But you completely changed the scenario in an absurd way?

The original setup was spending time in line vs having usable, productive time.

You changed it to spending time in line vs the time just vanishes.

Even sitting alone in a room doing nothing can be productive time. It gives you time to think about things in a way you can’t when you’re doing other activities.

There is no such thing as unusable, unproductive time unless you actively choose to make it that way.

There’s always something you can do, even if that’s reflecting on life.

▲

phkahler 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The genie transports to work, not time travel. You do whatever you want right up til work time and then teleport there.

▲

argee 16 hours ago | parent [-]

What GP is saying is that your scenario is strictly worse. You meant to argue that commute time is not seen as equivalent to "lifespan time" since no one would make your trade, but in fact your trade is deleting time from a life entirely in exchange for commute whereas commute time may still otherwise be spent somewhat productively (e.g. listening to a podcast, calling your family, or whatever). The difference between someone who accepted this bargain and not, is that the person who accepted the bargain has in fact less productive time overall (because it got deleted in the bargain), so of course no one will make the trade. When I say "deleted" I'm talking about the lifespan reduction, I understand your commute becomes "instant".

	▲	16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

pessimizer 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

edit: Nah, I was even misreading it - it's just saying exactly the same thing that objectors are saying. Commute time isn't worth nothing, and people wouldn't trade it 1:1 for time not spent commuting.

I'd comment by saying that human life math, and X% disability math etc., though absurd, has to be done when you have a say over how lives and health will be spent. There will always be death panels.

The best you can do is make your calculations explicit, so other people can express how they object to them and how they would do them differently. But there's no inherent or consistent value to a life or a handicap. Your dying would hurt you more than it would hurt me, and would affect your children in ways in which I wouldn't be affected; and losing the use of one's legs would be worse for an NBA player than for a computer programmer. Losing an index finger could be nearly like death to a guitarist.