5 ms·

> “Cruises don’t serve any purpose,” she said as the morning sun filtered through her kitchen windows, hinting at another sweltering August afternoon. “The cont

> “Cruises don’t serve any purpose,” she said as the morning sun filtered through her kitchen windows, hinting at another sweltering August afternoon. “The container ships and the ferries benefit everyone, but the cruises are benefiting the shipowners and then the people who save up to afford a cruise. It’s entertainment, and it’s entertainment that’s filled with completely ridiculous things, like an ice-skating rink on a ship. I mean, how can we authorize that?” That's kind of an odd perspective. Lots of things humans do don't "serve any purpose" other than entertainment. Get rid of movie theaters? The cruise industry deserves a lot of criticism and should probably get some regulation. Coming at this from a perspective of "I don't find cruises interesting so let's get rid of them" them does not, to me, sound like a good strategy. Personally, I have been on one cruise and I really enjoyed it. The price was really good and I'd even do another cruise at a higher price if that was the impact. I enjoyed being on a very nice hotel that I could wake up in a new place each day.

bigyikes 3y ago
I don’t think we should get rid of cruises, but I don’t see the movie theater comparison as valid. Movie theaters don’t emit tons of CO2. (One could also make the argument that movie theaters propagate the arts, which is a good purpose)
- PM_me_your_math 3y ago
  [dead]
- Zak 3y ago
  > Movie theaters don’t emit tons of CO2 Perhaps not directly, but in most of the USA, everyone in one drove a car there. The energy use from those same people streaming the movie at home would emit much less. I'm not for a ban on any of those, but very few activities are truly carbon neutral.
  - igor47 3y ago
    I think it's a matter of scope. Cruise ships are unusually polluting. This is why folks argue to ban private jets and not commercial aviation. Or in this case, cruise and not container ships.
    - skeeter2020 3y ago
      A lot more people get "value" from Fox News vs. HN; ban the latter to save resources and those people can go do some productive with the time they're currently wasting.
      - felurx 3y ago
        Again: That's not a helpful comparison. Cruise ships have absolutely ridiculous emissions. HN does not.
- igor47 3y ago
  This makes sense to me as an argument. People downvoting this because they disagree is pretty sad.
- skeeter2020 3y ago
  Everyone drove a car to the theater to sit sedentary for 3+ hours and eat garbage food before driving home. Lots of societal bad there; why do you get to decide?
  - BA_and_bored 3y ago
    Things you listed are parts of Murican way of life, not a part of cinema experience. Ppl around the world mostly use bikes or public transit or at least taxi to go to the cinema. In my local cinema they serve nice salads beside traditional pop-corn.
- rqtwteye 3y ago
  You have to look at the whole picture. The people who drive to the theater emit CO2. Same for car racing. I bet the emissions caused by the race cars are dwarfed by the emissions of people driving to any larger music concert.
- osigurdson 3y ago
  Most movie theatres propagate nonsense superhero stories. Lots of CO2 emitted in the creation of those. I guess we should delete movie theatres along with everything else. The problem with all such arguments as they are fundamentally nihilistic in the final analysis.
- concordDance 3y ago
  If CO2 is the concern then include the CO2 in the price via a CO2 tax (or a per person CO2 budget if you want something objectively worse but more intuitive, then people can save up their CO2 credits for a cruise if they really want a once in a lifetime thing).
philwelch 3y ago
I’ve never been on a cruise and I don’t ever particularly want to go, but these activists sound like a bunch of miserable bastards who hate fun.
- Simulacra 3y ago
  My take away was also bitterness and jealousy, the arguments just don't really add up to banning cruises.
gcheong 3y ago
I've been on a few cruises, they're fun and certainly an amazing feat of engineering but a bit of reflection and you realize perhaps moving the equivalent of a self-contained resort from place to place just so that people won't be a bit bored when in-between ports might be a bit egregious in the scheme of things. Do people really need to experience up-scale restaurants, casinos, roller coasters, zip-lines, skating rinks, musicals, comedy shows, etc while at sea? Combine that with the cruise industries' general poor track record of worker mistreatment, at the very least some much heavier regulation seems warranted. I'm guessing eventually cruises will go the way of orca shows in popularity.
osigurdson 3y ago
The problem with this type of argument is it always circles back. For example, what is the purpose of the 58 year old painters art? Hmmm, it doesn't seem like the painter is serving any purpose. The crux of the argument is, there is no such thing as an objective purpose. Nothing in the universe has such a property in the final analysis. Thus purpose must be defined by individuals.
notacoward 3y ago
Everyone thinks the things they don't personally enjoy or benefit from are the ripest targets for regulation (if not outright elimination). Just like everyone thinks that their (or quite often their parents') choices of where to live and how to get around should be easy for everyone else to adopt. Sometimes those preferences happen to be consistent with environmental or other concerns, but that's rarely the real motivation. People just like to look down on other people. The difference is apparent when you consider that the "activists" have generally not thought for one minute about what it would really take to make their prescription real, or what secondary costs (including environmental ones) that would incur.
- ianburrell 3y ago
  The interviewed activist is a painter. I would put painting and cruising in same bucket of utility. And that both have value because they provide happiness.
- nvm0n2 3y ago
  Not everyone thinks that. Come now. I and many other people can honestly say we never woke up in the morning filled with zeal to ban out regulate someone else's entertainment.
concordDance 3y ago
Most people lack a generalised sense of empathy. They can empathise with people who are missing out on things they (the observers) also would want but don't really care if someone is missing something they (the observers) don't care for. Applies equally well to parks, pets, porn, cars, cycleroutes, childcare...
tiberious726 3y ago
> "I mean, how can we authorize that?” Wow, she's saying the quiet part out loud. No, we don't need her goddamn permission if we want to ice skate in a boat. That sounds awesome.
- zwerdlds 3y ago
  Agreed. At what price do you think cruises internalize the externalized costs?

bigyikes 3y ago

I don’t think we should get rid of cruises, but I don’t see the movie theater comparison as valid. Movie theaters don’t emit tons of CO2. (One could also make the argument that movie theaters propagate the arts, which is a good purpose)

PM_me_your_math 3y ago
[dead]
Zak 3y ago
> Movie theaters don’t emit tons of CO2 Perhaps not directly, but in most of the USA, everyone in one drove a car there. The energy use from those same people streaming the movie at home would emit much less. I'm not for a ban on any of those, but very few activities are truly carbon neutral.
- igor47 3y ago
  I think it's a matter of scope. Cruise ships are unusually polluting. This is why folks argue to ban private jets and not commercial aviation. Or in this case, cruise and not container ships.
  - skeeter2020 3y ago
    A lot more people get "value" from Fox News vs. HN; ban the latter to save resources and those people can go do some productive with the time they're currently wasting.
    - felurx 3y ago
      Again: That's not a helpful comparison. Cruise ships have absolutely ridiculous emissions. HN does not.
igor47 3y ago
This makes sense to me as an argument. People downvoting this because they disagree is pretty sad.
skeeter2020 3y ago
Everyone drove a car to the theater to sit sedentary for 3+ hours and eat garbage food before driving home. Lots of societal bad there; why do you get to decide?
- BA_and_bored 3y ago
  Things you listed are parts of Murican way of life, not a part of cinema experience. Ppl around the world mostly use bikes or public transit or at least taxi to go to the cinema. In my local cinema they serve nice salads beside traditional pop-corn.
rqtwteye 3y ago
You have to look at the whole picture. The people who drive to the theater emit CO2. Same for car racing. I bet the emissions caused by the race cars are dwarfed by the emissions of people driving to any larger music concert.
osigurdson 3y ago
Most movie theatres propagate nonsense superhero stories. Lots of CO2 emitted in the creation of those. I guess we should delete movie theatres along with everything else. The problem with all such arguments as they are fundamentally nihilistic in the final analysis.
concordDance 3y ago
If CO2 is the concern then include the CO2 in the price via a CO2 tax (or a per person CO2 budget if you want something objectively worse but more intuitive, then people can save up their CO2 credits for a cruise if they really want a once in a lifetime thing).

philwelch 3y ago

I’ve never been on a cruise and I don’t ever particularly want to go, but these activists sound like a bunch of miserable bastards who hate fun.

Simulacra 3y ago
My take away was also bitterness and jealousy, the arguments just don't really add up to banning cruises.

gcheong 3y ago

I've been on a few cruises, they're fun and certainly an amazing feat of engineering but a bit of reflection and you realize perhaps moving the equivalent of a self-contained resort from place to place just so that people won't be a bit bored when in-between ports might be a bit egregious in the scheme of things. Do people really need to experience up-scale restaurants, casinos, roller coasters, zip-lines, skating rinks, musicals, comedy shows, etc while at sea? Combine that with the cruise industries' general poor track record of worker mistreatment, at the very least some much heavier regulation seems warranted. I'm guessing eventually cruises will go the way of orca shows in popularity.

osigurdson 3y ago

The problem with this type of argument is it always circles back. For example, what is the purpose of the 58 year old painters art? Hmmm, it doesn't seem like the painter is serving any purpose. The crux of the argument is, there is no such thing as an objective purpose. Nothing in the universe has such a property in the final analysis. Thus purpose must be defined by individuals.

notacoward 3y ago

Everyone thinks the things they don't personally enjoy or benefit from are the ripest targets for regulation (if not outright elimination). Just like everyone thinks that their (or quite often their parents') choices of where to live and how to get around should be easy for everyone else to adopt. Sometimes those preferences happen to be consistent with environmental or other concerns, but that's rarely the real motivation. People just like to look down on other people. The difference is apparent when you consider that the "activists" have generally not thought for one minute about what it would really take to make their prescription real, or what secondary costs (including environmental ones) that would incur.

ianburrell 3y ago
The interviewed activist is a painter. I would put painting and cruising in same bucket of utility. And that both have value because they provide happiness.
nvm0n2 3y ago
Not everyone thinks that. Come now. I and many other people can honestly say we never woke up in the morning filled with zeal to ban out regulate someone else's entertainment.

concordDance 3y ago

Most people lack a generalised sense of empathy. They can empathise with people who are missing out on things they (the observers) also would want but don't really care if someone is missing something they (the observers) don't care for. Applies equally well to parks, pets, porn, cars, cycleroutes, childcare...

tiberious726 3y ago

> "I mean, how can we authorize that?” Wow, she's saying the quiet part out loud. No, we don't need her goddamn permission if we want to ice skate in a boat. That sounds awesome.

zwerdlds 3y ago
Agreed. At what price do you think cruises internalize the externalized costs?