3 ms·

> No, I'm discussing the dialogue between the journalist and Bezos Well, yeah, did I suggest you weren't? I'm aware of the topic we're discussing. >This is a

> No, I'm discussing the dialogue between the journalist and Bezos Well, yeah, did I suggest you weren't? I'm aware of the topic we're discussing. >This is a problem because it lets Bezos off the hook about the bigger issue, and passes the responsibility of solvin humanity's problems to billionaires who shouldn't exist in the first place. Whether or not they should exist is an opinion. The question was about a different opinion that some people have. What makes your opinion (that billionaires shouldn't exist) more important than the opinion that the journalist was referencing (that since they do exist they should use their wealth to different ends)? > This is the question that should have been asked. What answer would you expect Bezos to give that would make it a better question?

cassianoleal 5y ago
At this point I'm just wondering if you're actually serious and didn't read or misinterpreted what I wrote, or just trolling. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and still answer this time. > did I suggest you weren't? Yes, you did, here: > You're pointing out a possible avenue for using wealth to fix problems on earth I was not. I was questioning the scenario posed by the journalist and how it doesn't fit the debate I see happening. > Whether or not they should exist is an opinion. Yes, but in this context we're not talking about my opinion, so I don't really understand what you're arguing about. A more complete quote of that part of the question is: "There have been a chorus of critics saying that these flights to space are, you know, just joyrides for the wealthy, and that you should be spending your time and your money and energy trying to solve problems here on Earth." So the journalist is acting as a proxy of, yes, the opinion, of "a chorus of critics". What I'm saying is that this seems misguided/ignorant/malicious (I don't know which) given that most of the criticism I have seen is NOT about how billionaires should spend their wealth but rather criticising the very conditions that make this question or choice exist in the first place - the very existance of a tiny number of extremelly wealthy persons, mostly amassed by > What answer would you expect Bezos to give that would make it a better question? I have no expectations, and I am not Bezos to know what he thinks. I imagine he'd just deflect but I can't know unless the question is actually asked and he's given a chance to respond. Essentially what I'm discussing is how the whole thing seems nonsensical and just a farce to let Bezos mostly off the hook, whereas you seem to be questioning my opinions about the subject matter of the interview. My actual opinion is that the interview is based on bad premises and should be discarded altogether.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  I'm just confused. You're giving an opinion that falls within the realm of answers to the question (it's yours but also not what you were trying to say?), zooming out to a different topic, saying it's the more important debate, then saying that the journalist not being of the same opinion is either malicious malicious or ignorant. Right? If so, ok. I disagree, but ok.
  - cassianoleal 5y ago
    Not quite. I'm not giving an opinion. I'm stating an observation (that the debate I've seen has been mostly about questioning the existence of this mega-wealthy class rather than about how they should use the money they have). Based on that observation, I then proceeded to say that the question is based on false premises and as such is not a good question as it can only have a meaningless answer. Another commenter mentioned the debate they've seen is more inline with what's in the question, and that's a fair observation. If that's the case and my observation is biased in the wrong way, then the question is ok.
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      > I'm not giving an opinion. Maybe that's the source of our miscommunication. > Based on that observation, I then proceeded to say that the question is based on false premises > If that's the case and my observation is biased in the wrong way, then the question is ok. Because that falls into my definition of an opinion.

cassianoleal 5y ago

At this point I'm just wondering if you're actually serious and didn't read or misinterpreted what I wrote, or just trolling. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and still answer this time. > did I suggest you weren't? Yes, you did, here: > You're pointing out a possible avenue for using wealth to fix problems on earth I was not. I was questioning the scenario posed by the journalist and how it doesn't fit the debate I see happening. > Whether or not they should exist is an opinion. Yes, but in this context we're not talking about my opinion, so I don't really understand what you're arguing about. A more complete quote of that part of the question is: "There have been a chorus of critics saying that these flights to space are, you know, just joyrides for the wealthy, and that you should be spending your time and your money and energy trying to solve problems here on Earth." So the journalist is acting as a proxy of, yes, the opinion, of "a chorus of critics". What I'm saying is that this seems misguided/ignorant/malicious (I don't know which) given that most of the criticism I have seen is NOT about how billionaires should spend their wealth but rather criticising the very conditions that make this question or choice exist in the first place - the very existance of a tiny number of extremelly wealthy persons, mostly amassed by > What answer would you expect Bezos to give that would make it a better question? I have no expectations, and I am not Bezos to know what he thinks. I imagine he'd just deflect but I can't know unless the question is actually asked and he's given a chance to respond. Essentially what I'm discussing is how the whole thing seems nonsensical and just a farce to let Bezos mostly off the hook, whereas you seem to be questioning my opinions about the subject matter of the interview. My actual opinion is that the interview is based on bad premises and should be discarded altogether.

BobbyJo 5y ago
I'm just confused. You're giving an opinion that falls within the realm of answers to the question (it's yours but also not what you were trying to say?), zooming out to a different topic, saying it's the more important debate, then saying that the journalist not being of the same opinion is either malicious malicious or ignorant. Right? If so, ok. I disagree, but ok.
- cassianoleal 5y ago
  Not quite. I'm not giving an opinion. I'm stating an observation (that the debate I've seen has been mostly about questioning the existence of this mega-wealthy class rather than about how they should use the money they have). Based on that observation, I then proceeded to say that the question is based on false premises and as such is not a good question as it can only have a meaningless answer. Another commenter mentioned the debate they've seen is more inline with what's in the question, and that's a fair observation. If that's the case and my observation is biased in the wrong way, then the question is ok.
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    > I'm not giving an opinion. Maybe that's the source of our miscommunication. > Based on that observation, I then proceeded to say that the question is based on false premises > If that's the case and my observation is biased in the wrong way, then the question is ok. Because that falls into my definition of an opinion.