Profile overview for Meph.
Submission statistics

This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):

5 submissions to BadMovies

1 submissions to ideasforvoat

This user has so far shared a total of 4 links, started a total of 2 discussions and submitted a total of 65 comments.

Voting habits

Submissions: This user has upvoted 7 and downvoted 1 submissions.

Comments: This user has upvoted 35 and downvoted 32 comments.

Submission ratings

5 highest rated submissions:

5 lowest rated submissions:

Comment ratings

3 highest rated comments:

Should We Redesign Capitalism to Address Our Jobless Future? submitted by ideasware to news

Meph 3 points 59 points (+62|-3) ago

People that say this are people that don't fundamentally grasp the difference between the Automation Revolution coming and the past Industrial Revolution. People think they are an equal comparison, they are not. At all.

The purpose of the I.R. was to improve human productivity. That was the goal, to invent tools and machines that can make humans do much more in the same amount of time, or make humans do what they couldn't do before. But fundamentally human interaction was still a critical element to make everything function, the machines in the I.R. were just dumb machines. They stamped or cast metal, but humans had to move the metal and assemble the metal into things like cars. Cars which would then, for a taxi driver, have humans driving them around. Human interaction was still a crutch to the I.R.

A.I. and the future with automation is not improving human productivity. It is replacing humans. It doesn't make us more efficient, it makes us obsolete. That's what you and everybody who makes your false argument don't get. Restaurant servers, cooks, truck/delivery drivers, consumer goods production, assembly line workers, any fast food joint, taxi drivers, accountants, retail sales workers, secretaries, any basic function involved in most of the Service industry is going to be gone. This is millions of jobs. Gone. We will not be "making new jobs" in any rate comparable to the rate of their removal. And those new magical jobs you people always say will appear? What are the chances that they'll even be jobs performed by humans? There might be new jobs... and they'll most likely be automated just as the jobs that are being lost are automated.

There is a company in Japan, FANUC, that can operate its production for a month without a single human being involved. Lights-Out Manufacturing dubbed because without people there you don't need to keep the lights on, they can be shut off and save on electricity costs. This automation revolution isn't the distant future. This is right around the corner, it's being developed now.

What do you think society is going to do when we've made a social construct that equates human value to their job/productivity, and now that society has half of its population unable to even find work? Not because they're lazy moochers, but because there are literally not enough jobs for half of the population.

Dairy Queen goes rogue, offers items discontinued by headquarters, as well as non-corporate approved food items submitted by cheesypoofs_andpinot to news

Meph 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago

I don't see why they couldn't easily do both. The menu can have a selection of uniform items across the nation, as well as a selection of local cuisine. So long as the local food can be cooked with all the standard DQ equipment. You don't need a menu with every different variety of burger. You just have a menu with Burger + Here's a list of toppings put on what you want. Five Guys does that quite effectively.

deleted by user submitted by MathGrunt to news

Meph 3 points 22 points (+25|-3) ago

Just because there isn't a law doesn't mean he didn't harm society.

Dude, that's not even a slippery slope of an argument. That's a fucking fireman's pole straight down. I'd strongly consider you re-evaluate what you believe in if you feel that is a solid justification.

3 lowest rated comments:

How Does This Picture Make You Feel? submitted by betterpc to fatpeoplehate

Meph 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago

I feel great about it.

Because this Ham wanted to feel like a man, since it's so used to feeling like a glob it'd be a new sensation to it. And in the process the company fleeced it out of a shitload of its money to "hunt" an aged/dying/sick/etc. lion. And in the process contributed to funding the preservation of habitat and support for hundreds of other younger lions, so they can grow and prosper. Believe it or not these programs are quite beneficial because without them the habitat would likely be lost, as well as a lack of poacher protection which would dwindle the lion population even further. You just have to be capable of looking past knee-jerk feefees to understand what's going on here.

Make Voat an adult space the way Facebok avoids controversy assuming users are 13 years old. Red's big problem is children and adults co-mingling. Free speech should be left to adult conversations. submitted by Calvin to ideasforvoat

Meph 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago

Besides putting an age limit on being unenforceable, what'll happen is that'll deter the good youths and encourage the asshole youths to lie about their age so they can be super rebellious fuck the system rebel yell aaaaaaaaaaaaaah! So you'll have backlash which will make the site worse.

Age isn't the issue, maturity is. Because that's what you really want. You want to prune away the shitposts and not have to cater to dumbdumbs. Problem is that some 15 year olds can be good content providers and 40 year olds can be racist fuckholes that don't contribute for shit. Age isn't the issue. Quality is.

This just in: Instaham has banned the hastag #curvy submitted by Fatties-Gonna-Fat to fatpeoplehate

Meph 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago