Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
As far as I can tell the Icon of the Seas is basically fine; even on the environmental front (important!) I see no reason to believe it's worse per passenger than other ships. A lot of opposition to it feels like elite snobbery against middle / upper-middle-class people. Any good anti-Icon arguments I'm missing?
4 replies
24 recasts
324 reactions
Matt Garcia
@mattgarcia.eth
something people don't consider about environmental impact is the splurge—"My 25-room mansion is eco friendly so I'm eco friendly." even if you're using econfriendly methods in your gigantic non-essential-thing (mansion,vegas casino,mega cruise...), your splurge footprint (resources, labor, land) is not eco friendly
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
Right but I feel like here people are unfairly carrying over the (usually correct) association of "big = wasteful", not taking into account that the bigness here is primarily not to pamper rich people, but to serve an unprecedentedly huge number of people, who would otherwise be split between multiple other ships.
3 replies
1 recast
15 reactions
Kaplan
@kaplan
Being stuck on a ship this size with that many people is not my cup of tea, it’s kind of a nightmare. That being said, I’d do the Alaska cruiseship experience. I’ve read that each ship has a mortuary to hold geriatric populations who simply die from old age. Not a bad way to go if you ask me.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Kaplan
@kaplan
As an aside, as soon as I have enough luxury money, I’m taking my family to the Galapagos to witness the incredible variance of flora and fauna. Bucket list for sure.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
