• Hey Guest,

    We wanted to share a quick update with the community.

    Our public expense ledger is now live, allowing anyone to see how donations are used to support the ongoing operation of the site.

    👉 View the ledger here

    Over the past year, increased regulatory pressure in multiple regions like UK OFCOM and Australia's eSafety has led to higher operational costs, including infrastructure, security, and the need to work with more specialized service providers to keep the site online and stable.

    If you value the community and would like to help support its continued operation, donations are greatly appreciated. If you wish to donate via Bank Transfer or other options, please open a ticket.

    Donate via cryptocurrency:

    Bitcoin (BTC):
    Ethereum (ETH):
    Monero (XMR):

Would it be better if there was nothing for all time

  • yes without doubt it would be better if there was nothing

    Votes: 8 88.9%
  • no it better that something exists

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • Total voters
    9
Darkover

Darkover

Archangel
Jul 29, 2021
5,648
If you believe that suffering is so foundational, so baked into the structure of reality, that any form of existence inevitably leads to pain, injustice, decay, and unmet need, then yes—nothingness for all time could be seen as an improvement. It would be the only true end to harm. No one to be hungry, no one to grieve, no one to die—because no one would exist at all. In that view, nonexistence is the only state that cannot go wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kunikuzushi
Doll Steak

Doll Steak

Student
May 31, 2025
176
I don't even think anyone could truly argue against this, its simple and straightforward, there are literally no flaws to non existence. Kind of just a fantasy though, nothing will go out of existence without at least a little suffering or discontent, and ultimately it will never be in anyone's power, weather anything exists or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pthnrdnojvsc
F

Forever Sleep

Earned it we have...
May 4, 2022
15,495
It feels like a paradoxical question. If there was nothing for all time, there would be no one to judge which would be 'better'. There wouldn't be a 'better' because there would be nothing to compare it to. I suppose there's a certain peace in contemplating nothing going on forever, certainly.

I suppose like any big decision though, I feel like the final choice would have to come out of a majority vote. If every living being got the chance to vote, I suspect we'd come out with a resounding choice to have life. Obviously we would- creatures keep reproducing. Our parents thought it was a good idea for one.

I think the annihilation of all life is God level thinking and, I'm pleased not to have that level of responsibility. I'm not sure you believe in God so- it's more chance and natural laws you want power over. You effectively want all of them to cease.

How do you know that harmonious life doesn't exist elsewhere though? You can imagine a much better way of being through information and technology. What if that type of life exists elsewhere? Would you be willing to destroy it, just to end your own pain?

I do understand people wanting to end their own suffering. I also understand people feeling dismayed at the suffering of others on this planet. It's just a step too far (for me) to assume that everything feels the same way though and, to feel justified in making decisions that could affect things we don't even know about. That's the big one really- feeling able to make decisions with such limited knowledge. There are so many unknowns about life, the universe etc.