Slashdot Mirror
China Censoring Flickr
An anonymous reader writes "It would appear that the Chinese government is currently censoring all photos on the site Flickr. A notice has been posted in a Flickr help forum about this, but the service currently doesn't have a fix for this. It would appear that China has turned on their Golden Shield Project to censor the site. 'Jain Hua Li, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said he hadn't heard of Flickr until told about it in a conversation with a Chronicle reporter, and then suggested that the blocking may be because Chinese authorities are trying to protect children from racy images. Lucie Morillon, the U.S. representative for Reporters Without Borders, a French group that promotes free expression, said that the Beijing government often censors Web sites under the guise of protecting children or national security. She called the blocking of Flickr "one more blow against the free flow of information online by Chinese authorities" and added that it is particularly lamentable in light of promises by China to loosen restrictions before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.' Thomas Hawk has a well-considered opinion to offer on this issue."
Stop giving dictatorial US law and policy makers new ideas!
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Censorship under the guise of protecting our children or national security. Thank god that stuff only happens in China and not here in the United States...
...nevermind
Oh... er...
Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
China censors the internet. It's what they do. How about an article of what China is *not* censoring?
Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all. -- Thomas J. Kopp
China: Turning off one website at a time until there is no more internet. Problem is, that could take a while...
Quick everyone make flickr clones! Oh wait...
Is there heaven? Is there Hell? Is that a Tuna Melt I smell?-Primus
A nice public execution by a firing squad should do you nice for sabotage.
It doesn't look like any official body in China has confirmed taking action here, and the article doesn't mention it either. Anyone find anything?
Well, its not quite a mop, and its not quite a puppet, but man.. So to answer your question I don't know.
learn oppressive regimes language..
then you can actually understand the enemy..
then get all of the oppresive governments IP address's to their sensitive networks..
scan for days and weeks, with compromised machines from other oppresive regimes..
get all the holes you can find on that regime, exploit them respectively..
study all covert operations that regime is part of that might harm our country, copy all data as evidence for yourself. then delete all of their data off their box.
sell this information to your own oppressive regime
profit for humanity!!!
Seems the Flick(e)r of free speech in China is slowly being extinguished by the authoritarian approach of the regime.
Video Game cheats, hints a
That area of the country, for the time period of the games, will be treated differently. It'll look great. You'll be able to sit in your hotel room and view all the stuff you want. (pro-Tibetian Falon Gong porn, whatever...)
The rest of the country? No.
A month later? No.
BTW, don't check your business email or log in to the corporate VPN from China. You know the story: "all your trade secrets are blong to us".
Such is the nature of censorship. It starts on a general level (like blocking results of certain search queries on google/yahoo) and then starts to leach outwards... to include entire sites that could have possible pictures or words that goes against state-distributed morals/ideas.
I love their 'think of the children' reasoning also. I think I've heard that one before, somewhere else...
"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies." -Thomas Jefferson
You guys want us to buy all the stuff you make, and you don't want to allow your people access to the ideas we make.
How much longer are you going to let this authoritarian bullshit go on? Do you realize how powerful China could become if it embraced concepts like "the free exchange of ideas"? You guys could be mining helium on the Moon, then building interplanetary transportation and communication networks with the Europeans and the Africans (if they can also get their act together in the next few decades), while we Americans are visiting the Creation Museum in Kentucky and arguing about whether or not to allow gays to get married to each other.
Let go of your artificial attempts to control your society. They'll do fine. Let things evolve.
China (or India) could leave America in the dust in the first half of this century, if they want to.
BREAKING NEWS -- Socialite and celebrity Anonymous Coward has been found dead in his mother's basement, apparently of terminal stupidity, the AP has learned. Details to follow.
http://goatse.cz/
God have mercy if slashdot posts a story about Paris Hilton. Real or made up.
Umm nothing is broken, its Chinas right to block whatever they feel is right.
Techincally if fickr circumvents this, they are violating China's wishes, and could be sued charged with treason and extradited.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Is there a group somewhere consisting of people who know computers using their skills to attack computer systems run by oppressive regimes and shut down their ability to do this sort of thing?
China has a group of hackers that do nothing but make viruses, spyware, to try and infiltrate and sabotauge foreign computers.
God spoke to me.
... Don't watch the Olympics. Let the media carrying the Olympics know that you're boycotting them, and will try to get others to join the cause vs. Chinese censorship. Try to avoid purchasing goods made in China, or from companies with close relationships with China. Otherwise, they'll continue to do what they want with all the money the West sends them...
But don't forget. Amerika is evil, not China.
... is just peachy. As is "we have the right to nuke you all to hell" Iran. "We use chemical rockets, but we don't have WMD's" Saddam, and a few others.
China
Don't forget, it's Bush who is evil. Not China, not Kim Jong Il, not Ahmadinejad and his islamic cleric band, and not "I like to gas non-arabs" Saddam. Those are excellent, moral human beings. And let's not forget Assad, Saudi Arabia, the palestinians, the pakistani's, and quite a few other, very moral, human beings.
Obviously someone who provides religious justification for mass slaughter is a moral cleric, who just "has different values" from us (islamic values, something like 9/11 ?), and we should respect that.
Since Yahoo learned what "Roll over" means in all the Chinese dialects, and how to say "Yes, sir" as well.
I've yet to know if they know what human rights means.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
than the wishes of a bunch of technocrats in beijing
namely, it is the wishes of the average chinese person
your words are basically "shut up and respect the guy in charge"
no, fuck you. the guy in charge needs to respect the guy on the street. in china, he does not do this. that's wrong
that's not wrong according to western values, that's wrong period, according to all human values
it's called democracy, and it is the right and provenance of every single soul on this planet
do you understand? or are you still some sort of sycophant of the big man with the gun?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Let's compile one of things China won't censor and save time
No sig for you!!
A couple of days ago was the anniversary of the Tianenmen Square Massacre. Several major sites were carrying a story about a Flickr album depicting the event. No doubt the Chinese Communist Party censors picked up on it and decided to block.
I guess the Chinese Communists are simply instituting Flickr's own policies.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
In light of the upcoming Olympics, I see news like this as neither good nor bad. Unless China has something quite sneaky up it's sleave, like some super-duper set of human rights and freedoms they will grant to their citizens for the duration of The Games, I imagine many of these issues will come to light with so many different sets of eyes and ears visiting.
The viewpoints and opinions that the spectators and athletes take back to their respective countries seem like they could do more to change Chinese policy than any news article or government sanction/tariff/international law.
-
China has a group of hackers that do nothing but make viruses, spyware, to try and infiltrate and sabotauge foreign computers.
In the real world, or just in Command and Conquer Generals?
I thought that most spyware originated in the US where you could sell marketing data you gathered for the greatest returns.
I dont read
No matter how many sites China will block, people are gonna find one way or another exercise freedom of expression online, so they might as well censor the whole of the internet. Fucking lunatics.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2300254722 104314948&hl=en-GB#0h40m29s
Is a shame Occident is supporting and sponsoring an oppressive regime, we are the ones that are doing business with them betraying ourselves, freedom, democracy and our occidental roots and values. We are the ones blame, not China; they just found is easy to play with us using their own rules because now days Occident only cares about saving some bucks.
I wonder what happened to Occident, great promises of freedom and equality are fading away in our old and corrupt society.
Sigs are for morons... Wait a minute...
No, you sue / charge the owners/operators. Much as you would do with a corporation that has overstepped its boundaries.
Now, i agree its hard to get somone transferred out of the country to face charges, but it DOES happen on occasion, and it doesnt mean they cant at least try, even if the request is denied.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Nothing has inherent value. Value must have context - valuable to whom? Many people feel that human life is precious, and for them human life has value. Many people don't, and for them human life does not. Some may feel that one group of people is more valuable than another - and for them that assertion is correct.
The universe doesn't care who lives and who dies. It doesn't care if people are miserable or happy. It doesn't carry any preference for one action an individual may take over another. Morals entirely come down to what individuals feel is right and wrong. There is no logical basis for moral absolutism.
How much longer will we ( the world ) continue to ignore their own moral issues with China in return for cheap goods? A long long long time.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
hey, it's a joke. laugh.
Actually, both the US and China are producing "hacker militias". Code Red, for example, was sanctioned by the Chinese government.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
umm... America isn't actually a democracy. Its a republic. I don't think there's a truly democratic nation in the first world. So, there's one alternative: elect officials to represent the people. Those officials have access to a wide variety of information and use that information to make decisions which they believe benefit the majority of the people. If they happen to think that censoring a mass media outlet is the best thing, then they are within their power. If the people disagree, then they can choose new leaders the next time around.
To recap, I don't think you are stupid, just oversimplifying. To try and frame complex cultural matrices in "either your with us or against us" kinds of terms doesn't pay sufficient attention to the underlying complexity. Continuity can be great. Its also a hobgoblin for...
Every person has equal value. And while you and I might agree that a basic human right should be freedom of expression and access to information, not everyone does. It is their right, unfortunately, to decide that some information and expression is detrimental to society, that it is devoid of value. Its our right to bitch and moan about it, hopefully some of those elected officials will take notice and pressure other elected officials to confront China's officials. Maybe.
Which one of you upload the picture of the tank man onto Flickr? Boy, that must have been an embarrassing moment for the party and they don't like to be reminded of it. That and pictures of shooting hundreds and thousands of college students demanding what is promised to them in their constitution.
EvilCON - Made Famous by
Seriously, why doesn't China just ditch the internet and create a nation-wide intranet like Cuba? Then they can be as abusive and controlling as they want without being bothered by nosy Americans.
Sor senses you!
You are reading a sig. Cancel or allow?
Do you actually have any information on where I can read more about this? I just tried a search and all I found was an article saying it originated in the Phillipines.
I dont read
God! FINALLY something other than more of that Paris Hilton bullshit in the news!
Seems if you want something not to be pirated in China, how about adding extras like the Dalai Lama, Falon Gong or Tiananmen Square? Software makers, be sure to feature a Falon Gong extra in the tutorials. Movie makers: How about a cameo by the Dalai Lama in the next Pirates of the Caribbean movie? Google Maps: when you zoom in on Tiananmen, show perspective mapped photos of what really happened.
5 .htm http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/world/asia/21cnd -china.html?ex=1337400000&en=578ee101ec63e955&ei=5 090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Seriously: I have a friend who just got back from a visit in China. He said the Communist Party is very scared about losing its grip on society. They've very, very worried about losing control. Something you haven't heard in the mainstream media: Chinese, particularly the poorer ones, are really sick of the rich getting richer. When the Chinese Government wants to build a road, they pick a poor area, flatten it and kick the poor locals out. Increasingly, people are getting sick of it and the government is worried: This is why they're banning things left, right and center: http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/2275.asp http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/PEK16528
I read it in a Scientific American article. I can't find the militia stuff in the article(it might have been in one of the boxes to the side, which are apparently not published online) but I think this is the article.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
I can tell you, as a user of Flickr despite the yahoo account requirement, that I am threat to communism and the People's movement!
/go ahead, check for my username and you will see what I mean ;)
LOL
From your mouth to God's ear.
I'm all for the Chinese government doing more and more repressive crap because it will encourage the Chinese people to work around it, and when they do, the entire world will benefit from Chinese innovation (an oxymoron, I know). Better web proxies and anonymizers will benefit Americans as more and more lawsuits get thrown around by the MAFIAA and other corrupt factions of Corporate America.
We may not know what the CIA is up to, but the press outlets are always happy to dig up dirt on foreign nations. There is much we can learn from them.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Thanks for the article, it made interesting reading.
But it does only speculate as to Chinese involvement in the Code Red worm. I got the impression from hacking incidents over the spyplane that the people participating on both sides were just silly little script kiddies (on both sides). I would hope that any US or Chinese government hacker could find better things to do than deface some random websites.
It is also interesting that at the bottom of the article they have a note saying that the first version of the story pointed a finger at a respected security company for helping in the worms creation. The fact that they suggested this than had to correct the article goes some way to robbing it of any credibilty it might have once had in suggesting a Chinese link.
I dont read
When you Google 'Whitehouse' you don't get pages about how the British burned it down in the War of 1812, so it must be a cover up since the British supported the war on terror.
For most Chinese internet users, the tourism aspects of the square and the nearby Forbidden City are probably more significant than a 1989 protest, which is the only reason westerners have ever heard of it.
... These things or that the Olympic Comittee allowed China to host the Olympic games, with all the shittiness in the background. Not just censorship alone, but with their civil rights in general. Money talks as usual... :-(
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
If other internet references to Tiananmen Square were more applicable to Chinese users, we would at least a different ordering of images in the search results. 18 pages turning into 3 pages by a change of locality is a bit too drastic of a difference to pass off, considering it is all coming from the same internet...right...? oh...
Yes we from CAFAD (Corporations Against Freedom And Democracy) welcome our new member flikr.
Here in the USA the government uses terrorism to justify reducing freedom, in China it's to protect the children. I hope I live to see the day when corrupt politicians are thrown in jail.
But as long as money strokes the cock, that will never happen.
Why do people think that people in China actually give a shit that the internet is being censored? Has anyone asked them, eh?
It seems the only people really caring about these issues are the people who would like their governments to impose their version of democracy on others.
Last time i checked not only is it not working but their own governments aren't doing too hot either.
stopped reading right there
by saying that, you've just declared intellectual and moral bankruptcy
congratulations, you're a moron
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
#1: who cares about america? what i am saying has nothing american or western about it. why do you need that crutch in your thinking? i can frame my argument neithe rin favor of nor agains tthe existence of the usa or the west. what i am saying strictly depends upon UNIVERSAL human rights. understand?
#2: "It is their right, unfortunately, to decide that some information and expression is detrimental to society, that it is devoid of value."
you were very careful not to call me stupid. i see no need for such care. you're a moron. they're not deciding anything retard, some technocrat in beijing is deciding FOR THEM. their rights ARE DENIED THEM. do you understand the obvious?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
the chinese ARE NOT MAKING THE DECISION
SOME ASSHOLE IN BEIJING IS DECIDING FOR THEM
do you fucking understand the fucking obvious?
the chinese have every right to live how they want, just as you say
AND THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW
(slaps forehead)
what a fucking idiot
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Being an expatriate currently living in China, I must say that this really not that unexpected. Everything gets censored here, even the TV. I often watch the BBC news channel, and as soon critical talk about China arises the signal is "lost" and there is a whole lot of snow of the screen.
I must agree with most people's comments about how this limits the free flow of information in China. For instance bbc.co.uk is blocked, images.google gets blocked randomly and Wikipedia is permanently blocked. And this extends to far beyond just the internet, the only hard copy source of "critical" news (in English) I can get my hands on is the daily China Daily, who, yesterday published a front page article about how government officials are delighted about how their country grant everyone religious freedom and also how they do not have any knowledge of anyone ever being persecuted because of their religious beliefs.
Luckily there are ways other ways to access services that are mostly blocked, but most Chinese people have no idea how to access it and even more frightening, they do not know that news critical of a country EXIST.
Now it's time for RkcilF. After all, the Chinese didn't block Elgoog for quite some time.
A warrior venturing into battle with a golden shield would bear a heavy burden in more ways than one. Lends new meaning to the exhortation, "Come home with your shield or on it.
Whoa! The Chinese government is censoring something on the internet!? What a surprise! Of all of the governments out there, I can't believe that it's them that are censoring things, especially given the fact that China has one of the most open and friendly governments in the world. This is so shocking, everyone!
pictures ARE worth a thousand words. and we all know how little china likes THOSE.
We know the block on flickr is not due to the official reason. Most assume its for general censorship issues. It is possible that a t@nkman photo was widely viewed on flickr this last week or two. That could have certainly triggered a block. I've lived in Shanghai for 7 years and am amazed that most have never seen that photo or any other one from the TSM. No, Please don't start a rant on "TSM censorship" or China may block slashdot ;-(.
flickr may also be blocked due to protecting a Chinese competitor to flickr. This happens _lots_ (I'm posting as AC for a good reason!!). The Chinese gov has many times hurt a foreign internet competitor to help a local direct rip off. You can bet that all the strong China internet companies have many gov officials taken care of to ensure unfair advantage.
The bottom line on China is this behavior is how things are going to be for a long time.
Oh, and also to mention that my IQ is actually off the scale in most non-Mensa tests. put a little thought into your words, and you'll wind up agreeing with me Hmmm...
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
The truth is that Tibet has been stable for decades now. The reason is that the people we don't hear from -- the other 90% of Tibet's population -- definitely do not want their former masters back. Tibet used to be a slave society, where 10% of the population -- consisting of the Dalai Lama and the rest of the old power structure -- literally owned the other 90%. The old slavemasters fled to India in 1959, at the height of China's anti-landlord pogrom. Life without the masters is vastly better for the ordinary Tibetan, which is why the area is so quiet.
That's essentially what Flickr users in China can see now. It's well represented by this photo, http://flickr.com/photos/jakerome/537775502/ . Go ahead & add your comments, notes & tags and bring this issue even more attention.
morals change
HOLY SHIT NO WAY
what, is this supposed to be amazing to me? is this supposed to change my view?
lots of MINOR issues remain different, but across ALL cultures, ALL times, past present, AND future, certain bedrock principles remain the FUCKING SAME
because you can say the japanese are not so pro-women's rights as the americans are, that means that say murder is also morally relative?
what a fucktard!
you must be some sort of racist
ALL humanity, ALL times, ALL cultures, ALL countries DESERVE basic human dignity
disagree with me?
YOU go to the slums of nairobi and tell the people there it is there lot in life to suffer in poverty, and that's perfectly ok
what a fucking stupid evil prick
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
all people SHOULD BE equal? or that the people who live in toronto are somehow superior to those who live in nairobi, and tha'ts just the way it is, why fight any difference
is there another way to look at this issue?
please, i'm all ears, enlighten me
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
but, like most asperger's syndrome morons, your social sense is utterly zero
you want us to not champion democracy, because there is the possibility that SOMEDAY something better may come along
wtf!?
ok, i'll go tell my dad to stop taking lipitor, because they may cure heart disease with nanotechnology in a future centuries
SAME THING MORON
wow! i feel the bathing glow of your estreme superior genius!
(snicker)
you're fucking retarded
there are math profressors who can't balance their checkbook, i don't consider them smart, more like idiot savants
so you go have fun with your 3 variable calculus
leave the commentary on politics to human beings who actually know the fucking BASICS of human nature, ok einstein?
what a cretin
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Why would a pornographer want to advertise to members of a marketplace who are unlikely to have access to credit cards and the ability to pay said bills discreetly?
It doesn't need to be illegal. There's no reason for them to spend money to do it in the first place.
I mean, I've never had problems with pornographic ads on non-adult sites back when I was a wee teenager even during the wild-west days of the internet.
It's just puritanical bullshit, same as always.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I live in Shanghai and after a while you just get use to it and move on - ok so i cant use wikipedia and now my all my photos i had on fickr are broken images. But hey 99% of the time things work and they work fine. Ok so sometimes websites mysteriously start timing out after some use but so what i can get onto slashdot and thats all that matters!
you're good with numbers, but not human beings
:-)
;-)
say this quote:
Totally. Even today. When 3000 americans die, it's the worst terror attack in history. When 300,000 iraqis die, it's collateral damage. What do you call that if not relative?
person a:
i don't get much sleep, and i fall asleep at the wheel of a truck. it smashes into a busload of children, killing 10
person b:
i carefully plot the bus route of a schoolbus, taking note of the best time and place to ram it to kill children, i do so, killing 2
according to you, person a is worse than person b (numerical comparison alone). which is of course, nonsense
to believe this is somehow a valid comparison, numerical alone, reveals you to be profoundly socially retarded in your ability to evaluate what happens in the world. the magical concept your mind is missing of course, is intent. in all legal systems aorund the world, they have different categories of criminal law for manslaughter and murder. because all human cultures understand the value of intent when making judgments on people. you don't
but that's only because you have a psychological problem: asperger's. you're probably brilliant in certain mental exercises, like 3 variable calculus, tha tmost people would fail at. but in social efforts, you're retarded
I have a solid dislike for white anglo-saxon protestants with a subscription to righteousness, yes.
well good for you. we're talking about universal human principles, correct? so according to you, if a WASP were to righteously proclaim that rwandans deserved UN proteciton in 1994 from genocide, you would dislike him. does that follow?
is it your position then that human principles need to be relaxed when you leave the west? therefore, according to your rationale, that WASP has more rights to life and liberty than say a ugandan. because god forbid anyone in the west righteously pass judgment on a horrible situation there, correct?
that's a funny way to show your dislike for WASPs. by supporting a POV that says they have more right to life and liberty than a nonWASP. one would think if you dislike WASPs so much, you would support rights for people other than them, no
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Many expatriates here in China think it has something to do with this:
Xiamen demonstration today - live reporting on blogs and video sites
EVENING UPDATE 18:30:
The link to the Flickr.com photos of the demonstration that Feng 37 posted below in the comments has been
blocked by the Net Nanny. The rest of Flickr.com seems to be unaffected.
A Guess: The shit hit the fan last week when one of their servers went offline and they started to forward to farm1 which seems to be blocked here.
slavery still exists. it always will, under the radar, in some form or another. does this mean you stop fighting slavery? furthermore, at some point in the past, slavery was more prevalent than it was today. so is this proof of progress in the world?
you seem to championing stasis: no change. of course change is difficult, of course it is messy, people's feelings get hurt. therefore, no one should attempt to improve the world?
and how do i define equal? very simply: equal in rights and priveledges. equal in accountability and responsibility. what's so complicated about that? what's so wrong with that? what's so western about that? seems a universla human concept. you can go into antiquity and find wirters championing that. you can find people in every culture championing that. all times, all cultures, forever. nothing western about the concept at all
it seems to me, to run contrary to my position, you only wind up championing true evil in the world: oppression, exploitation, bigotry. why would you choose to champion that? you might say you are not doing that, but you are:
People would be upset and consider you endangering their very morals if you had claimed that slaves, jews, christians, greeks, women or whatever they oppress in their society are equals.
yes, those people would be upset. bigots, racists, the ignorant: they get upset when you suggest to them that all human beings are equal. and? so what? because a moron or an evil asshole is upset we should let those slaves, greeks, women, etc. continue to live as unequals? huh?
so what is your problem exactly? are you yourself ignorant or a bigot?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
i fear for those people. for if they are in YOUR care, they will suffer. because you yourself ascribe to notions that that are rather nihilistic
here it is, the rock of gibraltar that your words cannot move, and defeats your position:
either you have a positive affirmative belief in humanity, or you don't. if you don't, then you forfeit your right to comment on the efforts on those who are working to improve humanity's lot. for if you don't believe in human potential or human progress, then why are you talking, it's pointless, correct?
now i may be unfair, in calling you a nihilist. you may in fact think positively about progress and humanity, but have a problem with an IMPLEMENTATION. however, your words above reveals you are rather obsessed with the definition of democracy
but your words baout democracy and its definition are baffling to me. who fucking cares? you say you don't have asperger's but this futile and assbakcwards insistence on nailing down the the minutiae of word definitions before you can begin talking about the concepts just reveals you to have some sort of social defect. however many people ar ein your care, your whole attitude reveals a serious social problem on your part
democracy is merely the spirit of humanity having a say in its government. it's a rather simple straightforward concept. it disavows the rights of a special ruling class having the right to decide for the "masses". these statements are well within the entire swath of various interpreations of repulbic or democracy, or whatever. and it is the only basis i need to say the word si say. but you sit there with this bizarre fear about cultural imperialism or something. pathetic
you come at me saying its a word game by me to define a culturally specific interpretation and force it on other people. as if i were insisting everyone in the world drink coke, or drink pepsi
hardly. to interpret my words that way only reveals that you yourself have a profound defect in your ability to process the world about you. namely, that the democratic instinct is solely a western notion. and that thought brings you to believe that nondemocratic institutions: communism, authroitarianism, theocracy, dictatorships, etc., are somehow valid, because they exist in nonwestern cultures
as if people in nonwestern cultures don't themselves yearn for a say in their own lives, in their own governments! how fucking hypocritical and arrogant!
you do percieve how this thought on YOUR part is more condescending and arrogant and patronizing than the most warlike neocon talking about iraq, right?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
since it so arrogant to refuse rights to nonwesterners, you arrogant racist prick. hundreds of thousands should die, without a finger lifted, simply because as soon as you cross the rio grande, POOF, people are worth half what they are worth above it. that's your entire pov, which you mildly dismiss as "yeah, i'm arrogant"
;-P
;-) so i'm actually talking to an elected official, DOWNGRADING DEMOCRACY
;-P
;-)
;-)
;-)
HA!
you sit there and smarmily talk about people being killed in iraq (99% at the hands of iraqis, heh), at the same time that you are arrogantly and boldly talk about how much you don't care about them, and wouldn't and shouldn't help them
how does that work in your mind?
you're a racist, morally bankrupt prick. and you're an elected official? ha! it gets even better!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
oh man, you're so fucking empty and bankrupt
additionally, you have this oh so fashionable antiwestern attitude. congratulations. you're what's wrong with the west! hate neocons who invaded iraq? for the typical cynical reasons? look inside your empty callous head, and find the same callous cynical motivations! man it's hilarious
congratulations prick, you're a grade AA western asshole. you're everything that is wrong with the west. you're a typical aristocrat: arrogant, smug, superior. part of the ruling class. and yet you somehow pretend to dig against it in the most lowest common denominator "teh west r teh killers d00d"
dude, you're hilarious, now you make me laugh
sometime before the french revolution, an aristocrat's carriage ran over a poor kid and killed him. the aristocrat tossed a coin out the window, and was on his way
what happened next?
you'll find out
xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Define 'right' and 'wrong', and provide logical reasoning for why these concepts are universal and apply to everybody.
;-)
yeah, like that's the issue. either you are as completely nihilistic as you present yourself, in which case you're a grade A moron, or you think your wounded wing routine is more convincing then it really is: making issue of the large and obvious thinking you've provided a nice cover to excuse yourself form the pit your own retarded words have dug you into
ok, you win: there's no such thing as right and wrong. and there's no such thing as progress
wtf!?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
oh man, what a loser
keep it up though, you're quite the comic relief
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
universal human rights always existed, exists everywhere now, and always will exist
they were not recently invented, they have been the desires of every human who has ever lived and will live
the problem of course, is execution: it's hard to implement. but because something is hard to implement, you seem to take this as an excuse to disavow universal human rights
wtf?
how does that work in your mind exactly?
i think your problem, again, is asperger's in quality: the messiness of life, the fact that nothing can be complete, that human nature is good, bad, and ugly, it offends you
and so, in your mind, because something cannot be achieved 100%, it shouldn't be attempted at all
this is life in the ivory tower: in your hermetically sealed, climate controlled above it all pov, you look down at mankind struggling in the mud, and you sneer
you rail against me passing judgments, and yet you have passed the most arrogant and evil judgment of all: it is not worth striving for anything better, because its so difficult
so what, you'd rather accept slavery?
here, let's take an allegory as a point for contrasting our two attitudes: pedophilia
pedophilia will never be exterminated. it will always recur in society again and again in low grade percentages because there are always biological and psychological and developmental random events which renders some poor souls pedophiles
now, what to do about them?
you seem to be: accept them. because they will never go away, there is no reason to fight them. and plus, we can't agree on exaclty what pedophilia is (you keep babbling on about getting an exact definition of a term before you can act, wtf is that idealistic aspergers' bs about? no fucking term is exactly defined or agreed upon by everyone!)
my pov is: war must be waged agains tpedophilia. forever. and i think it is a war that will never be won. it's simply the maintenance of civilization. the wages of living in society
we cna extend this allegory on all of our other differences. i take the garbage day pov on the problems we seem to have a disagreemnt about. every thursday you have to take out the garbage. the point is not to sovle the problem of garbage once and for all. that garbage can be defeated. no, it's simply something you must do every thursday. the problem never goes away. additionally, you never STOP taking out the garbage
you have this weird break in your mind though where somehow, because a task is difficult, or cloudy and not precisely defined, or not guaranteed, or not easy, that it shouldn't be attempted
so fucking simpleminded. enjoy your ivory tower coccoon, dear spoiled pampered ristocrat. sorry the world is so ugly. we'll try to hide the details of struggle and progress from you next time, seeing as it offends your delicate sensibilities. we're so sorry for that
(snicker)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
fundamentalism is my enemy
at the same time, i hew to moral equivalency: that humanity has more in common in values than differences. that these similarities should be built upon to prevent certain assholes form getting away with murder, quite literally. you however, seem prepared to use moral relativism to excuse the most heinous evil. there is no such thing as moral absolutism. simply because nothing is absolute
basically i am simply a humanist. that simple repsonsibility and rights is what every owes everyone else, and what everyone is due everyone else
you meanwhile seem ready to forgive evil if it doesn't happen in your time zone and latitude. so you're bankrupt morally and intellectually. you've relinquished your right to talk about the subject matter your words are currently involved in, simply because you have disavowed your responsibility as a human being to care what happens to other human beings simply because they are far away
and you keep talking about suffering in iraq when it is very clear from your OWN WORDS you wouldn't lift one finger no matter how much they were to suffer. so does that work in your mind?
1. the west is evil in what it is doing in iraq
2. i would never do anything else for anyone in iraq, not my place
you realize these are contradictory positions for you to take, right?
you either CARE about people in iraq, in which case you will wind up getting involved under certain conditions. or you DON'T care about people in iraq, in which case you couldn't care less what happens to them, so why do you have a problem if they are all carpet bombed?
pick a pov, and stick with it. but your current one foot in one pov and one foot in another is morally and intellectually empty and bankrupt
do you have a human conscience or not? you seem to have a western conscience: you only care about the west. in which case, your commentary on anything in iraq is utterly pointless. to say ANYTHING about what happens in iraq defeats your own pov
and ps: intent is everything. your discount of intent is to discount human faith and belief. not religious faith, but faith or belief in anything, of any value. this is nihilism. this is empty and pointless. if intent doesn't have any meaning in your judgments of what happens in the word, you're simply utterly devoid of any humanity
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
here, a show you smug piece of shit
enjoy, some more to entertain you. a song and dance. get some popcorn
i'm glad you think the struggle to progress in this world amounts for you as little more than entertainment. why not just point a magnifying glass at an anthill and watch them try to cope? i guess that's how you think of darfur. is it amusing to watch those with a human conscience struggle with suffering in this world? and if someone asks you to care, you can always stammer and haw about defining the meaning of complex terms. because of course everyone has to agree on every little metaphysicial semantic before anything can actually be attempted in this world, right? such a nice rationalization for you to explain away in your mind the need to have a conscience. "oh no, i can't actually life a finger because someone far away is suffering. because we have to look deep into history and realize it's all a fog"
pffffffft
a conscience, such a pesky thing for you huh?
i am a humanist. this is what a aspire to. i make a difference. i have faith and belief in humanity. i am positive
you? typical and empty. a man with a little bit of dust in his head, and nothing more. a spoiled pampered aristocrat, who spends his time rationalizing why his shit actually smells like roses
you lose. but don't worry about it child. in your ivory tower, you're impervious to all criticism, care and concern. enjoy your tv reruns, useless western spoiled child. leave the job of caring about the world to the adults
but next time, try not to fool yourself into thinking your ratinalization for not caring actually is impressive to anyone else
thanks for the bit of anger and humor though. it's nice to recharge your batteries when faced with the enraging indifference of the pampered western child
fucking cretin
xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
it all makes sense in the ivory tower
;-P
you know, explaining your humanity away with philosophical manipulations and gyrations
so much easier, and cleaner to explain away your humanity, then to accept that its messy
people like you prefer placid lies to messy truths. you favor cleanliness over truth. the truth is messy. and you can't deal with it
now go adjust your climate control to 69.9 degrees and turn on fox news/ cnn and cast your aspersions and tut tuts. so happy you're not involved, right?
if only everyone would stop caring like you, the world would be a better place
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
man you're a fucked up creep
for me, it's nice to meet people on the internet, see how they think, and be revolted by it. it recharges the batteries to redouble my efforts. so you do have some use, in the end, you turdcicle: a cautionary tale of rich aristocratic indifference, resintg comfortably on a bed of philosophical legalisms to explain any need to have some simple common human decency
fucking lowlife prick
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
If it is a fact, please point me to the evidence of universal human rights, say, 200 million years ago, when there were no humans.
Ok, that's an invalid argument you say, so let's kill your second all-quantor. Please point me to the universal human rights in the Andromeda galaxy. Hey, you said "everywhere", not me.
No, I'm not just playing stupid here. There's a point. The point is that your definition lacks. If you agree that "universal human rights" can't have existed before humans did, then how and when (and why!) did they come into existence? Can they change over time? If not, why not? According to what we know of the world, pretty much nothing is that eternally static. the problem of course, is execution: it's hard to implement. but because something is hard to implement, you seem to take this as an excuse to disavow universal human rights Nope. The main problem isn't even execution. The main problem is definition. Sorry, but I work with lawyers a lot. You mentioned the French Revolution in another reply. A quote from during the French Revolution goes like this: "Give me 10 lines, written by the purest of man, and I will find something in there the hang him."
The "universal human rights" are just words. And words are subject to interpretation. And once you move away from the very generic, very abstract to the level of actual life, you find out that it isn't half as easy just to define precisely what you mean. Heck, there's a whole area of science dealing with nothing but that. pedophilia will never be exterminated. it will always recur in society again and again in low grade percentages because there are always biological and psychological and developmental random events which renders some poor souls pedophiles
now, what to do about them? First, as you expected, I'd request a definition of "pedophilia". Because, you know, our current definition is flawed. In my country, a 16 year old boy sleeping with his girlfriend today can go to jail. Next week, everything will be fine. Why? Because she's got her 16th birthday this weekend.
So, first we need a better definition of the crime. Yes, you can handwave that and talk about extreme cases, so let's do that. A 50 year old sleeping with a 10 year old.
Did I mention that this was fairly common in ancient greece? Plato, Aristotle, all the heroes of western thinking were child-fuckers. And homosexuals.
So, if we are on the level of an individual case, why not treat it that way? Check what the guy says, check what the boy says. Find out what really went on. And then I would strongly suggest not making pedophelia the crime. If the boy was hurt, physically or psychologically, then that is the crime. Pedophelia is just a label. my pov is: war must be waged agains tpedophilia. forever. and i think it is a war that will never be won. it's simply the maintenance of civilization. the wages of living in society And I don't like war. We already have far too many. The war against drugs, the war against piracy, the war against childfuckers, and so on. At the current rate, in 2-300 years, our entire civilisation will consist of wars against everything.
I'd rather fight for things than against them. Can you re-formulate your POV in a way that states what you're actually for, not just what you're against? you have this weird break in your mind though where somehow, because a task is difficult, or cloudy and not precisely defined, or not guaranteed, or not easy, that it shouldn't be attempted Not that again, please, it's getting boring. You know nothing about me. You don't even know that my job quite often consists in making a reality what others consider impossible. In fact, I rarely give up. I like difficult.
Which is why my view of the world is multi-dimensional. It's more difficult that way.
But it's also closer to reality, which also consists of at least four dimensions.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
you keep saying you work in position of power, which could be just a troll, but if not... ugggh
your point of view is more and more clearly asperger's: you can't see the human being in the equation, and you have power over human beings. frightening, because you obviously so willfully dismiss them
i feel like i'm talking to a kindergartner, but here goes. some intellectual charity for someone who considers themselves learned philosophically, but displays a baffling ignorance of the really very simple:
human beings are unlike any animal that came before. instead of adapting to their environment, they adapt their environment to them. this makes them something you can't define statically, even though that is all you seem to want to do. you keep reaching for something pat simple and static about how to define things, when you are dealing with humanity, which, by its very definition, defies that. human nature is emergent phenomenon. it believes in something and MAKES that reality. yet you want to say, what is reality, and how are human beings forever bound by that? when all humanity is is about redefining what is real
when you realize this, you see the struggle of ideas. when you accept that this struggle of beliefs is what is happening, you enter the struggle with your beliefs. and redefine reality. then you are truly alive
but sitting on the sidelines, and saying the struggle is for naught, what is that supposed to be? why not just slit your wrists now? you've basically come to the conclusion there's nothing worth fighting for, from any point of view
dude. you're not talking about snails: simple organisms bound by the waves and sand and sun. you're talking about human beings, who in a few scant centuries, a hiccup in time in this planet's existence, went from sharpening bones to walking on the moon. a creature that can do that, what will it do in centuries coming?
well, what does that creature BELIEVE? because what it beleives it will MAKE real. you insist on saying "what is real?" and thinking humanity is bound to that. and things are static. fucking ignorant!
you apparently have no fucking clue with what you are delaing with when you deal with humanity, yet you choose to talk about it. you have no appreciation for the power fo faith and belief and passion. this isn't a religious observation, it's a simple observation of humanity itself and it's potential. shape the potential positivistically. or what? walk away from it and announce it a joke? you don't know that, just as much as i don't know it is a success. neither of us know, becuase no one knows. you simply contribute, and hope for the best. nothing certain. i think you want certainty where there is none
you need some education on the very simple basics of your subject matter dude
it's not a pat calclus equation. it's emergent phenomenon: unpredictable, irreducable. and your intent is to make it predictable and static
you're ignorant
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
science and logic. ha!
you want to reduce humanity to a math problem
"Compassion is an emotion evolved through natural selection to facilitate the survival of the species. The same goes for all of our primitive moral instincts. They are nothing more than techniques that improve our fitness for natural selection."
yes, agreed 100%. and? is it ever another way?
"You can kick and scream all you like (and that's all you have done here) but in the end your position isn't logical."
no, it's not logical. nor will it ever be. not my position, that is, but this entire subject matter. duh! (slaps forehead) more asperger's syndrome: you don't understand humanity. it's not a math problem Rainman
"Logically when it comes to the actions of an individual there is nothing more than the power to make something happen and the will to make it happen. I guarantee that any definition you try to provide for 'right' and 'wrong' - morality - will be unsupported by science and logic."
yes! 100% i agree! but, you see these realizations as a problem that needs to be overcome. DUDE. THEY WILL NEVER BE OVERCOME. THAT'S HUMANITY
"I guarantee that any definition you try to provide for 'right' and 'wrong' - morality - will be unsupported by science and logic."
YES 100% CORRECT. AND? WHAT IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN? IT NEVER WILL BE SUPPORTED BY SCIENCE AND LOGIC
DUH!
welcome to what most kids realize in kindergarten when interacting with other kids. maybe you can graduate to the first grade now, my dear intellectual charity case
now: your job is to get used to that rock of gibraltar, and WORK within those constraints. not think that those constraints could ever be overcome
i think we're making progress with you
ever see the movie Rainman with tom cruise and dustin hoffman? i feel like tom cruise to your dustin hoffman. Rainman could read into a 7 deck shoe and calculate the number of toothpicks on a floor just by looking at it
he also thought a candy bar and a car were about $100. he was very good with numbers, not very good with the human element
as are you. you can read all sorts of fancy philosophers and build castles in the sky about how humanity should be if humanity just started behaving in ways it has never behaved in all of history and all cultures nor will ever behave. ever
currently your pov is that you're not going to contribute anything to the struggle for progress until humanity suddenly starts acting accoridng to your impossible standards
autistic. retarded. poor social skills. you are in an elected office? ha!
dude, i have a better idea:
"Logically when it comes to the actions of an individual there is nothing more than the power to make something happen and the will to make it happen. I guarantee that any definition you try to provide for 'right' and 'wrong' - morality - will be unsupported by science and logic."
i suggest you start with this realization of yours above as the constraint in how you think of humanity from this point forward. previously, you have used this realization as an excuse to stop working with humanity, period. you wanted humanity to suddenly start behaving in a fashion it can't behave. nice excuse to defer your human conscience. don't work no more. no more deferring
i'm sorry Rainman. humanity isn't changing in the working parameters of how it behaves. so you better, in order to help contribute to progress in this world, get used to the illogical irrational human being. it's beliefs and its passions. work with it
but not working with it all because you want everyone to be a machine is just retarded
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
if you fail to understand the basics of the subject matter
you wish for me to apply to you the logic of physics in the question of human social dynamics
what you fail to understand is that these are separate realms of intellectual inquiry
what you need to do is understand you are using the wrong language for the current subject matter. if you understand the constraints and basic concepts of the subject matter before us, you would find my words more compelling
but as it is, you don't have anything valid to say yourself, and you can't hear anything i am saying, simply because you want to talk about humanity in terms of math equations
different sphere of reasoning. do you understand that?
there's no communication going on here between us, because you insist on the impossible: to talk about humanity's beliefs in terms of math equations
let's put it this way: are you familiar with chaos theory? emergent phenomenon?
the idea of emergent phenomenon is that, given the initial constraints, there is no way to know or calculate the end results. this is humanity. you can't feed humanity into an equation and get an answer, because humanity is an emergent phenomenon. the REALITY (as in social morals, right and wrong, etc., not fucking sunlight and weather you asperger's jackass) we live in is dictated by variables that emerge within the crucible of human society, something that is not foreknown or previously decided by physics calculations
it's dynamic. and you want the static
you don't understand the basics, and so you fail utterly to even understand the subject matter you immerse yourself in
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
slashdot's current quote of the minute is
'"In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point." -- Friedrich Nietzsche'
which is of course 100% true
but what you and nihilism wonderboy fail to realize is that very subject of morality has nothing to do with reality, and never will
it's completely seperate realms of intellectual inquiry
like this: every day on the plains of the serengeti is barbarisim and suffering of disgusting magnitudes if you were to apply human morality to it. of course, that's ridiculous, because it's not humanity, it's animals, and mother nature doesn't care how much suffering there is
which is exactly the point: reality doesn't care about suffering. the parable of that is the reality doesn't care if you try to reduce suffering, either. did you get that?
the realm of morality is completely a human invention. and mother nature doesn't care. reality doesn't care if you die a horrible suffering death. realit yalso doesn't care of you spend your life working to structure society as to reduce human suffering
did you get that? morality has nothing to do with reality. so you work agains thuman suffering, for that sake, and that sake alone. that's the point of morality (or should be, depsite many poorly thought out moral models such as with religious fundamentlaists that actually increases suffering)
you won't talk about morality unless you can reduce it to the same set of formulas that dictate star formation or the physics of rain clouds. except yu never can, and never will. and the subjec tmatter has nothing to do with righ tor wron gor morality
it's a human invention. reality doe snot give it's stmap of approval to morality. but the reality of physics or math doesn't DETRACT from the realm of morality either
morality has to do with POTENTIAL, how one SHOULD BE, not show how one IS. it's a code of behavior that is pointed at reducing suffering, at increasing justice
reality doesn't fucking care how just or unjust your life is
but your fellow humans do. and that, in and of itself, is the whole fucking point you and nihilism wonderboy and his quote completely and utterly miss for some bizarre reason. probably asperger's syndrome. an inability to see the human being in the mix
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
is the only proper response to arrogant retards
parse this prick:
morality, right and wrong, has nothing to do with reality. reality doesn't care about human morality. to desire that morality be based on reality is to not understand morality (or reality, for that matter)
at the same time, this doesn't devalue morality. morality is a valid pursuit. based on what? based on the simple fact that pretty much the entire human populace is interested in justice and fairness. again, does it matter if the sun and the moon and the earth could care less about morality? no because PHYSICALS AND MORALITY NEVER DID, DO NOT, AND NEVER WILL HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER YOU ASPERGER'S RETARD
morality is about what SHOULD BE in the realm of human behavior. realit yis about what IS in the realm of PHYSICS
FUCKING
DIFFERENT
SUBJECT
MATTER
do you fucking get it yet retard?
you're stupid. and arrogant. you don't understand your subject matter, and you keep spouting off. shut up. examine where you FAIL, then restart
you lose moron
xoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
possible:
;-)
the physics of earthquakes is governed by reality. the suffering of slaves is not. reality doesn't care if people suffer
at the same time, reality doesn't care if humanity strives to limit suffering. did you catch that?
so, when i strive to reduce suffering, via morality, i am not acting with reality, i am not acting against reality. i am acting in a different REALM: human social dynamics
the sun and the moon are bound by gravity. the execution of prostitutes in afghanistan is not. one is reality, physics. the other is morality, right and wrong. do you think it is right women are killed for prostitution?
well, according to you, being in the west, i have no right to comment, and i shouldn't care. why? because reality doesn't care. go study history.
wtf?!
well then, you don't care what happens in iraq, right?
oh wait, you do?
what the hell is not? reality doesn't care if humans suffer in iraq
you can't have it both way son. you care baou twhat happens outside the usa, ro you don't. you can't pick and choose. that's just your MORALITY talking, your sens eof right and wrong
furthermore, babbling on about reality and morality is just changing the subject, not addressing as to why we shouldn't care baout this, or care about that
reality doesn't care AT ALL. so if you are so concerned with the provenance of realit yover morality, stop CARING AT ALL. don't care if gw bush carpet bombs for oil, don't car eif he drinks oil out of a dead iraqi children's skull. reality doesn't care, why should you?
for you, caring about what the usa does in iraq but not caring what china does with the internet is your MORALITY. your morality of course is called simply being western-centric, but that's a WHOLE other subject. you're babbling on about the basis of morality in reality. WHICH DOESN'T EXIST
one more time: morality has nothing to do with reality. it is not based on it, it never will be. it never was. to try to connect the two is folly, the ignorance of a naive idealistic simpleton
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
saying that something on the orde rof the logic and reason of the physics of gravity or star formation has anything to do with morality and right and wrong
you get past a certain point, and you can't govern one with the other
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
the laws of physics
govern star formation, earthquakes, etc.
the laws of physics don't care if i behead my sister for sleeping with a man unwed
catch that?
nothing magical here at all son
simply different realms: how humans SHOULD behave, and how stars DO behave
it's an entirely different mental realm
you can't take a supercomputer, model every single subatomic particle in someone's brain, and arrive at "thou shalt not kill"
emergence
look it up
this does not invalidate morality, it simply establishes that morality HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PHYSICS IN ANY WAY
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
we both understand reality doesn't care how humans behave, yes?
but other human beings do. that's a separate "reality": the realm of human social interaction. we can talk about the evolution of memes and geens that led to a brain that is interested in justice and fairness, but that doesn't matter. what matters is humans DO care about these things, point of fact
would it be interesting if humans didn't have hands, or didn't have eyes. who fucking cares. science fiction. the fact is they DO have hands and eyes, and they DO have a strong sens eo fairness and justice, about how humans SHOULD behave
i think that's your essential probelm: you keep framing this subject in terms of stasis, the way things are. when morality is all about how things SHOULD BE
how we ARE and how we SHOULD BE are completely different avenues of discussion. learn to try to talk about one without the other, as one doesn't have anything to do with the other in the way you think it does
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
have to do with what is. we are talking about what should be
things like belief and passion play a roll. if you are padlocked to logic and reason, you couldn't possibly understand morality
morality is about what SHOULD BE, it is dynamic. it isn't about what IS, it isn't static
morality is predicated on the behavior of humans. humans, since their behavior is illogical, can't be reduced to logical statements like a computer simluation
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
if i murder you. the universe doesn't care. no shit sherlock
if i murder you, another HUMAN BEING might care
because the human being might think murder is wrong. if he thinks it is wrong everywhere, it is universal
if enough people believe it, it becomes reality
not reality in the realm of subatomic physics you asperger's dweeb, reality in the realm of HUMAN SOCIETY
realms of human inquiry. you understand there are different realms, right?
because i can't reduce "thou shalt not kill" to a physics equation doesn't mean that if i murder you, i SHOULDN'T BE sent to jail, right?
you understand that inquiring into WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN TO MURDERERS is different than a static inquiry into field dynamics, right?
because the universe doesn't care, doesn't mean other human beings don't care, nor is it a valid argument that they shouldn't
remember: the universe doesn't care if YOU care
and people care
got that?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Merriam-Webster says:
Main Entry: reality
Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : the quality or state of being real
2 a (1) : a real event, entity, or state of affairs (2) : the totality of real things and events b : something that is neither derivative nor dependent but exists necessarily
3 : television programming that features videos of actual occurrences (as a police chase, stunt, or natural disaster) -- often used attributively
- in reality : in actual fact
According to that definition and common consensus, human suffering is very much a part of reality.
True, "reality" doesn't care. That's because "caring" is not a function of abstractions. i am acting in a different REALM: At least you are writing as if you were from a realm removed from "the totality of real things and events".
Oh, and btw., in this reality, you are still evading my question about the universality of "universal human rights". Conveniently forgotten about that one, because it leaves big, gaping holes in your whole argument?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
you just can't see the human being in the equation
reality doesn't care if you murder someone. reality also doesn't care if a bunch of other humans punish you for murdering someone
in other words, reality is neutral on the whole subject matter. i can't depend upon reality to support my views. what you don't seem to understand is that you can't depend upon reality to detract from my views either. reality is utterly neutral on the subject. it just doesn't care if i murder. it also EQUALLY doesn't care if i get punished for murder
if i murder you, reality will do nothing. if a bunch of humans lock you up in jail for murder, reality will do nothing
with me so far?
so how about we fucking stop talking about reality, and start talking about HUMANITY
when we want to talk about morality meaningfully, we talk about human attitudes on the subject. most seem to be against it. universally. therefore, universally, murder is wrong
"but some asshole somewhere thinks it's ok"
yeah, but that's a disqualification of morality on the basis that every single person has to agree on anything
friend: welcome to a new realm: the relam of human society. if ENOUGH people believe it, it is true. really
OH MY GOD! MY ASPERGER'S BRAIN CAN'T DEAL. EITHER IT IS TOTALLY ACCEPTED DUNIVERSALLY OR IT IS FALSE
laugh
if enough people believe murder is wrong to set up a justice system that catches most people who murder, murder is wrong, universally. the universe=THE REALM OF HUMAN SOCIETY
not the andromeda galaxy you asperger's retard!
and no, asperger's dweeb, i can anticipate your retarded brain: if enough people believe in pink elephants it doesn't mean pink elephants will magically appear. asshole: ANOTHER REALM, THE REALITY OF PHYSICAL OBJECTS. DO YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND?
if enough people bleieve murder is wrong, it becomes WRONG. IN THE REALM OF HUMAN SOCIETY
different set of rules. absolute uniform acceptance and solid logical mathematical proof from subatomic particle physics is NOT in this realm
got it asperger's retard?
do you dislike this thing called human society? fine, go ahead, dislike it
i dislike gravity, i want to float around. but if i jump up, i fall down. oh well
you dislike people preventing you from murdering other people, you want to kill anyone without repercussions? well, if you kill someone, to jail you go. oh well
or maybe not if you're sneaky, or get oj simplson's lawyers. however, we're dealing with human society. human society is not 100% efficient. it's not a machine. absolute efficiency and enforcement of the laws of society isn't the fucking point
it's NOT PARTICLE PHSYICS YOU APSPEGER'S RETARD
stick to 3 vairable calculus dweeb. your understanding of humanity sucks
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
it's called majority rules. democracy
if the majority of people think osama bin laden is right, then he right. if the majority think i am right, then i am right. if there is significant difference of opinion, there is war
reality doesn't care. reality doesn't care if we wipe each other off the face of the earth. the stars will still shine, gravity will still work
but humanity does care, and it fights for what it believes in, and consolidates its beliefs
you think that's messy? well yeah, its' messy. humanity is messy. this is the truth. it is an ugly truth, and it is why you don't like it, but it doesn't make it any less the truth
i don't like gravity, doesn't mean gravity will change with me
same with human passion. go ahead, snap your fingers and amillion people will suddenly stop caring about their beliefs
meanwhile, i'll snap my fingers to make gravity go away
who will succeed? me or you? neither of us, to 100% certainty
you are bound by this reality of human morals and conflict as most certainly as you are bound by gravity
because you are a human, on this planet
you don't have to like it, but it is the truth
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
because you fail to understand the fucking obvious
reality doesn't cares if i murder you. reality also doesn't care if society punishes me for mudering you
because morality is a different realm than reality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it