[scoofy]

>whatever a "categorical imperative" might be or represent

If you do not understand the concept of a categorical imperative, I would strongly suggest studying some ethical philosophy. There are folks that have spent lifetimes trying to figure out the best ways to see human flourishing, and they have some very, very good ideas.

[paganel]

> I would strongly suggest studying some ethical philosophy

Now, why would I ever want to do that? What's next, starting a crypto company in the Bahamas while joining a polycule?

> There are folks that have spent lifetimes trying to figure out the best ways to see human flourishing, and they have some very, very good ideas.

No, I won't join a polycule while swindling people out of their money.

[scoofy]

I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm just a fairly boring nerd who studied philosophy in college and grad school.

[chadgpt2]

Another categorical imperative is "everyone who is bullied by the city and only allowed to sleep in the transit system shall sleep in the transit system"

This one is fine. If the city doesn't like it, it should legalise sleeping on park benches.

Another one is "it costs society nothing if you occupy an empty seat on a nearly empty car". Most people don't sleep in the transit system when the transit system is busy, anyway, because why would you sleep in such a noisy place? They are there at quiet times because they don't have a better place. They don't like it any more than you do.

Another one is "everyone is equal". People here are complaining that a homeless person sleeping on park benches takes away their ability to sit on them. But why is sitting considered more valuable than sleeping? Or why should the benches be reserved for people who HN readers agree with?