this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
157 points (80.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35869 readers
1324 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Would they have all still fought against him?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 331 points 1 year ago (27 children)

Isaac Asimov, a very intelligent person, wrote a lengthy essay to the effect that he had no idea what intelligence was. He talked about how society would generally consider him more intelligent than the nearly illiterate man who repaired his car, and yet whenever something went wrong with his car he would go to his mechanic and listen to his advice as if it was being handed down from the mountaintop by Moses himself, because Isaac Asimov knew fuck all about car repair. He talked about how he thought that supposedly objective IQ tests were generally a series of gates designed by people already considered intelligent to keep themselves in power, and that they totally disregarded huge swaths of indispensable human knowledge and talent. Isaac Asimov, who has been published in literally every section of the Dewey Decimal System, concluded that he had no firm idea as to what exactly "intelligence" even was.

In short, how could one even define "the dumbest 50%"?

And that's why Thanos should have made everybody half as large as they once were.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

He talked about how he thought that supposedly objective IQ tests were generally a series of gates designed by people already considered intelligent to keep themselves in power, and that they totally disregarded huge swaths of indispensable human knowledge and talent.

Modern psychology supports this, too. IQ tests are bullshit, and intelligence is not something that can be reasonably quantified in any meaningful sense without an insane amount of asterisks.

Also...are we counting kids? Because you'd probably find kids are consistently beneath the 50% line on any generic intelligence measuring criteria someone makes up.

[–] ButtholeSpiders@startrek.website 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree, I took a few IQ tests and scored high and initially it made me wonder is if everyone else was as concerned as I was watching our species being driven into early graves for yearly profit projections.

Suffice to say, most people I met who scored high lacked the foresight to even think we might be screwed. Which led me to a swift conclusion that your IQ doesn’t mean jack squat, it was a biased system that was simply a biased form of dick measuring.

Perhaps I’m disillusioned, but the best summary of our species is that old video of a chimpanzee in a zoo pissing in its mouth.

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Many IQ tests, even ones that claim to be scientific, and especially free ones, artificially inflate the scores they give, to encourage the people taking them to purchase an in-depth analysis of their results.

Like, "Your IQ is 135! That's well above average! For $39.99, we'll give you this in-depth, 18 page question by question analysis showing how you stacked up against everyone else, and what your answers mean!"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 27 points 1 year ago

I love the entire story, then your very solid and succinct answer

[–] soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 year ago

The dumbest 50% is everyone but me.

[–] Kahlenar@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Ahhhh the GOAT. Seriously, as a smart kid everything else about me was ignored. Something wrong at school? You CAN do it, so just do it. D&D breaks up mental stats, but there's even more out there. Int, Wis, Cha to start. Then there's motivation, happiness, and empathy, and more. The mind is super complex and an int score of 18 being all that matters is like the saying "this hammer solves my nail problem, it will surely solve my window problem."

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] contextual_somebody@lemmy.world 73 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Yeah, because it’s so morally defensible to eliminate all of the developmentally disabled and republicans.

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 23 points 1 year ago

rip grandma

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

cougheugenicscough

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 72 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Hang on, do you mean “with the least capacity to be smart,” or is he killing all the babies and children?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pwnicholson@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago (4 children)

They'd still be appalled and try to stop him given their strong moral code. And given that they'd be at full strength they'd probably find a way to stop him and reverse things faster than they did in OTL

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm frankly astonished anyone could genuinely think the Avengers would ever somehow be more ok with letting Thanos kill "only the stupid people". Like...that's a very strange read on these characters to think they'd ever react any differently in this scenario.

But even if they were so morally and ethically bankrupt to think it may not be such a bad idea, the truth is killing "the dumber 50%" is still causing catastrophic secondary effects. People would lose loved ones. That's enough of a reason to go Avenging.

Hell, how are we defining "dumb"? Because you may have just murdered every child under a certain age.

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

You think none of the Avengers is in the "dumb" 50%?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Would they have all still fought against him?

I know this is No Stupid Questions but...come on.

Why on Earth would the Avengers react any differently? Is the assumption that they're morally bankrupt enough to actually reconsider in this scenario? That somehow letting "stupid" people be murdered is ever, in any way, acceptable?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

50% was such a dumb number anyways.

It requires a single doubling to get back to where we were. To double, you'd need about 10 times a 7% growth. Probably within less than 100 years you'd be back at the same problem

Not to mention that when you murder a shit tonne of people, and when it's over you'll likely have lots of people getting babies, so you get a birth wave about 9 months later. That regrowth starts FAST.

[–] Kyoyeou@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This message was brought to you by the Rabbits in Australia

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

I mean, he could have just created 200% more resources as well. Or he could have equally redistributed all the resources. The problem he was trying to solve would still eventually happen again, because solving the problem relies on everyone working unselfishly, which is simply not possible when humans are involved.

[–] lazylion_ca@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think he should have cut the pregnancy rate to a third of what it is now. No one would notice. No one would die or be missed. There'd just be a lot less people within fifty years.

[–] AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com 16 points 1 year ago

OK while that would be a better idea the thought that no one would notice is laughable. We have detailed pregnancy rate records going back 75 years, an immediate 30% change would definitely raise a lot of red flags.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] MTK@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The real question is which avengers would be gone. Putting my money on Thor

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] PreparaTusNalgasPorque@kbin.social 30 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I think the whole 50% depopulation is a flawed premise, of the hundred of thousands of years modern humans have existed that would throw total population back to... 1970

[–] swordsmanluke@programming.dev 35 points 1 year ago

Yup. His movie motivation was dumbed down. The whole resources thing is stupid for exactly this reason.

In the comics, Thanos became infatuated with the Marvel Universe incarnation of Death. ...And naturally he figured that if he killed half the universe at once, he'd get her attention. (cause girls love it when a boy makes a huge amount of work for them...)

Anyway, his plan was still moronic, but "manchild does stupid thing to impress girl" is a classic for a reason.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It wasn't just humans, it was the whole universe. He wasn't concerned with how each individual species' populations would fluctuate, he just had a solution in his head and went with it.

Ya know, the "mad Titan" thing.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it largely depends on his definition of “dumb”…. Given he’s already committed to wiping out half of all life, I’d consider his mental facilities to be of questionable intellect already. His idea of who is dumb may be similarly questionable…

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 22 points 1 year ago

Dude, he killed Vision and Gamora and other people close to the member of Avengers, no way they gonna let him off the hook.

[–] Nioxic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 year ago

Then we know he would have killed all of GOTG

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Why couldn't Thanos just wish for unlimited resources? Or universal peace? Or literally any number of things that would have solved the problems he was trying to solve without anyone getting hurt or never existing? His method was stupid.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] SpiralSong@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I always wondered if your goal is to reduce population. Why not just make half the people infertile?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He also could have just created trillions more planets so that there wouldn't be natural resource shortages. Nope. Gotta murder quadrillions of life forms.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don't think the hulk would have reacted at all, since he'd be gone. But does that mean Banner would stay somehow?

[–] 3laws@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Hulk is not dumb, he just was born 30 years later than Banner.

We know that given the time Hulk also proves to Bea genius of his own.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] zepheriths@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

That leaves an interesting situation for Bruce banner/the hulk

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 12 points 1 year ago

Ant-Man: Well come on, wait, you know, there are different kinds of intelligence, right? Please someone tell me I'm not making that up.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanos could have literally chosen 1000 other options that were better than killing 50% of all living things, and I'm sure nobody would have disagreed!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

You killed all of our kids!

load more comments
view more: next ›