Yeah and those ideas have a common thread to them - making other people's lives worse with no obvious gain to anyone. People should stop with that and spend some time thinking about how to make the situation better instead. Somehow modern society sprung up in place of barbarians living in caves and it wasn't by vigorous protest. The trick seems to be capital investment, clever application of science and accumulating reliable data. A lot of negotiation and tolerance of people who believe other ideas too. Violence did happen and in some small amount is probably useful but people go waaaay over the top in trying to use it as though it was a productive force. It nearly never works.

> and it wasn't by vigorous protest.

Are you off your rocker or just completely unfamiliar with the history of human rights and civil liberties?

maybe study the history of the civil rights movement, then we can talk

You have greatly misinterpreted history if you believe this to be the case.

Violence is the only reason we have a civilization in the first place. How do you think we deal with people that do not play by its rules? Hint: we don’t just use our words.

I was just reading about some environmental protestors outside the first minister's residence in Edinburgh. They're doing a Halloween protest with lots of pumpkins, it seems quite nice.

This is the way, inconvenience the people responsible, not your fellow citizens. Block the robot company's street, not you main street.

Of course, it's safer to inconvenience the public than someone who will call the police and get you removed, or even jailed, even if the law supposedly protects both activities equally; but going to jail for their activism has never been new for actual activists.

Ask yourself: Am I willing to get arrested for my ideals? If not, it's just performance, and you'd better find something more fulfilling to do.

Sitting quietly at home? Like, not going into work, and possibly negatively affecting GDP?

Unfortunately she had the gall to retire beforehand

The French students form of protest has already yielded concessions.

The "if violence doesn't work, you are not using enough" way.

You're misunderstanding, probably intentionally. GP is not upset on behalf of the cold lunch or the person receiving it. They're saying this is a stupid way to protest. Until she was arrested (which was not an expected or anticipated consequence), it was utterly irrelevant and meaningless. It had no benefit to anyone, brought no attention to what she was upset about (which is moronic anwyays - being mad that robots are taking the "jobs" of DD/UE "workers" is completely misunderstanding the issue), and had no chance of changing anything. It was an idiotic way to "protest".

But go off about guillotines and cold lunches or whatever.

> You're misunderstanding, probably intentionally. GP is not upset on behalf of the cold lunch or the person receiving it. They're saying this is a stupid way to protest.

I understood this

> It had no benefit to anyone, brought no attention to what she was upset about

“Stopping in front of the robots, Marvin said, led to productive conversations with other passersby who asked what she was doing.”

> which is moronic anwyays - being mad that robots are taking the "jobs" of DD/UE "workers" is completely misunderstanding the issue

I intentionally did not express an opinion on the merits of her complaints

Acts of civil disobedience are not, as a rule, intended to directly benefit anyone, and arrest is not only an expected, but often a desired outcome.