[medlazik]

Absolutely everything related to this article except the sport itself. All innovation from now on should go through a committee of scientists and randomly selected individuals to avoid such fucking stupid ""innovations"" to ever exist.

[gameman144]

This is super interesting to me -- I would expect that this world view would object to the comparatively extreme infrastructure and capital requirements of professional sports and other in-world consumption, vs. the relatively small outlays for digital consumption.

[graypegg]

I thought it seemed neat. If I was part of your randomly selected individuals, I would give it the green light.

I think the core element of human creativity might be lost in your imagined system of governance.

[medlazik]

"Earth is burning and 99% of humanity is suffering but at least for a century we were oh so creative" You in 2062, most probably

[graypegg]

Is it more to do with resources misallocated from something to prevent human suffering, to something comparably suffering-neutral? (a VR headset with an NBA app on it)

While I can empathize with that, I don't think those resources would be reused in solving world hunger, poverty, access to medicine, or something more directly related to alleviating suffering.

If there's a direct connection here that I'm missing (one of the engineers abandoned a medical degree to become a developer) I'm willing to at least understand that. But otherwise your idea still seems rather tenuous.

Oddly enough, you don't have an issue with the sport, which is also suffering-neutral, and actually represents a massive capital and labour waste by comparison. (Stadiums, redirected tax revenue, bloated salaries, ownership structures)