Slashdot Mirror
Dissension Grows Inside Anonymous Because Of Political Propaganda (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report on Softpedia: Political tensions relating to the U.S. presidential race are creating turmoil inside the Anonymous hacker collective, muddling waters even more in a group that's known for its lack of leadership and a common goal. The most recent Anonymous infighting relates to the actions of the group's most famous news portal known as AnonHQ, who's been showing downright public support for Bernie Sanders, while being extremely busy at bashing Trump, Cruz, and more recently issuing video threats against Clinton. Ever since Anonymous' official news source has started showing public support for Sanders, many of the group's divisions have publicly disavowed it and have even gone so far as launching constant waves of DDoS attacks at what once used to be the hacker's official news portal. Last month, when a former Anonymous member decided to dox himself, he said in interviews that the group had been infiltrated by government agents.
"Anonymous" is the equivalent of a preschoolers yelling and kicking your shins. Ignore them, or chuckle if you want, then move in.
These people aren't shaping anyones option on anything.
SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
Is that possible?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
In other news, there's also growing dissent among ACs on Slashdot
Will the ACs ever come to agree with each other, or will the AC group dissolve completely into different factions?
Tune in at 11 PM to find out more.
We are all anonymous
In a similar way to Vorlons "We are All Kosh"
There are 14 trackers on that page after adblock stops scripts. While I support anonymity I can't imagine a more preposterous site for claiming to be anonymous anything.Why is anyone paying attention to a group that blatantly denies the principles in its name? This is like the Gay Black Jewish Klansmen for Peace and Understanding.
Whatever their agenda and whoever signs their paychecks it's time to stop giving attention to these bozos.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
You dont "muddle" waters, you "muddy" them. The only way to "muddle waters" is to spoil water all over the place while trying to fill your glass.
Well the only thing for it is to have a "Great Leap Forward" and roll out the little black books, show trials, gulags, etc..... until the maximum leader of said anarchist democratic collective unites every freethinker towards the common goal.
I was thinking, it would be pretty cool if Slashdot had submissions about technology, science, and maybe even computing. I know this is mainly a political site, but I think some people might find submissions about non-political stories interesting. Maybe there could even be some submissions about computer programming on the front page every now and then.
When will the morons in the media get it? Anonymous isn't an organized group. There is no central command, no inner circle to infiltrate. There are people who publicly label themselves "Anonymous", and there are many, many more who are Anonymous that you never see. It's in the fucking tagline - "We Are Legion".
https://youtu.be/gD_Y-r8gdaA?t...
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
I could have sworn there was an episode exploring exactly this sort of shit. Has anyone been murdered yet?
+5
They had some class, they had skill and most importantly they made me laugh.
Anonymous of today relies on zero effort DDOS attacks and their messaging is dominated by anger and revenge.
What happens when you try to do anything by committee.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
What you have here are two fake PR fronts fighting it out for who can pretend to control a group of random hackers whom they neither know, nor represent.
Fake PR front #1: "Anonymous is targeting drug dealers and Trump today, here I'm genuine, see my well stitched flag and high quality video production standards"
Fake PR front #2: "No, I'm the real PR outlet for "Anonymous", don't listen him, we're totally not, we're targetting Somali pirates and Clinton, see my more believable grunge website"
You know how it works, they are hackers, they come and go, live their lives, gets jobs, or girlfriends. They get pissed at stuff sometimes and hack it if they have time and when they find a hole, and dump the result to pastebin if the hack is successful. Anonymous is just an internet MEME used by every changing random hackers.
We know they've hacked something when the hacked data appears.
So how could such random people ever have an "official news outlet" if there's no "official" in charge of them?
Never mix politics with your anonymous anarchy, electronic crusades. That's the 1 topic, that will bring about your destruction. It's like the people don't know history....
kill Firefox and 50% of the anonymous lost communication - the other half are just trolls and pedoturds
who's been showing downright public support for Bernie Sanders, while being extremely busy at bashing Trump, Cruz, and more recently issuing video threats against Clinton
not sure I see a problem, here.
but, video threats; what is that? is there audio, too? in 5.1?
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
I would bet that at the very least our government has tried to infiltrate and not just Anonymous but a lot of software companies as well. I will state that I am certain the recent accusations that Cruze is Lucifer is a lie. Trump is Satan and Cruze and Boehner are just wannabees.
I totally agree. Not only are there more political stories, they're decidedly left-leaning. It's getting even worse in the comments. I remember when government was "the man"' and hackers were mostly libertarian. Now every Slashdot issue seems to end up as a fight for who can hand government more power and control. (Don't like big corporations? Why do you think big government is better? Maybe small both is best. Bernie Sanders? Give me a break. Do you know how other countries provide college for free? They pick the people who are allowed to go.)
The more Slashdot becomes a hang out for privleged young lefties to tell everyone how to think, the more I just want to chuck the whole thing. And fwiw, I've been a daily visitor since I downloaded Debian onto floppies with my 28.8 modem.
best AC post ever.
Anonymous -- Even as tempers can run high around/near volatile topics, keeping your teeter-totter balanced to LEVEL between 'intellect' 'and 'emotion', staying away from political elections will require advanced WISDOM on the part of professionals. Please, even though it surely hurts, leave (all) the campaigns alone. Post as you wish from whichever side tweaks your 'balanced view' and also review the Beatles Revolution, "destruction, count me out." ok? tyia. OBF
I was also thinking that we could have an opinions topic maybe or editorial or something
So people could separate their news and blatant attempts to influence people into appropriate categories.
You know why it's getting worse in the comments?
People using words like 'left wing' and 'right wing' and then believing they're talking about tech. Calling themselves 'libertarian' and then claiming all hackers used to be libertarian because they never met any but assume because it would make sense in their own heads.
Also, when people tell you you're fucking stupid, you assume they're 'left wing' because of your political position, when really they just want you to stop talking because you're fucking stupid.
NB i also have a 5 digit ID and stopped coming back here regularly years ago. I'm disappointed to see you're still fucking stupid.
People using words like 'left wing' and 'right wing' and then believing they're talking about tech. Calling themselves 'libertarian' and then claiming all hackers used to be libertarian because they never met any but assume because it would make sense in their own heads.
I think they were more anarchist than libertarian. And yes, there's quite a difference between the two.
So we can do another round of breathless headlines! Don't underestimate the power of vapid clickbait! Click! Click! Click!
Reality has a well known left-wing bias. There are other sites you can go to for reading about how dinosaur-riding Jesus disproves AGW.
Citing an Anonymous source (who declined to be named), said everything started going south when over 9k people hung Guy Fawkes masks on the rear view mirrors of their cars.
One of the jobs of science and data reduction is to remove bias to get to the truth. There are books on the subject.
A site for "anonymous" that has tracking cookies and divides users with political banter? If you visit that site you're a special kind of stupid.
Also noticed there's a lot more British articles with the scent of propaganda in them. It's mostly still technology and computer industry related otherwise I would have left when they sold the site. It's definitely changed a bit in terms of honesty vs slanted propaganda.
When was the last time you actually visited that link? Honestly you are making yourself look like an ass by posting a "Buy this domain" link.
I call bullshit. Free college here is based on scores in final year exams at the end of secondary level education. No one "picks" the results.
Maybe lay off the tinfoil hat son?
Those books wont help you prove dinosaur riding jesus unless you apply them incorrectly.
They also wont help you disprove dinosaur riding jesus, though. They actually understand how epistemology works.
They *might* point out you have no chain of evidence to support dinosaur riding jesus and ask you why you keep returning to the subject and maybe if you'd like a tissue to wipe up the drool though.
Let's see now...... a group of anarchists attempts to organize and coordinate attacks on non-anarchists....... and anarchy ensues.
wow
News flash: Water is wet, and gravity makes things fall down.
There's a reason why anarchy is generally only embraced by the young, who are easily drawn to the excitement and too dumb to see it for what it is, and by the criminally insane. Normal civilized people reject anarchy and its companion vigilantism, embracing various forms of civilization which include judicial systems for dispute resolution.
please stop talking about them
they are nothing like they used to be
It's "muddying the waters", you illiterate, ignorant American cretins...
I was thinking, it would be pretty cool if Slashdot would run stories on how we used to beat up and humiliate nerds in school, and then went on to humiliate them on the workplace later when it turned out they would not become our bosses, either. :)
Is it irony that the collective which made its name by attacking the 'top dog' is now supporting the 'top dog' and attacking the underdog who wants to defend other underdogs?
Getting rid of Bernie Sanders doesn't help the Republican party, so, is this Democrat-driven or a coincidence?
That's what reddit is for. /r/technology, /r/science, stuff like /r/FPGA, /r/, etc.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
Its because the -chan sites don't have logins. Its dirrectly analogous to "Anonymous Coward" here on slashdot.
Saying "Anonymous" did something is like saying "Anonymous Coward" did something.
Mostly it was just 4chan/7chan trolling facebook back in 2008, until they decided to troll scientology.
The most amount of power they ever had was the mainsteam media giving them attention.
Reality has a well known left-wing bias
apparent only to those who try to ignore it.
Care to explain why the US market has recovered faster than the EU? Everyone on the left agrees we did to little stimulus and yet here we are and there they are. Greece is about to collapse again, Spain and France have deep likely unsolvable structural problems... The one nation that is doing exceptionally well Germany adopted the more conservative policies...
Lets face it, progressives are just as bone headed as their reactionary counter parts. There really is a middle right leaning road the yields the best results.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
People probably assume that because you seem to defend useless idiots who happen to be "feminists" quite often. I remember the Brianna Wu interview quite specifically, and then there was some other thread where you decided you needed to stick up for Randi Harper. Both of them are awful people and if you didn't somehow feel like you belonged to the same tribe, you wouldn't bother defending them.
I think the term SJW is worthless as its just a convenient way for people to label someone and group them in with other people they dislike and then hate by association, which is really the same kind of behavior that they accuse modern feminism of, making it a bit funny. However, you've done the same and accused people of being an MRA, which is really just the feminist version of SJW, a nice label they can hang on someone so they can accuse them of all kinds of other things that they may or may not believe in.
I recall modding you up before because you say things that I find to be insightful or informative, but for most people here, modern feminism has become a cruel jape. It's been taken over by the kind of people who get called SJWs a lot and you sticking up for them doesn't make anyone like them more. All it does is tell those same loud idiots that they have people who will back them and they should keep doing what they're doing. It's akin to if most people supported the Westboro Baptist Church instead of mocking them for the lunatics they are. People defending their actions just means more people are going to act that way and if you don't toss out the rot from within a movement, it will eventually overtake it. Look at what happened with the Catholic church, the covered up pedophilia for so long that they ended up with a disproportionate amount of pedophiles in their ranks because those people knew they could get away with their actions because someone else would hush it up or make excuses for the behavior.
You can be a feminist without being an "SJW" but it means you can't give free passes to bad behavior, terrible arguments, or any person just because they also claim to be a feminist. Otherwise you can't be surprised when a majority of people don't want to associate with you for wearing that same label or start making assumptions that you're just as bad as the awful people you've been defending.
They "pick" the best performing....what a novel idea.
and if it has to do with Microsoft we can all say it's bad because Microsoft, if it's Linux we can comment about systemd, and if it's Apple make a reference to walled gardens!
Surely that'll never get old and people will love to submit more articles.
hackers in Politics?:) Just shows you how honeypoted system it is....
Anonymous is nothing more than an anonymous vehicle for political activism, it is only what particular people bring to it at a particular time. The activities of those people who operate temporarily under the name of 'Anonymous' seeking support from others, is their own as it is of those who wish to join them in that activity.
It is only what those anonymous people, operating under 'Anonymous' at any particular time, make it. There can be no dissension (as there is no organisation with which to dissent), it is an anarchistic vehicle for political activism, which ever way the majority involved decide, is the way it goes. Dissension logically can not exist and multiple conflicting sides can be taken at the same time, the dominant view is simply the view that achieves the greatest consensus at any particular time.
It can not be infiltrated by government agents or corporate agents or agents of any description. If they so choose to engage in an activity under the name of 'Anonymous' then so be it, no different to anyone else, no one is accepted to 'Anonymous' no one is rejected from 'Anonymous', if you wish to engage anonymously in a particular political activism activity. then it is there to be used. What support you gather or fail to gather will be entirely up to other individuals choosing to or ignoring or even opposing the call to political activity.
It just provides a required level of protection via anonymity when engaged in political activism for those who need it or for those who seek to support anonymity in political activity, well, at least in part. Most political activity should be in public but many big players in politics do so in anonymity via bribes paid in tax havens, so it is only fair the majority have similar avenues to anonymous political activism, not involving the corruption of democracy of course. To claim to be a member of 'Anonymous' is factually to deny being anonymous, you cannot abandon anonymity and be 'Anonymous', it factually illogical and merely represents those particular individuals vainly seeking to gain control of non-organisation that in implementation is designed to be uncontrollable. Any groups that conduct activity under 'Anonymous' remain the group they were prior, during and after conducting that activity. You can not be recruited by 'Anonymous', you form your own political activism groups prior to any 'Anonymous' activity and that group than simply conducts an activity under 'Anonymous' seeking to draw others to that activity, for greater collective impact, than would otherwise be achieved on their own or not ;). The more the merrier, as there is safety in obscurity and it confuses the crap out of data analysts, the on and off again, informal temporary partnerships, involving individuals, groups and even government agents (they help to feed the obscurity and drive the public presence of 'Anonymous' ;D).
Sometimes it behaves better than other times, sometimes it is more effective than others time, sometimes the average member of the public agrees with the activities and sometimes they do not and sometimes PR=B$ agencies attempt to use it and their cause fails but they have promoted 'Anonymous', only to see 'Anonymous' then attack PR douches promoted cause, with far larger numbers than those who originally supported it for profit.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
blah blah blah
slashdot sucks
blah blah
blah there aren't enough technology stories
You could be part of the solution.
Very well said. I am regularly amazed at how few people understand the (lack of) organization of Anonymous, especially media outlets. The only thing I would sort-of disagree with is that it is for political activism. That is one thing that has arisen from Anonymous and it is probably the most visible aspect, but they do other things too that are not political in nature: they still do some things "for teh lulz" occasionally.
The very fact that you include 'trigger' as apart of your general vocabulary speaks loud and clear that you're a regressive leftist (the polar opposite of a right wing religious nut)...Which is further compounded by the fact that you're defending Anita who's nothing but a scam artist (with her various fund raisers for shit that she never starts nor completes) who sits around droning on fastidiously about insignificant things like hip sways in video games and coming up with pejoratives for male signals of attraction like 'male gaze'.
I'm sorry but 3rd gen. millennial feminists are fucking sexist pieces of shit who amount to nothing more than a hate group that's akin to neo-nazis hence the reason why they're called 'feminazis'.
Supporting Sanders is political, no argument about that. Of the leading 4 candidates, he is the only one who has taken serious positions (though you might not agree with those positions).
Bashing Trump and Cruz isn't political. Neither of those are serious candidates and no matter what your political ideals, no matter how right or left you are, no matter how you would approach the country's problems and opportunities, those are totally horrible candidates and also just plain bad people who shouldn't be in America's government at any level. Gary Johnson and maybe Kasich are the only right(ish) wing candidates that anyone should be seriously considering voting for. Trump and Cruz supporters can't talk in public without immediately outing themselves as 1) utter fuckwits and 2) essentially non-political (i.e. no ideals of any kind, not even conservative).
A shadowy, decentralized group of anonymous activists with wildly different views of the world is experiencing internal dissension and infighting?
Wow, who coulda seen that coming?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
People using words like 'left wing' and 'right wing' and then believing they're talking about tech. Calling themselves 'libertarian' and then claiming all hackers used to be libertarian because they never met any but assume because it would make sense in their own heads.
This is false.
Also, when people tell you you're fucking stupid, you assume they're 'left wing' because of your political position, when really they just want you to stop talking because you're fucking stupid.
See what you did there? That's why no competent people ascribe to your ideals and you have to go onto sites you don't belong (such as this one) and push them in the idiotic hope others will listen when in fact you are just an obnoxious loudmouthed hippy.
A great example would be Anita Sarkeesian.
People don't hate her because she's a self-identified SJW, they hate her for her duplicity, her scams, her dishonesty, and the outrageous baloney she claims her 'research' uncovered. She's a very successful con-artist, and that's why you'll find a fair number of people who hate her.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
:) feminism is awful because it's a collection of in-fighting intersectionality-worshipping separate groups of women. And like much of the far left at this point, they've gotten to the point where WHO you are, is often the biggest deciding factor in whether or not what you say is actually heard and appreciated.
hey, i'll all for feminism, but i'm a dude. Even if i had something to contribute I don't think anyone would listen. as someone put it, it's victim olympics at this point. think a transgender muslim person of color probably wins at this point.
the left is eating its own. it's part of the bigger trend of the left being less tolerant of dissension than ever.
had someone tell me once that i was the most congenial liberal he'd ever met, and one of the first ones he had actually discussed things with without having his head bit off. Thought he was joking at first, but hell...
Technology has become more involved with politics lately. Too bad Slashdot wasn't around in 1993 during the first Crypto Wars. It would have been the same stuff.
Which candidate, exactly, do you think would reduce the sum of corporate + government power more than Sanders? I mean, at least he wants to break up corporate power; every other candidate wants to make it even worse.
Clinton? Nope, she likes the status quo.
Trump? Nope, jackbooted thugs and racist pogroms aren't "small government."
Cruz? Nope, dominionist theocracy isn't "small government" either.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Really just about anything can be for political activism, even the lulz. When dicks are taking the wrong things far to seriously because of their inflated egos, deflating those egos often has a great benefit in reducing the political harm those inflated egos cause. Politics doesn't have to be all serious, it can be quite fun and in fact making it more fun tends to get more people involved ie taking the piss out of corrupt politicians is fun and although it does not achieve much political change it certainly strips away pleasure those corrupt politicians derive from their victories out our expense, at least it does make the very cautious about repeating bad behaviour.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
So if you do poorly on the exams you're consigned to a lifetime of poverty. Seems fair :P
I'm not sure where "here" is but I bet you'd feel different if the academic bar were set high enough that you didn't qualify to attend college. And who decides where the bar gets set, the terms of the testing, the factors for consideration... the politicians make those decisions.
This is the core problem. Everything comes down to ad-hominems.
What else can I say about someone who I have a low opinion of though? I suppose I could phase it less harshly and say that I don't think they are very good people, and then qualify all of that with examples, but what does that really change? You, who considers them a member of your tribe will just find a way to dismiss the evidence or rationalize the bad behavior or make other excuses for it.
Kinda like you just did to me.
I don't ever recall calling you an SJW or accusing you of something like that and if I have, it's something that I realize does not lead to healthy thinking or discourse. At most I've stated that I expect you'd identify yourself as a feminist, but like many other things it's an overloaded term and has almost become a bit of a pejorative. You post a lot of other things where we're in agreement and I suspect that we have more beliefs in common than not, even though I suspect our reasoning for arriving at those beliefs are different.
I'll concede that I have called people that in the past. I stopped a while back because I realized it is counter-productive. Even so, I'd point out that when I did, it was because the person was following MRA ideology. Unlike Social Justice Warriors, Men's Rights Activists are an actual organized group with a number of web sites, conferences and books on the subject.
SJW as I understand it is just a placeholder for what much of modern feminism has become. Couldn't you make the same argument that calling someone an SJW simply means that they subscribe to third-wave feminist philosophy and then further point out the large number of web sites, conferences, books, etc. on the subject? I think both groups have some legitimate points to be made, but the problem is that they've been taken over by crazy idiots who are very counter-productive.
I think the anti-feminist caricature of feminism is that, but not the mainsteam or even radical feminist movements. This goes back to what I was trying to get at. People say feminism is awful because of feminists like Anita Sarkeesian, but then rebut some imaginary arguments which show they have no idea what her actual opinions are. All they know is what the anti-feminists told them, they don't even watch the videos and then answer the actual points being made.
But I have watched a few of her videos and while she does have some good points, eventually she drifts off into patriarchy theory, which is utter nonsense when looking at modern western societies. Feminism incorporated too much nonsense with no empirical basis and has drown or driven out the rational members of the group. Take a look at someone like Warren Farrell who was a longtime feminist, but then the fringe element of the group has essentially driven him out or famously protested him speaking because he doesn't buy into the patriarchy theory nonsense. There are plenty of others just like him who might call themselves feminists, but the majority (or in some cases the noisiest contingent that shapes public perception) of other people who call themselves feminists don't feel the same.
Just because you agree with some points that a person makes doesn't mean you have to defend everything they say because it somehow invalidates the points you agree with. There are particular positions where I agree with Donald Trump and others where I agree with Bernie Sanders, but that doesn't mean I have to defend the things I dislike about them or argue against anyone who thinks they're not a good candidate. Much like labeling people in order to put them in a certain mental box is counter-productive, so to is trying to defend someone just because you feel as though you're on the same team, which is just another aspect of human behavior that we do out of habit. I don't think you're a bad person for doing it, just one th
Actually, I vehemently agree with you. I'd MUCH rather be talking about tech than topics which require using classifications like left or right-wing to discuss. I feel like many of the recent stories lately were picked or positioned to do just that. I'm not sure if I'm the troll here or just being trolled but there seems to me more of a political agenda in the stories themselves which just catalyzes a bunch of, "if you don't agree with me, you're not just wrong, you're evil" kinds of comment bouts. (Case in point.)
I hardy ever post comments so I don't get to enjoy being called stupid very often, but I'm pretty sure I can differentiate a basic left vs right-wing approach to a issue, rather than just self-identifying with right and thus anything I disagree with is automatically left. (Believe me, both sides have their strengths and weaknesses.) Yeah, I let my stripes show a bit but the bigger point is: "Hey story approvers, stop posting stories that try to stir up all the political BS and get back to what we came here for, heated, political debates about stuff like init vs systemd."
Maybe your last point was that I'm the stupid one for still coming back hoping that this wasn't the case. As I wrap up this comment, I certainly feel a little more stupid than when I started so you may just be right.
That's what I get for trying to make a point about how Slashdot seems to be pushing more political stories but then also letting my opinions in to the mix. Human nature, though... I can't help but take up your comment. (Damn it, trolled again!)
In full disclosure, I don't know where you're from or the details of your system and I admit my comment was extremely general. It may be better than ours in many ways, if not every way, but it may also not be apples to apples. You may have all the elements I describe below and if so, I leave the educated one.
In our system, if you get high marks in secondary education, you generally already receive highly subsidized higher education through things like government grants or scholarships funded by the private or personal sector. (Yes, even from the dreaded 1%.) Students who can afford it or who's family can afford it are generally restricted from these, so there's already a distributive element built in to the system.
If you don't receive those marks at that time, you still have higher-ed options and choices. If you mature at a different rate from your peers or find that your interests don't align with your abilities at the same time to meet the specific criteria needed in your system, you can still find many options for college. You just have to decide personally whether the benefits that you'll receive from the degree outweigh the costs.
I believe that we under-value vocational education in this country and tell kids that the only way to be successful is through higher ed. We do a bad job of helping kids and families do the cost/benefit analysis but since the government took over much of the student loan business, it's kind of hard not to see them as beneficiaries and thus complicit in this. (There I go, showing my stripes again.)
Your system seems rather unforgiving to us "anything goes" yanks but I also kind of feel that ours maximizes personal freedom at the expense of allowing people to make choices that aren't in their best interests.
So to take it all the way back to the techie discussions I'd rather be having, it's kind of like when the manager wants you to keep putting more VMs on the same VM host instead of buying new hardware. The raw computing resources are still limited and have a real cost. When you start thinking of the underlying layer as free and unlimited, things will break.
There are several methods/theories on how to best ration a limited resource and far fewer are actually evil than get credited as such in Slashdot these days.
Gosh I hope this is an ironic reference to how far things have dropped here since the excellent threads/discussions here after the Columbine School shootings.
Beyond being a communist, Bernie is a career politician. He's a calcified part of the establishment. Anyone that thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves.
Although to anyone that actually understands civics, this is all a sideshow anyways as the President has little real power.
In that respect, a Bernie presidency might actually be a GOOD thing as all of the naieve young kids that like him will get disappointed with his socialist agenda due to his inability to force Congress to do his bidding.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Don't like big corporations? Why do you think big government is better? Maybe small both is best. Bernie Sanders? Give me a break. Do you know how other countries provide college for free? .
You can't have small both, I would have thought this was obvious - governments have to be a certain size to be able to effectively keep corporations of a particular size in check. It's pretty clear that in the United States (from an outside perspective) that several of the larger business interests are pretty hell bent on getting rid on the government agencies that keep them in check, especially environmental and safety regulations.
Governments at least in democratic nations have at least some accountability to citizens of that nation and periodic elections allow the removal of really unpopular politicians without bloodshed. I agree that there are dangers associated with big government but I don't see a workable solution short term that doesn't include them.
Free university or at least free tuition is more common than you think it would be, particularly in Europe and at least, Bernie Sanders has a tax plan that sort of adds up, the candidates on the republican side are so far from doing that, you could completely defund the military (which isn't going to happen) and still not make up the difference.
I don't think Wu is an awful person, so much as she's more self-serving than bright. I don't really keep up with this, so I may be missing something she did that you feel qualifies her as awful. But hey, she managed to have civil coffee with an 'undesirable;' of course that went about as well as you'd expect, with a certain group of self-labelled progressives suddenly deciding she's not a "real" woman. But I can't think of anything awful on par with doxing or fabricating/spinning events to get people ostracized and fired.
Polar opposite, but essentially the same: some asshole using a "righteous" cause to excuse being a fucking asshole.
Care to explain why the US market has recovered faster than the EU?
Is this a joke? You must be joking because do the same thing we did before to crash the economy is not fixing it nor are we "recovered". It looked good on the surface in early 2000s as well unless you actually looked at it. We've done NOTHING to fix the underlying issues, we just bailed out the people creating the problems and are well on track for another disaster. Recovered, lol.
Care to explain why the US market has recovered faster than the EU?
The US had more stimulus than the EU. Not enough perhaps, but more. The eurozone is locked into neoliberalism by treaty, its individual countries are prohibited from creating stimulus. Germany has a massive trade surplus and therefore has no need of stimulus, neoliberalism works just fine for them.
What else can I say about someone who I have a low opinion of though?
You say nothing at all about the person and confine your commentary to their arguments.
they've been taken over by crazy idiots who are very counter-productive
All of the major social/political movements seem to be heading this way.
I think the loudest nutjobs are trying to be the next MLK or Gandhi, but they are not not smart or charismatic enough to pull a movement together. And some are simply self-serving and getting attention however they can.
The mudslinging is just another way to rally support and build that tribe, and extract some money from them.
It also provokes the opposition---which can be a good career move if the activism is a means to personal rather than social ends. If someone wants the national spotlight, there's nothing better than a verbal brawl that gets play with media pundits and editors.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
And then #Gamergate happened.
What else can I say about someone who I have a low opinion of though?
You could address their arguments. That's generally how a high level debate works, you discuss the issues rather than the individuals involved.
Couldn't you make the same argument that calling someone an SJW simply means that they subscribe to third-wave feminist philosophy
You could, but what is the point? Address the issues directly rather than poisoning the well with name calling.
eventually she drifts off into patriarchy theory, which is utter nonsense when looking at modern western societies.
It seems to be an accurate description of western society. What specifically makes you think it is nonsense?
The rest of your post is again focused on the individuals and who their perceived groupings. Stick to the issues, I'm happy to discuss them with you.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Are we talking about the anatomy of birds here?
How could anyone be disappointed with Bernie's agenda if the Congress blocks said agenda from being implemented? Are you often disappointed with the quality of meals you didn't get to actually eat?
If anything, the Congress, being a notoriously corrupt organization, blocking an agenda gives that agenda more credibility.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
And then #Gamergate happened.
While reality still has a left-wing bias, assholes exist in all wings of politics. That's the main lesson of Gamergate.
No, that's not what happened with the Catholic Church. What happened with the Catholic Church is that they covered up child molesters to protect their reputation at the expense of past and future victims. They are not accused of attracting terrible people, they're accused of being terrible people. And that they keep on playing the victim simply proves they've not changed, and don't intend to.
Not an assumption but a deduction. Approving of awful things makes you an awful person. This seems to be a persistant tumbling block in the way of every single movement that dreams of a better world, and is what separates people who might actually build one from psychopaths who simply want a fancy excuse for their atrocities.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
I think any anon that isn't supporting sanders is not an anon at all.
I expect these DDOS attacks aren't coming from anonymous at all, but the power elite itself.
"hey, i'll all for feminism..."
That seems to be the motto of men who don't like feminism.
"Just because you agree with some points that a person makes doesn't mean you have to defend everything they say because it somehow invalidates the points you agree with."
I defend Anita Sarkeesian because the people attacking her have no reason to be so angry, and most of them don't even know about her actual opinions. If someone wants to do a feminist critique of video games, that's their right. Stop being so insecure and just leave her alone.
Also, she is mostly just saying obvious things about women in video games. Like its a big secret that women are objectified in games.
Also, it would be nice if you could just say what your beef is with the word patriarchy. I have a feeling that she is using it to describe the very real phenomenon of men assuming power over women. You guys keep picking little arguments, which miss the big picture.
I remember when government was "the man"' and hackers were mostly libertarian.
Yeah, but you know, we grew up. Happens to the best of us. You might even consider trying it yourself. Maybe you'll even like it...