute moral truth, but we have no way to determine what it is? I’m sure we can agree that morals don’t have a physical form, so in what way does it “exist”?

Of course the Nazis weren’t right by our standards, and of course they were/are by their own. But by what universal standard can we judge their morality against ours? How can we know that what we think is right is the objective morality?

Saying “it just is” really just means “I think so”, and it there’s as much reasonable backing for you to say it “just is” wrong to be a nazi as there is for someone to say it “just is” wrong to be gay.

Objectively it’s morally wrong to gain from someone’s loss. So… winning anything? Schadenfreude? A profitable short position? Picking a penny up from the ground?

Anyway, the specifics aside… how do you arrive at the conclusion that it is objectively wrong to gain from someone else’s loss?

I agree with all of that, but I don’t see how that deals with the problem that we don’t even have consensus on a morality that we are all supposed to “know” by ourselves because it is objective and somehow contained within us. Why is there such disagreement on what is moral if we should all know what’s right?

Moral “progress” only happens because of our collective judgement of what is right changing over time.

Ok so who’s deciding which people are evil and which aren’t? There are plenty of wrong things (according to me, today) that have been consensus among some for hundreds or even thousands of years. Adults marrying children. Slavery. Execution of homosexuals.

Or consider that vegan/vegetarians would say that slaughtering animals is wrong, and that they know that in the same “innate” way that you’re describing… and yet the majority disagree with them. So who’s right? Where can we get this objectivity? If it’s just our “gut” then I’m sorry but there is not a single morality, there are 7 billion separate objective moralities.