Slashdot Mirror
Whatever Happened To Second Life?
Barence writes "It's desolate, dirty, and sex is outcast to a separate island. In this article, PC Pro's Barry Collins returns to Second Life to find out what went wrong, and why it's raking in more cash than ever before. It's a follow-up to a feature written three years ago, in which Collins spent a week living inside Second Life to see what the huge fuss at the time was all about. The difference three years can make is eye-opening."
... being a refuge for people that do not dare to be themselves in RL.
Want to be a slut? Don't dare to step up to girls? Afraid to date someone or something? Maybe you are a transgender person not willing to act it out in RL? Etc...
In the end it's just for people that fail at RL because they are afraid to be happy and comfortable with themselves. It's also a breeding place for no-life-luser....
Here be signatures
Yiff in hell, furfags
I'm pleased to believe that I was a participant in the event that first uncovered the hypocrisy in the Lindens' operation of SL, ie the War of the Jesse Wall. Too long a story to tell here (you can google it) but their originally-stated goal was laudable: a lassaiz-faire (sp?) world with basic physics, to see how people would operate, including a truly free-for all zone called Jesse. The first culture to display their nascent fascism were the liberal peacniks, who objected to ardent patriotism of a number of players during the Iraq war. They tried to bottle up and hem in the pro-US players, who reacted violently (within the rules of the Jesse zone, where killing was possible).
This escalated to a full scale war which, when the peacniks (who'd been joined by socialists and other fellow travelers) begged the Lindens to intervene, and they did. Their actions to enforce 'peace' in some Left-Coast sort of utopian view directly contravened their own stated rules of non-intervention, and showed them for the hypocrites they are.
-Styopa
Is that a surprise? Truth doesn't matter to conservatives. If they can win by lying, they'll lie. They can see that telling the truth and losing will get you one thing: dead.
They call that horrible philosophy "morality." What a bunch of sad clowns they are.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
We don't begrudge you, we look down on you and mock you; there is a difference.
I suppose I should expect a comment like that from someone with a "Lynx-enhanced" homepage.
Seriously though, I'd be happy to fill you in on more details if you're not just out trolling.
You're quite right. Everyone can see it but YOU and HIM and similarly illiterate people.
"Apparently you can't be peace loving, anti-war, or liberal and like the US."
Really? REALLY? Are you REALLY that daft that you agree with that shite?
REEEEEAAAAAAALLLLLLLYYYYYYY???????
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
But they never speak up against those who do, so I lump them all together, the deathers, the birthers, the teabaggers: all the wacky conspiracy theorists; the libertarians, the Austrian Schoolers, and all the other lassaiz-faire deregulationists: these are the true conservatives of America. If you find these stereotypes offensive, then perhaps you ought to do something to prove that there are other, alternative forms of conservatism that are not based on fear, anger, hatred, violence, and domination.
Interesting that you would characterize a group of libertarians (I'm not sure about birthers, and if by "deathers" you mean people who are suspicious of broad government programs, I think there's a good overlap) as being based on a variety of emotions such as fear, anger, hatred, violence, and domination. Where do you get your facts from, MSNBC?
First, the most prominent libertarian political figure, Ron Paul, keeps saying, more than any other liberal Democratic candidates, that we need to pull out of the whole region of Middle East. Who's "pro-war" here? Ron Paul, standing for libertarians, or Barack Obama, standing for liberals?
Second, the Libertarian Party specifically rejects initiation of violence. I suppose the fact that this is a cornerstone of that organization is more of a relic of history, when they wanted to distinguish themselves from communist or anarchist groups that wanted to overthrow the U.S. government entirely, but in any case, libertarians believe in retaliation (and hence their pro-military view, so that they can retaliate when necessary), but not initiation.
Third, of all political philosophies, libertarianism is one most emotionally devoid---both negative and positive---of them all. It starts out with simple premise that all rights derive from property rights, starting from self-ownership, and the rest of the philosophy is pretty much logical deduction from that premise, guided by respect for everyone's rights, untainted by fuzzy standards of empathy or special consideration of any particular group of people, such as the poor or the rich. Of all the emotional characteristics that you ascribe to libertarians, perhaps one is even remotely close: fear, that is, fear of the government, but the libertarian fear of the government is only a useful rule of thumb, because governments are the most effective destroyer of property rights who can also legitimize their acts of destruction.
And finally, "domination" is the characteristic most aptly applied to liberals, not libertarians or even most conservatives. Small-government conservatism, which is the core of any American conservatism (I won't deny that there are some flavors of conservatism which go much, much beyond these core principles, but they are fringe, not mainstream), can be described as "live and let live", i.e. we won't dominate others, but we will not let others dominate us. On the other hand, the core of progressive liberal agenda is reforming the humanity into their image. Public education (for which I do credit progressives) which instill in the children their view of right and wrong. Government programs incentivizing particular set of behaviors. Tax incentives that amount to micromanaging people's behavior. High taxes that make these tax incentives look good. As ... laudable as some of these goals are, reforming others must necessary include dominating them first, militarily, economically, or by some other means.
I don't care. It was useful to rope in more conservatives (fascists, really) and call them names. Thanks, and sorry you got caught in the crossfire.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!