Reminds me of a scene in the book 1632 where a group of women and children hide in a latrine to avoid being found by soldiers.

If he’s been a plumber for 40 years, then he obviously has a track record of not making enough mistakes to lose insurance.

Yeah, I see what you’re saying as well. I’m coming from the perspective of having worked at a chain pizza place for 6 years in the past and seeing drivers double check orders before leaving and sometimes having to drive back to deliver something they missed. I feel like that should be a reasonable expectation for Doordash drivers, but then the bag is sealed, presumably to keep the driver from messing with/eating the food, which also seems like a negative to me. If they can’t be trusted not to eat my food, how can I trust them to deliver it?

It sounds like if I watch any of his videos it will need to be with a critical mind and an eye toward further paths of research from other sources.

Interesting, this is the first I’ve heard of him or the channel. Thanks!

Who is this guy? Someone else mentioned Man Carrying Thing, but that’s a skit channel, and not in China like another person said.

The driver could check that all of the stuff is there before bringing it to you. At the end of the day why should I care more about how the mistake happens than that it happens?

If I used a service that messed up my orders frequently enough to make such a statistic, I’d stop using that service.

Spending extra money for generally worse service to save a couple minutes of typing is actually the epitome of laziness.

Wait what? Oh no.

Wow, my brain had a tough time processing that image. Turn it about 20 degrees counter clockwise and it looked like a hallway with several red carts with netting blocking the way. I literally thought the morgue was at the other end.

I generally agree with the exception of sandbox games intended to be played through multiple times, like grand strategy games. In those cases they can be a fun way to find absurd goals to try out, like in Victoria 3 when I made the US a monarchy or made Paraguay really big!

If you read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein that may give you an idea.

Otherwise, I attended Porcfest, the libertarian Porcupine Freedom Festival, back in 2016. Although it’s labeled libertarian, most folks I talked to discussed anarchy. One of the presentations I remember asserted that 8 is the optimal number of individuals in a decision making group. In his ideal anarchy individual people would assemble in groups of 8, who would then gather their groups or reps from their groups into a higher group of 8, and so on. Effectively higher level group decisions, if needed, would be made by a council that could be traced back to any individual.

I don’t know that that’s a good plan, but it may get your mind going on how to think about the topic.

I have a lot of thoughts and feelings related to the book because, while there is a lot of garbage in it, the core thesis spelled out at one point in the last third I think is very worthwhile and came at a time in my life (just turned 21 when I first read it) that it helped shape my political views. As another commenter said Heinlein was never very consistent in the politics portrayed in his stories, which I’ve understood as him exploring various views more than wholeheartedly endorsing any one of them.

First, the garbage. It’s pretty clearly pro military, as the in-book government was established by veterans seizing power and the primary path to having political power (being a voting citizen as opposed to a civilian) is through military service. There’s lip service paid that it’s any kind of civil service (Neil Patrick Harris’s character goes off to a research lab for experimenting in the book), but it’s only a sentence or two. No source on this, but my gut says Heinlein probably wanted to explore the idea more but was hampered by the fact he was writing a space military adventure and needed to focus on that. There’s also a lot of 50’s values espoused for separating genders into different groups and that spanking your kids is good no matter what the “bleeding hearts” might say.

The biggest difference that bothers me between the book and movie is how soldier lives are valued, best displayed through the tactics humanity uses. In the movie humanity uses almost the same strategy as the bugs. Get a lot of troops, equip them about as cheaply as possible, then send swarms of them to deal with bugs. Mass casualties are a given. The book is one of if not the first example of power armor turning a soldier into almost a one man army. It’s stated at one point that a single soldier is about as effective as 1000 bug drones in combat. This, along with statements from multiple officers throughout the book, shows me that individual soldier lives are actually valued in the book, and that while they are spent they are not wasted the way they are in the movie.

But for me, the most important takeaway from the book is a lecture given to Johnny Rico during officer school where the instructor lays out why service is required for citizenship. Essentially the goal is to ensure that the only people making decisions on behalf of society (ie politicians and the people that vote them in) are putting the good of that society over their own personal wellbeing. The service citizens go through is meant to weed out selfish people by putting them through difficult experiences where it would be in their best interest to quit rather than continue. While I doubt the book’s system would actually achieve that, I do think that the value of society-serving rather than self-serving voters and politicians is correct and probably the most important thing that a society could achieve (not that I know how to achieve that). It’s the first thing I ask myself when deciding who to vote for now, “does this person actually care about the people they’ll be representing or are they just interested in having power?”