Slashdot Mirror

"Alcohol is considered fair play. ...
People just don't see this as wrong. I don't know why. "

Some while ago I read some discussion on the topic:

http://www.sexuality.org/latrans.html

So it states that some BDSM people believe in this safe sane consentual and sober mantra, instead of just SSC, and the speaker in the transcript doesn't like the sober aspect at all.

On the whole I would never expect people with the maturity of freshmen to read the above website and follow SSCS on top of it even. The BDSM scene just has some more rigorous standards I guess because of the greater dangers involved. I heard once that people should attend a course or have some other kind of guidance, i.e. if they want to engage in anything bondage related to prevent nerve damage - who would have thought.

I never tried sex and alcohol, but I'm an introverted geek. Also I'm surprised about what passes off as majority culture and what exists at the fringe, in terms of mutual respect.

Fascinating, but polyamory in San Francisco isn't exactly a representative sample of polygamy worldwide.

That was just one example. There are plenty of others, in the US at least. Try these:

1. The Polyamory Society
2. Sev on polyamory
3. Poly Potluck Discussion Group of Greater Seattle and Western Washington
4. Polyamory Archive
5. Twin Cities Polyamory Discussion Group
6. PolyOrlando
7. Poly Matchmaker

And those are just from my bookmarks. About.com, which is also in my bookmarks, has more.

Falcon

He wants obscenity reported? Please report to him that the following message was posted:

(The easily offended should skip the rest of this post.)

(Last chance to look away...)

Fuck Senator John McCain. Fuck him up the ass hard with a big thick dildo with built-in violet wand until the santorum runs down his legs. Tie him down and fuck him and give him the golden shower he wants and deserves, until he admits his wretchedness, admits what a bootlicker he is, admits that he gets off on being a slave, because he can't handle freedom.

I think this is why Paul Allen invested so much money in SETI. Sounds like Steve was really pumped before coming out onto stage.

Article's a few years old, but will give you a starting place for searching.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/200 0-08-11/xtra_feature2.html

This one's only a year old:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/01/277711.sh tml

And something that looks like an essay on the subject:
http://www.sexuality.org/l/mscott/ssex01.html

From TFA:

"Too, there are unique challenges with representing and operating upon infinite sets, because an infinite set's contents cannot be completely stored in a data structure or enumerated."

Compare eg Houseplants of Gor.

(And yes, it's not terrifically advanced, and disappointingly free of C#-specific enlightenment...)

Why does that link bring to mind the name Natalie Portman?

I for one cannot stand that horrid rampant humanophilia all over the net. It's only for pervbots and it's disgusting.

Regards,
Cmdr Data

Forgot about the /. bug putting in spaces for the http lines. Here are those links again:
http://www.gorskys.com.au/ask/need-phone-sex-tips. html
http://www.sexuality.org/l/workers/phonesex.html
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pho ne+sex

Also, in america it isnt libel if its a claim that no one would reasonably believe(which is why the onion can say what is does, also parody is protected. Also because of Americas libel laws it is EXTREMELY hard for public figures to win a libel suit. A good example is the Falwell vs Flynt case which everyone should be familiar with if not here is some info on it Falwell v Flint.

Both parody and satire count as protected speech. The distinction's more because parody and satire cases have different precident cases backing them up, so the exact level of protection is different.

http://www.publaw.com/parody.html/

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/state/958 2196.htm?1c/

One of the most significant Satire related cases:

http://www.sexuality.org/l/wh/whfalwel.html/

The problem for satire cases right now may be seen in one recent case:

"Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. Penguin Books USA
Penguin Books published a poetic account of the O.J. Simpson trial in a book titled, The Cat NOT in the Hat! A Parody by Dr. Juice. The 9th Circuit held that the book did not parody The Cat in the Hat, but simply retold the Simpson story. Therefore, there was no fair-use defense, and the book was deemed a copyright infringement."

For source of this, see:

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/librari es/topic.aspx?topic=parody_satire/

Note that case was originally a ruling on a Parody claim, but a lot of people seem to think the decision, as worded, has severe impact on Satire based claims. This whole issue will doubltless come up again in further cases, at least until the supremes issue a ruling as definitive as in Fallwell.

So there are what, 4 people using linux at home that also have intimate enough relationships to actually produce offspring

At least some of us Linux users are capable of extremely intimate relationships. If there is a small number of Linux users with kids, it may be because we are smart enough to read the man page for condoms. And of course, the little part in the birth control pill manual that says they aren't effective for 30 days after you start taking them or after missing a dose. Windows machines, and their owners, get knocked up all the time because they aren't smart enough to RTFM. Often, even their operating system was loaded on the computer without their consent. It isn't that windows users have more sex, its just that they have more mishaps.

And Linux users are also capable of creating intellectual creations which reduces the psychological need to spawn biological creations.

Mac users, on the other, hand may have trouble reproducing because they are always too busy using their iBrators :-).

If you're a project manager, do you use a plog for better control?

I've always found flogging to work best for control.

I find it difficult to see how you can deduct such a position from the argument that I'm making. I'm not arguing that your life is enriched by something that you don't enjoy, I'm arguing that the attraction of a whole range of stuff isn't immediately apparent. Quite frequently, the greatest things in life are actually quite difficult to the naive and inexperienced brain and a real appreciation of these things only comes with time and effort. Great music, great literature and great art often falls into this category.

By taking the time and effort to acquaint yourself with these things, you may well come to appreciate them and by doing so, your life *will* be enriched. What is it about this concept that you find so difficult to grasp?

And although it wasn't the argument that I'm making, there certainly are those who would argue that one's life is enriched by a closer and more intimate personal relationship with certain types of pain -- and no, I don't have any disagreement with their argument either.

[...] what's a few holes in the walls between friends?

I think he stole it from here:
Stuff for nerds, knowledge that matters

I have been thinking lately that yes, I would suck another guy's cock or have my cock sucked by a guy IF that could be arranged anonymously. I haven't found any glory holes where to try, though.

What do you expect in a sex-negative culture?

I haven't read it, but based on this review, the guy obviously believes (probably on a subconscious level) that sex is icky and bad, not pleasurable and good. Or at the very least he's playing off of peoples' fears in that regard.

Repeat after me: Sex is nice and pleasure is good for you.

Which isn't to say be careful in real life. But there's a huge difference between being careful and being sex-negative.

SEX FOR FAT PEOPLE

• Russ Kick's Outposts & Outposts 2
• Re/Search Pranks
• From Chocolate to Morphine
• How to Get High Without Drugs
• A gift certificate to Good Vibrations
• Exhibitionism for the Shy by Carol Queen
• Screw the Roses, Send Me the Thorns
• The Herbal Abortion Handbook
• Electroshock Scorpion 200
• ASP Baton (check local laws)
• The Whole Earth Review
• Hakim Bey's T.A.Z.
• Drawing Down the Moon
• Ain't Nobody's bussiness if you do

Now, what about worshipping such a woman?

I can't speak for the parent poster, but my experience is that women (both geeky and non) are much easier to get along with when you're talking with them and not worshiping them. Especially if they're co-workers, or potential co-workers.

If you're attracted to someone, try flirting. If you're afraid of scaring them off with flirting, well, your hoving from a distance because you don't want to frighten them is actually scarrier than your flirting with them. At least with flirting they know what's up.

If you get rejected...hey, it happens. And it's not the end of the world.

Hope this helps.

Next they'll go after little "Evil Inside" logos that constitute fair use in free speech (as satire, political protest) as laid down by Falwell v. Flint and the First Amendment. Heck, one can make a completely valid argument that the same would apply to "Linux Inside. How can someone own a trademark on the expression of one object being within another?

"Yoga Inside" has no chance of diluting the Intel brand; however, Intel's behaviour does. Nobody's going to run around and say that they're computer is a "Yoga Inside". Your rant is spurrious.

I'm deeply suspicious of changes to trademark law. Got to love the recent changes that have been made to copyright law.

<sarcasm>Thanks, Disney!</sarcasm>. If this trademark stuff gets as out-of-whack, maybe we'll be using XPortholes instead of XWindows a few years down the road.

Brought to you courtesy of the clearly-a-sarky-observation-piece dept and can't-be-arsed-to-copy-the-colour-scheme-or-layout dept.

faux instructions

1. Surround yourself with a handful of Slashdot-aware friends.
2. Surround yourself with a variety of alcoholic beverages.
3. Familiarise yourself with things to slur when sufficiently intoxicated. These may include - but are not limited to: "Whaaaassssup!" and "I regret to inform you, ossifer, that my alcohol may contain trace amounts of blood".
4. Gather friends around a large monitor.
5. Familiarise yourself with the observations set out below, and decide among yourself which drinks to down, and when.
6. Load a web-browser, and visit Slashdot. Open up an article on practically any subject; display preferences set to 'flat, threshold 1, oldest first'.
7. Scroll down the page, slow enough so that even the booziest of observers has enough time to read and comprehend each post. As per the pre-arranged rules, consume a beverage of your choice.
8. CMP state,#bladdered : BNE stage_7

1. Read the observations listed below.
2. Depending on whether you agree with them or not, either nod sagely and concur, "True, true" or scowl angrily and accuse the author of smoking crack.

Drink a quantity of alcoholic substance and/or nod solemnly whenever...

• A poor analogy is constructed, embellished and never refuted, especially when it relates to the politics of MP3s, the feasibility of designing accessible websites, the ramifications of gun laws or the relative advantages/disadvantages of Intellectual Property.
• A large number of words in an article are unnecessarily hyperlinked, thus causing the hapless (yet curious) reader to place the mouse pointer over each and every one, in the hope that at least one of them might be in any way interesting.
• Someone says "Ummmm... you did read the article, didn't you?"
  • ...but they probably didn't read it themselves.
• An informative article is moderated as 'insightful', or vice versa.
• Someone claims that their post consists solely of the cold harsh facts of truth, while the opponent has to resort to name-calling, FUD or other such beastly tactics.
• The pre-emptive plea: "I'll probably get moderated down for saying this..." which of course gets moderated up.
  • ...they were posting anonymously to "protect their karma".
• The 'Slashdot mentality' is described and 'rebelled' against, to the author's karmic advantage.
  • ...they are effectively moderated up simply for voicing an opinion which is (or claims to be...) 'radically different'
  • ...plausible examples of the 'groupthink conformity' are mentioned (e.g. pro-Linux, pro-Open Source, anti-Microsoft, anti-spam, pro-Libertarian, anti-censorship, pro-Napster etc).
  • ...implausible examples are mentioned ("I'll probably get moderated down for voicing this opinion in what is clearly a predominantly anti-taildocking forum")
  • ...the author talks of 'Slashbots', 'Sheepdot' or other such anti-Slashdot rhetoric ("Open Source, Closed Minds... we are Slashdot")
  • ...a clearly inflammatory post is saved from a rightful (Score: -1, Flamebait) with the cautionary "this isn't a troll, I'm just pointing out the facts" or better still, the unconvincing "this isn't a troll - I don't even know what a troll is."
  • ...the score makes it clear that Slashdot moderators are becoming more sympathetic to pro-Microsoft posts than pro-Linux ones.
• A poster recognizes a troll and comprehends the futility in replying to such, but does so anyway with the resignation, "I know I'm not supposed to reply to trolls, but..."
• A poster is accused of being a troll despite being not even remotely inflammatory or controversial.
• After being berated for posting an insensitive, illogical or offensive post, the author caves in and posts, "*sheesh* it was only a joke! Evidentally you have no sense of humour!"
• Ignoring the numerous replies to a "It's funny. Laugh" article that clearly demonstrate that the posters have indeed found it to be amusing, someone suggests that everyone is taking it "waaaaay too seriously."
• Something is criticized as being "cool" or "trendy".
• A posting ends with the author saying, "eh, whatever", "go figure" or "*shrug*".
• Someone utilises any of the following terms or phrases: zealot, jihadist, sheeple, hysterical, misguided, whine, apologists, "funny, isn't it, how...".

My first experience with installing Linux was early in my college career. I'd heard great things about Linux, about how stable and powerful it was. That was just what I was looking for in an OS. I wanted something that would stay up longer than my old Windows system. I decided to go ahead and experiment with installing a totally different OS, so I decided to go for Linux. I am disappointed to say that my first attempt failed miserably. I was just too intimidated by the process. Linux seemed so complicated and I was only starting out in the alternative OS scene. I became scared, and my desire to install Linux was quickly shelved.

All throughout my college career though, my friends kept telling me about the power and stability of Linux. When I got out, I was again ready to attempt installing Linux. This time, however, I found the process much smother and easier. Linux was ready to be installed, and I was ready to install and I did so with pleasure. I found that except for a few minor differences involving my video card and sound card, Linux was the powerhouse my friends had talked about. I decided to go ahead and keep Linux for my web-server.

Little did I know how complicated Linux would continue to be. I was naïve, I was stupid, and I was ignorant. I didn't know that there were many people out there who had no desire except to take control of my web-server. I had no clue that Linux was so easily attacked. I didn't keep up with maintaining Linux's security, and in the end my system was taken away from me. Evil hackers took over my Linux and flaunted their control by changing my root password right under my nose!

I still miss my old system, but I am too afraid to install Linux again. I'm afraid it'll just be hacked again, and I'll look like an idiot one more time.

Now my friends are telling me about the strength, power, and security of FreeBSD. They say it's much less hackable, and it's just as rock-solid stable as Linux. Perhaps one day I'll be ready to experiment again, but until then I feel better with my easy Windows system.

Damn it, did I do it again? That's not at all what I meant. Please replace the above words as follows:

• Password - asshole
• Security - faithfulness
• Hackers - homosexual MBAs
• Video card - love of butter
• Strength - horniness
• Something - someone
• FreeBSD - Michael
• system - boyfriend
• Stability - manliness
• root - lover's
• Install - seduce (Modify tense as appropriate)
• An - a (Where necessary)
• Windows - Golden Shower loving
• alternative - plushophile (An explanation is available here)
• Hacked - tempted away
• OS - lover
• It - he/him (as appropriate)
• Changing - screwing
• Linux - CmdrTaco
• Web-server - beautiful arm and ass candy
• Attacked - swayed
• Stable - manly
• Sound card - distaste of Taco-Snotting
• Hackable - easily tempted

1. Surround yourself with a handful of Slashdot-aware friends.
2. Surround yourself with a variety of alcoholic beverages.
3. Familiarise yourself with things to slur when sufficiently intoxicated. These may include - but are not limited to: "Whaaaassssup!" and "I regret to inform you, ossifer, that my alcohol may contain trace amounts of blood".
4. Gather friends around a large monitor.
5. Familiarise yourself with the observations set out below, and decide among yourself which drinks to down, and when.
6. Load a web-browser, and visit Slashdot. Open up an article on practically any subject; display preferences set to 'flat, threshold 1, oldest first'.
7. Scroll down the page, slow enough so that even the booziest of observers has enough time to read and comprehend each post. As per the pre-arranged rules, consume a beverage of your choice.
8. CMP state,#bladdered : BNE stage_7

1. Read the observations listed below.
2. Depending on whether you agree with them or not, either nod sagely and concur, "True, true" or scowl angrily and accuse the author of smoking crack.

Drink a quantity of alcoholic substance and/or nod solemnly whenever...

• A poor analogy is constructed, embellished and never refuted, especially when it relates to the politics of MP3s, the feasibility of designing accessible websites, the ramifications of gun laws or the relative advantages/disadvantages of Intellectual Property.
• A large number of words in an article are unnecessarily hyperlinked, thus causing the hapless (yet curious) reader to place the mouse pointer over each and every one, in the hope that at least one of them might be in any way interesting.
• Someone says "Ummmm... you did read the article, didn't you?"
  • ...but they probably didn't read it themselves.
• An informative article is moderated as 'insightful', or vice versa.
• Someone claims that their post consists solely of the cold harsh facts of truth, while the opponent has to resort to name-calling, FUD or other such beastly tactics.
• The pre-emptive plea: "I'll probably get moderated down for saying this..." which of course gets moderated up.
  • ...they were posting anonymously to "protect their karma".
• The 'Slashdot mentality' is described and 'rebelled' against, to the author's karmic advantage.
  • ...they are effectively moderated up simply for voicing an opinion which is (or claims to be...) 'radically different'
  • ...plausible examples of the 'groupthink conformity' are mentioned (e.g. pro-Linux, pro-Open Source, anti-Microsoft, anti-spam, pro-Libertarian, anti-censorship, pro-Napster etc).
  • ...implausible examples are mentioned ("I'll probably get moderated down for voicing this opinion in what is clearly a predominantly anti-taildocking forum")
  • ...the author talks of 'Slashbots', 'Sheepdot' or other such anti-Slashdot rhetoric ("Open Source, Closed Minds... we are Slashdot")
  • ...a clearly inflammatory post is saved from a rightful (Score: -1, Flamebait) with the cautionary "this isn't a troll, I'm just pointing out the facts" or better still, the unconvincing "this isn't a troll - I don't even know what a troll is."
  • ...the score makes it clear that Slashdot moderators are becoming more sympathetic to pro-Microsoft posts than pro-Linux ones.
• A poster recognizes a troll and comprehends the futility in replying to such, but does so anyway with the resignation, "I know I'm not supposed to reply to trolls, but..."
• A poster is accused of being a troll despite being not even remotely inflammatory or controversial.
• After being berated for posting an insensitive, illogical or offensive post, the author caves in and posts, "*sheesh* it was only a joke! Evidentally you have no sense of humour!"
• Ignoring the numerous replies to a "It's funny. Laugh" article that clearly demonstrate that the posters have indeed found it to be amusing, someone suggests that everyone is taking it "waaaaay too seriously."
• Something is criticized as being "cool" or "trendy".
• A posting ends with the author saying, "eh, whatever", "go figure" or "*shrug*".
• Someone utilises any of the following terms or phrases: zealot, jihadist, sheeple, hysterical, misguided, whine, apologists, "funny, isn't it, how...".

Virginia isn't for lovers anymore?

Fact is, porn gets boring, unless you're a sex addict. After a while even scat lesbian midget bondage porn isn't worth more than a raised eyebrow. The kids aren't going to get injured by what's out on the net any more than I was by stealing my dad's Playboys and playing "Doctor" with the girl next door.

What these kids *are* going to be is more educated. With very little effort, they can get the cold hard facts about STD's, the dangers both physical and emotional of promiscuous sex activity, anthropological studies of human courtship behaviour, and the details of sexual technique.

There's an old joke, more true today than ever:

Father: "Son, we need to have a talk about sex."

Son: "Okay, dad. What do you want to know?"

Trying to censor your children's access (as oppsed to guiding and directing it) simply isn't going to work. The most you can accomplish is "As the twig is bent, so shall the tree grow." Problem is, that ain't going to be a very healthy tree. Hot-house plants don't do well in open gardens.

--Dave Rickey

This is off topic but US has legal prostitution in Nevada. Here's a FAQ about it.

By restricting traffic, for instance, to one side of the road or the other depending on the direction it is traveling you are actualy more free to arive at the destination you desire.

You trivialize freedom. We're not talking about societal conventions, and we're not even talking about public safety. Your traffic example doesn't even come close to the issues of free speech and censorship we were talking about.

But your traffic example makes me wonder... do you actually subscribe to the notion that sexual information is dangerous? Do you think that you are so weak and gullible that you need the law to protect you from your own sexuality?

Why do so many adults in this country distrust themselves? I can only surmise that they have been brainwashed, by a lifetime of propaganda, to believe that they cannot defend themselves, and that they need to be protected. And if this message that I'm writing serves no other purpose, I can at least hope that it will make someone ponder this.

It is an interesting irony that *restricting* some things actualy enhances freedom.

Life's full of ironies. Believe it or not, I'm not quite so mindless that I can't appreciate them.

The point of the GPL is to ensure that software remains free for all users, forever. Therefore the GPL prohibits you from taking away the freedom of others (by making a proprietary derivative work).

But this has very little to do with free speech. And nothing to do with sex.

Are you planning on just being able to give it to them on the spot?

I've thought about several lines of reasoning, but the short answer to your question is "yes".

It will depend on which child asks, how old he is at the time, and on exactly what he asks. I'm counting on "Where do babies come from?" (or a variant) being the first question, not "What is sex?".

The reason I took such offense at your answer was because you made sex sound like it's something wrong. It's not. It's the ultimate expression of caring and trust between people who love each other. And it's so much more than that, but I don't quite have the words for it yet.

But the propaganda which permeates American culture today would have you believe that sex is dirty, or shameful, or sinful (whatever that means). There are people out there who wish, consciously or otherwise, to suppress free exchange of information about sexuality, for reasons which I'm not quite able to fathom (though my brainwashing theory seems like a safe guess at the moment).

I was one of the people who contributed to alt.sex and alt.sex.wizards back in their glory days, before spam destroyed Usenet as we knew it. I learned so much there, and I wish that other people could have the same opportunity. (sexuality.org has some of the old alt.sex material on it, and a lot of wonderful references, for those of you in the Web generation who missed the boat the first time around.)

But if you and others like you persist in your blind faith that sex is something to be hidden away and suppressed, then I fear for the next generation.

Nitrozac: "If civilization manages to hold on to its tenuous existence, I'd like to find a cure for Agalmatophilia, and have others join me to rid the world of this illness that causes so much needless suffering. "


agalmatophilia: a fictional paraphilia, not yet observed as a syndrome, in which the sexuoerotic stimulus is a nude statue or model of a human being [from Greek, agalma, image + -philia]. Synonyms, statuophilia; Pygmalionism. See also pictophilia.

I'm am so glad Nitrozac is going to rid us of the "Naked/Petrified" people :) And she's French Canadian too ... yumm
---