Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT

WCDT 7-11 January 2019 (3911-3915)

<< < (31/46) > >>

DSL:

--- Quote from: Zebediah on 11 Jan 2019, 08:38 ---So let me get this straight. We’re letting Crushbot off the hook for nearly killing Roko, but we’re condemning Faye for potentially hurting Crushbot’s feelings?

--- End quote ---

You're allowed to feel remorse, and attempt to offer condolences for, an accident that is determined to be your fault but which you did not intend. (Even if Thuh LAW and Pernicious Pedants insist we "intend" every consequence of our actions.)

Absent any indication C-bot delibarately sent Roko's chassis to Flatland, Faye's "No one likes you" is a tad bit uncalled for.

Is it cold in here?:

--- Quote from: A small perverse otter on 10 Jan 2019, 09:14 ---I really liked how Jeph kind of took us into one of the most degrading of the aspects of the trans experience: people asking very personal questions about your body, and whether and you'd had surgery. I particularly think it's great that he brought the whole debate about whether or not Claire has had genital corrective surgery directly into the narrative, even if only indirectly.

I hope that the next time somebody wants to speculate about Claire, they'll think about Roko's response to the question about whether or not she now has nipples...

--- End quote ---

Jeph has also addressed the issue head on in a tweet.

OldGoat:
Using real life vehicle insurance policies as a model - At least in any US state I'm familiar with, by accepting a settlement from the insurance company for a totaled vehicle, you give them title to what's left.  Roko's old body probably isn't hers anymore.  (You do hear about owners buying their junked vehicle back to rebuild it.  "Total loss" just means the insurer thinks it'll cost more to repair than to replace.  There may be a lot of car left.  In some cases the damage may be entirely cosmetic.)

The default in any surgical procedure paperwork here in the US is that the surgeon gets to keep whatever they take out of you.  Babies excepted.  As my doc explained once, "That's in case it's really interesting and I want to write a paper on it."

No one has mentioned the liability of whoever the nincompoop was that left a crate of bananas on the traveled portion of the sidewalk, particularly in a neighborhood frequented by abnormally large sentient robots.  Crushie's insurance carrier is no doubt investigating the possibility of subrogating to recover at least part of their loss.  (Proportional liability - how much of the fault rests with Crushbot and how much with the Banana Leaver - will be discussed in pretrial negotiations and argued at court if the case goes to trial, but they seldom do.)

de_la_Nae:
I don't have the energy for WCDT, but I feel like it bears mentioning that I would look askance at a *constructed* giant able to be foiled by one (1) errant crate of fruit. Like i dunno three legs, magic gyroscopes... something?

like I totally can be foiled by fruit, but i'm a product of evolution and more-or-less natural biology, i'm automatically doomed to be a ridiculously-unoptimized bag of flesh and water

Roborat:
Oh please, they have to give Roko a fruit backet, it would fit their sense of humour, and would serve to welcome Roko into the group.  Also, why the anger Faye? It was an accident, it wasn't Crushbot's negligence or actions that caused Roko to become one with the sidewalk.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page