well heres where people are going to chime in basically saying "take every penny from rich people" and wanting to remove the incentive to get rich in the first place. meaning innovation goes out the window.
you guys need to study economics and business. UBI is a pie in the sky dream. National economies are systems of systems. Mess with one aspect and the others are affected. To pay for UBI, you have to raise taxes. Raising taxes raises costs. The more it costs to live the more you have to pay out in UBI. UBI is an unsustainable model.
So what is your model?
So we have creeping automation that is working its way up the social-economic ladder. This is happening.
The why of that fact is that the users of that automation find it profitable to eliminate the cost of employing people.
Now it is pretty incontestable that if the trend continues - and it will - at some point, we will hit a unpleasant point where manufacturers cannot squeak more profit out of a system that has been made very lean, coupled with and overall economy in which most of the population is nothing more than a drain.
So if we use the current model, there will be a need for a massive culling of the non-employable. The method of achieving an 80 percent reduction of worldwide population has to be carefully managed.
The nuclear option is crude and injures the people who are deemed worthy of continued existence - it isn't to say we won't use it - humans can be remarkably stupid.
Natural die - off coupled with tight population control is very slow.
If we are going to use traditional thinking, we are going to have a creepy "final solution" applied to the population at large. It will be grimly amusing to watch people's racism as they choose who to eliminate.
But there will be billions lost as industries that were feeding those billions lose the source of their government income, which was providing food and shelter for the useless and now dead surplus population.. They aren't going to like that.
This is a massively complicated issue. 19th century economics will not solve it. Our lizard brain is not going to solve it.
And many of the people who foam at the mouth railng about how much they hate socialism are collecting Social Security,Disability benefits, Medicare, Medicade, Food Stamps, and WIC, and other social benefits.
And the angry mobe pissed at everyone receiving social benefits but they fully deserve theirs - sometimes they have mod points.
We get it. Today's crypto conservatives are suffering from Red Queen syndrome:
"Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
Anyone storing private information is liable 100% for its unauthorized release.
They would be completely on the hook for compensating any losses and remediating any financial fallout.
Remember though, that places like Facebook have a lot of authorized releases. I don't know if you ever go there, but everyone there has friends who take "intelligence tests" or personality tests which then post something like "Billy is a great friend, but a terrible enemy", or "If you can't handle suzy at her worst, you don't deserve her at her best". Stupid shit like that.
These doofuses went to some website suggested by Facebook, then plugged in a bunch of personal data, and got a response that gratifies their self-absorption, while the people sponsoring that site take that personal info, and weaponize it.
Purely voluntary - even wanted by these dolts, and not political until weaponized.
And if for a moment, we ignore the people who it helped and hurt this past election cycle, this is merely a weapon exposed by the Russians and outfits like Cambridge Analytica, and now Russian operatives like Wikileaks founder Assange - look for him to head out to hide in the land of the people he helped - these weapons were simply available. So they were used.
The real hat trick is the next several election cycles, when the party who gleefully accepted the confusion and outcome might be run through by a pike of their own forging.
Being neither Democrat nor Republican, My gaddamned popcorn is mighty tasty these days.
The United States literally has Social Security benefits. USA is much more socialist than say India. In India you dont work you starve.
Elon was able to create SpaceX because he lives in a socialist country which catches you if you try something and fail.
And many of the people who foam at the mouth railng about how much they hate socialism are collecting Social Security,Disability benefits, Medicare, Medicade, Food Stamps, and WIC, and other social benefits.
A sizable percentage of US citizens have a self damaging desire to go back to the 1950's or even better, the late 1800's.
That is indeed possible to take the USA to the conditions of the late 1800's. Problem is, the conditions of that time will be pretty much third world.
The forest was disappearning, erosion scouring the soil down to the rocks. But the trees kept voting for the axe, because it had a wooden handle. That made them think "It was one of us!"
Does that sound like some fellow who has spent over 30 years dealing with third wavers?
Well, yeah, it does... Your arguments seem to focus on them as a group rather than on specific arguments that are considered part of the third wave movement.
Look at it from my point of view, as someone trying to debate with you. You say "third wave feminists did/think/said X". Okay, what am I supposed to do with that?
You can agree, or disagree. One of the first issues that you might ask is why do I dislike third wave feminists. Because then we can go into more reasons.
Certainly their ease with castigating white males is not even my major issue with them.
My major issue is that they espouse the idea of the weak woman - so weak that Victorian women would call them sissies.
These are women for whom winking at them is sexual harassment and damages them. Just as an example. THat is remarkably weak.
The thing I find interesting is a I married an actual strong woman, who would go toe to toe with men, and who wouldn't put up with any BS. But it was actual BS, not winking. Her paycheck and mine were similar - She was actually paid more than the business owner.
Because she was worth that to the business. The men she supervised listened to her without question. And she never pulled the woman card.
So yeah, I'm all about equality. But kowtowing to weakness such as third wavers demand must be served is a sure fire path to failure.
There is a difference between equality and equity.
I can only defend my own position or discuss the ideas of third wave feminism in general.
Well then defend. I'm kind of wishing you would. Let's start - should the statutes of limitation and due process be waived, and a man lose his livelihood if he does anything that a woman defines as sexual harassment, including things like winking at her, asking her out on a date?
Should all employees be paid the same based on sex? Should pay based on output be eliminated? Shoulds women get preferential hiring?
Lotta good stuff to debate.
I can't defend or even really speculate about the motives of individuals I don't know and have not met, and with respect about whom I only have your side of the story.
If you want to discuss something like intersectionality or transmisogyny then that's fine, or if you want to identify a specific organization that has some published material (web site, manifesto etc.) so I can at least evaluate them myself then please do.
I recall times posting many links for you. I also recall you telling me you were too busy to look at them.
But general complaints about "third wave feminists have been calling me a racist/sexist for 30 years" isn't really an argument... It's a complaint at best.
Actually, I have had very little problem with being called misogynist by third wavers. There is a lot you can tell about people by simply watching and listening. If somoeone comes in with fire in their eyes, I only need to hear them speak for a while. I was raised by the fire in the eyes crowd. In person, I know when to keep my mouth shut when dealing with people who can harm me if I open it. So left and right wing, when in person, they know me as the quiet guy.
When the slightest disagreement gets you declared as a misogynist and you know you are playing havoc with your career, you tend to practice avoidance rather than debate.
So are you retired, or is Ol Olsoc a pseudonym, or do third wave feminists just not read Slashdot?
I'm retired. My colleagues tell me the situation hasn't improved. But as noted before, I did not debate with them - I only watched what happened to any man who was stupid enough to debate them.
How? Because the U.S. isn't and wasn't intended to be a National Democracy. The most votes isn't the only thing which determines decisions. Protection of minority and individual rights against a tyranny of the majority is built into our system of government.
There is a big difference between protecting the rights of minorities and rule by minorities.
While you completely accept as non-racist and non sexist when somoene on your side talks about a particular sex and particular race being sexist and racist
No, I absolutely reject that. That's my point, I would never say anything like that, and I don't know why you think I would.
Let's back up a moment. You wrote:
"You may think it's true, it may even be true, but all it does it poison the well. It makes debate difficult when you start by attacking some unspecified proportion of a poorly defined group who are not around to defend themselves, and it's a logical fallacy when you use it to support your own arguments."
Does that sound like some fellow who has spent over 30 years dealing with third wavers? I even worked enthusiastically with trying to get young women involved with STEM, mainly the science and engineering end.
And I'll repeat, there is no debating the topic. Disagreeing with a third waver is dangerous for a male. The best you can do is being called a sexist. The worst you can do is they march off to human resources, and demand they "do something about that misogynist."
You quoted some text... But it's just me talking about trying to avoid things that screw up debate.
Yeah, and for the umpteenth time, there is No debate. When the slightest disagreement gets you declared as a misogynist and you know you are playing havoc with your career, you tend to practice avoidance rather than debate.
I'm not certain if you have spent much time in an academic environment. At one point this was a place to be exposed to different viewpoints. Controversial speakers did the circuits and you got to hear and speak with them. It was fun. Getting to ask Anne Coulter questions or get entertained with Bill Maher's caustic and politically incorrect humor was a blast. It was interesting to hear from Gloria Steinham. I could never quite get behind her stated belief that "A woman needs a man like a Fish needs a bicycle".
Today, Jerry freaking Seinfeld is too controversial for college campuses. Have an opinion that is not in lockstep with the third wavers, and you will be banned from speaking. And if not banned, you'll have protesters outside trying to deny access to your talk.
The situation has improved ever so slightly, as college administrators have finally figured out that the agents of outrage do not stop. Today Anne Coulter and Bill Maher, next Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock. Tomorrow?
Saying that many third wave feminists are racist and sexist has plenty of evidence to show that to be the truth. I've done enough research to see that.
Yeah, see that's problematic. You may think it's true, it may even be true, but all it does it poison the well. It makes debate difficult when you start by attacking some unspecified proportion of a poorly defined group who are not around to defend themselves, and it's a logical fallacy when you use it to support your own arguments.
Yeah see, you make some prejudicial statements about me.
I've worked in a University environment for over 30 years. That puts me in the direct line of third wave feminists. And in that environment when the lady talks - you listen. There is no such thing as debate. I wanted to keep my career.
Worse, after all the complaining about "SJWs" calling everyone racist and sexist... Well, you are pretty loose with those terms too.
You see - you use the same tactics. While you completely accept as non-racist and non sexist when somoene on your side talks about a particular sex and particular race being sexist and racist, you will not allow another person to point out that the very statement is sexist and rscist.
You prove my point excellently - I am not supposed to debate. I am supposed to nod my head and accept it. And any other opinion is verboten.
It seems odd to me that you would get that impression from what I wrote. It's very difficult to have a discussion when the other person takes what you say in the worst possible light rather than trying to understand your position and assuming good faith.
I do understand that some people would find that odd. Perhaps I can illustrate
Saying that many white people in America have had a problem with Racism is not a racist statement.
Saying White Americans are racist surely is. Saying that white supremacists are racist is not racist - it's in their descriptive name
Saying that women are sexist is surely sexist and prejudicial.
Saying that many third wave feminists are racist and sexist has plenty of evidence to show that to be the truth. I've done enough research to see that.
People with light pigmentation can be racist. People with dark pigmentation can be racist. Males can be sexist. Females can be sexist.
As an American, I have much of the baggage of our highly racist past. So I double parse my statements to try to make certain I don't say something stupid.
As a person who believes in the equality of the sexes with equitable opportunity, I have been left behind by the female supremacist racist and sexist attitude of third wave feminism. Yet this is not a blanket condemnation. I can make the decision on whether a woman is racist or sexist after interacting with her a while.
So I try to be color blind, and I try to be gender blind. The reason I go on about third wave feminism is merely warning people that where they end up might not be where they think they are going.
And finally, who is likely to be right - a person who weighs everything or the person who is so completely certain of their ideology that no criticism is allowed.
Because that no criticism allowed dogma is how ideologues can believe that they can make clearly racist and sexist commentary that through the magic of ideology, are not racist or sexist. Its the difference between wanting to fix the problem and wanting to just win.
What is mean it's, can you really just swap the words white and black to determine if something is racist, or are there things that are dependent on historic actions?
It of course is dependent on circumstances. But if a derogatory remark about any race or sex is made, it is racist. or sexist or both.
It seems odd to me that you would single out "white" people as being exempt from racism and racial slurs. Am I so naive to think that if a person professes to be non-racist that they would not pre-judge people by the color of their skin or the accident of birth that determines their gender?
Or am I cynical enough to believe that these people are simply just as racist as the people they hate, and simply believe that they are right, so the ends and any end at all - justifies their hatred, and lying about to others, and worse, themselves, is a perfectly acceptable thing to do because their cause is just.
Then again, I sometimes have trouble understanding the far left and far right. They have different targets for their hatred, but their minds appear to have the same need to hate other humans that they never met. Because they think they know all about them. Probably based on fear of "the other".
Don't you think that there might be some historic context though?
Hell yeah. There has been some real atrocities performed by white people. The USA has an ongoing racial problem. The Germans in World War 2 and the events leading up to it were terribly racist. Europe has gone through some horrible ethnic cleansing efforts even since then.
But the problem isn't "white people" or "white men". Ask a Korean about how they feel about the Japanese. Ask the Armenians about the Turks. Ask the Tutsi about the Hutus. There might be a local genocide in the offing in Africa as the South African national Assembly has voted by a huge margin to allow confistcation of white owned property https://www.thetribunepapers.c... . Shades of 1930's Germany.
So here is where we find ourselves. In the USA, white people are going to find themsleves in a minority in the not too distant future.
And as the far left is allowing itself to delude itself that white males are the problem, and that somehow racism in the pursuit of eliminating racism will somehow work. perhaps we'll be dealing with that sort of thing in the future.
It's just a case of becoming what you hate. For your reading pleasure, these people care about the end results of racism, be it left or right http://www.genocidewatch.org/
Problem is, every time the far left gets caught in some racist and sexist moment. it automagically becomes a joke
Or maybe, just maybe, right wingers are unable to comprehend jokes and humor?
You'l have to ask a right winger. I just speak truth to either side.
"Yes, did you see? She wore a T-shirt captioned "I bathe in male tears!" She must hate men!"
That is a whole awful lot of semen to take a bath in! Because Male tears is slang for male ejaculate.
So... you think the "white male lead is a problem" thing was serious, huh?
Here's the issue. If you can simply say that anything that blows up in your face is a joke - Then the kooks on the right can say that Their disgrace as a president was just joking when he bragged about grabbing women by the pussy.
Sorry muchacho - you want special privileges. Just like the far right does.
It doesn't matter one bathtub of male tears what I think - although that must have been one hell of a bukake moment, amirite?
You don't think... given how improbable it is that someone would say "Movies are failing because they do something almost every movie has done since Harold Lloyd was hanging from clocks at the top of tall buildings, and how similar the criticism is to the protests of the manosphere against movies like Rogue One with merely the roles reversed, that it might have been a joke?
One thing I've found is that neither the far left or far right have much of a sense of humor. While the middle left does indeed make the best humor, the extremes are too full of themselves to actually be funny. It tends to come out as either sadistic or bitter.
I'd make a joke about it, but you'd probably take me seriously...
Sorry squiggleslash - I definitely do not take you seriously.
When you replace an existing white male character with a black woman for no other purpose than getting rid of the white male character that is both sexist and racist.
But I guess that's alight because, you know, white men deserve it.
Right - when it becomes gratuitous, or even worse taunting.
When it comes to racism and sexism, we all have things to learn. But both far left and far right reject that their position is racist and sexist. That in itself is a big clue.
Many (most?) IOT devices require Internets access in order to function. Here's a more practical and common example of iot devices: IP security cameras. Few and far between are the IP cam's you can use without internet connectivity.
Another example? Streaming video player devices.. guess where they stream content from? Want a thermostat that trends your cooling data, crunches the numbers, and attempts to reduce your power consumption? it's going to send that data off to a server farm for number crunching. There's a long list.
Then you accept that hackers will pwn you and the risk is worth it.
Problem is, every time the far left gets caught in some racist and sexist moment. it automagically becomes a joke
Funny. Every time a kerfluffle about sexism starts online it's you manbabies crying "bitches can't take a joke"
Take your projection, and stuff it up your arse, you bigoted wanker.
Do tell us more - Also consider posting as an AC - I do understand that you are racist and sexist - I am firmly in the middle, and you left wing kooks merely serve to entertain me. As do the Right Wingnuts, it's especially fun to see you at each other's throats.
Sorry, but from a not idelogical perspective you are teh same thing as those you coonsider your enemies - A racist sexist bigot. Now get back to making me laugh sparky - it's raining here, and I'm stuck at the computer with the need to piss someone off - and you show potential, muchacho.
Who are "they"? Do you have a link to them saying this?
All the reviews I have read say it flopped because it was not a very good movie.
I'm curious - is serviscope_minor a sock puppet of yours? Just noticed after I ignore that one's posts, you pop up. And there are some similarities, except he's much ruder, and fun to ignore.
But I've seen a litany of reasons. But only a few touched on fan revolt.
But that was the one that was about a straight white male... Surely if diversity was the problem then the other three new-era films would have flopped and Solo would have been a huge success.
Maybe it's just not a very good film, or we have reached Star Wars saturation point.
No, the sequence of events was that after Rogue one, there was some murmering among the fans regarding the direction the franchise was taking. That was the time that Kennedy told the world that she wasn't there to serve men.
Next up, the Last Jedi was simply a lame film. Yes, there were some social Justice aspects, but also some awful plot lines, and some simply ridiculous parts of the movie. Think Princess Leia's Mary Poppins debacle. Now there have been some not so good Star Wars films in the past, but Kennedy et al met any criticism with condescension. A complaint is a gift, and they refused the gift. So the fans who complained simply said they were going to stay way. And they did.
As I noted in another post, Disney and Kennedy can turn the Star Wars Franchise into an intergalactic RuPaul's Drag Race, or here comes Honey Boo-Boo In Orbit if they like. They own the rights.
But don't blame the male fans after chasing them away. Oh - plenty of female Star Wars fans stayed home as well.
I think this could be the first time I've ever seen a genuine "SJW" in the wild. Someone who makes spurious accusations of racism and bigotry and is easily offended.
Unless... You are not being serious. I can't tell. May be a skilful troll.
90 percent troll. But when you want to tell if a person is racist - review their comments and replace white with black, and men with women and review. If the new statement is racist or sexist - the original one is too. That isn't spurious unless you support racism and sexism against white males - and just don't recognize it.
And I'm actually pretty hard to offend - but I don't at all mind offending others - especially if the purposeful offending statement carries the truth. Otherwise, I am happy to sit and watch the far left and far right accuse each other of whatever offends them at the moment, not understanding that they are looking in a mirror, and mereely seeing their own reflections.
So far the more diverse Star Wars have done well at the box office, it's the one about a white guy that flopped.
Or was it the annoying android?
A lot of Star Wars fans we not pleased with the direction that the movies were taking. And it wasn't merely the social justice aspect. It was that the story lines were getting rather bad, and plot holes, and a few things that made no sense. Taking a new Jedi and turning this new into a Mary Sue character, or Marty Stu if you please just annoys people - In addition, the people involved with producing the movies were pretty dismissive of any criticism. As Kathleen Sullivan noted:
"I have a responsibility to the company that I work with. I don’t feel that I have a responsibility to cater in some way. I would never just seize on saying, 'Well, this is a franchise that’s appealed primarily to men for many, many years, and therefore I owe men something.'"
That's pretty offensive. I've seen a lot of female Star Wars fans - many of them who are pissed at the new direction. But here's the interesting part - while giving lip service to her responsibility to the company she works with, does she not have the responsibility to make that company money? When she gave her giant "Fuck you!" to the fans who put the Star Wars franchise where it was - both male and female fans.
Movies and comics are entertainment, and nothing else. You pick an audience and produce works that you believe will attract them to give you money in return for being entertained. Kennedy and Disney are allowed to Change Star Wars into an intergalactic version of Glee if they so wish. But will the people they have chosen to be their new audience give their money just like the audience they discarded?
There is a vanishingly small but no zero chance that the reason that Solo failed was because it had a white man as the leading character. While that might be the case, you will need to explain how other movies with white male lead characters have excelled and made a lot of money for their producers in the same time period that somehow people decided that Solo needed to fail. Hard to defend the argument. Occam's razor says that since a lot of fans who were upset at being chased away and were vocal about it did exactly what they said they would do.
It all comes down to this. The people that Disney needs to replace the people they abandoned need to step up and pay it forward. Solo, which was apparently a decent movie after Ron Howard took over and recued it from the disaster it was heading to after the people Kennedy used to produce it, was ignored by the abandoned fans, while the new socially conscious fans did not replace them.
The movie is going to lose between 50 and 80 million dollars in the end. Disney will need to decide if they want to lose that much money in order to appease those who demand that matters that happened in a far away galaxy a long time ago must have 21st century social justice issues at the expense of good storytelling or not.
One thing is for certain. The old Star Wars movies were pretty certain to generate a lot of money, and Disney and Lucasfilms could demand a lot of money and length of showing from the theaters. I suspect they will need to lessen the demands - a lot.
It is quite a funny snark, yes. And was similar to my thinking, who uses cheques these days, and why?
While checks are becoming less and less common, there are a number of things going on that still use them. Certainly the bank that we have that line of credit through has a procedure. You apply for the line of credit, and the way it works is that they create a checking account that just sits there. If for some reason you need money quickly - say you are the winning bid on some real estate auction, you write a check out to the auctioneer. The money is transferred into the checking account when he deposits it, and as a line of credit, it is treated as a loan against whatever collateral you provided.
There are a lot of outdated technologies that a person might be called upon to use. As the executor of my father's estate, I used a Fax machine - a lot. Not because I reveled in the past, or needed a new well dig in my village, but because I had the choice of either faxing documents or hand delivering them. That would have been an interesting road trip across the country. A couple times.
Do you have the ability to just type a bank branch & person's account number into your banking app (or bank website) and transfer money, for free, that way? It may take a business day or two to show up in their account, unless you both use the same bank, but it works and has no fee, you transfer $101.01, they get $101.01.
I have a lot of different ways to pay. Credit card, gas card, PayPal, ApplePay, regular checking account, LOC checking account, or even cash. If the seller has online presence, I'll use that.
The determinant of how I pay is not me - it is the person I am paying. If it were me, I'd put everything but fuel on my cashback card. Since I pay the thing off every month, that gives me a 2 percent discount on almost everything I buy.
Really, that 'white male lead is the problem' meme started as fucking joke in progressive circles. I was there, I saw the first appearance of it, and I had to chuckle, as I just knew the screams of rage that would cause from the knuckle-dragging basement dwellers.
As you just went on to prove. Thank you.
Problem is, every time the far left gets caught in some racist and sexist moment. it automagically becomes a joke
But allow this knuckle dragger to go on here.
We live in an age where one's commentary lives forever once on the internet.
It is not remotely difficult to find examples of people claiming that white men are the problem a simple DDG search or Google search will provide examples - try it
Here's one that is an interesting read https://www.huffingtonpost.com... Authored by a woman of African descent, it is both racist and has a kernal of truth in it.
I'm bored now - you want any more do the work yourself.
Are there people that are considered "white" who are obvious racists? Oh hell yes. And history is littered with their crimes.
But yes Virginia, there are people of all races and creeds and political affiliations that are racist. "white" is considered a race. Men are considered a sex. Unless you are referring to medical issues that might affect one group over another like the issues fair skinned people have in tropical sunny environments to issues faced by people with dark pigmentation face with Vitamin D shortage in northern environments, referring to angry white men is the same as referring to angry black men.
And y'all can deny you are racist just as well as the guy who likes to dress in bedsheets and burn crosses on the lawns of people they have identified by race.
tl;dr version: The far left shouldn't make jokes that look and read exactly how they feel. If you make a "joke" that reads exactly how people who are serious racists write, you'll have to forgive people who look at your "joke" and believe you mean the same.
Slashdot Mirror
well heres where people are going to chime in basically saying "take every penny from rich people" and wanting to remove the incentive to get rich in the first place. meaning innovation goes out the window.
Are you high Dude? Sorry, I couldn't resist. 8^)
you guys need to study economics and business. UBI is a pie in the sky dream. National economies are systems of systems. Mess with one aspect and the others are affected. To pay for UBI, you have to raise taxes. Raising taxes raises costs. The more it costs to live the more you have to pay out in UBI. UBI is an unsustainable model.
So what is your model?
So we have creeping automation that is working its way up the social-economic ladder. This is happening.
The why of that fact is that the users of that automation find it profitable to eliminate the cost of employing people.
Now it is pretty incontestable that if the trend continues - and it will - at some point, we will hit a unpleasant point where manufacturers cannot squeak more profit out of a system that has been made very lean, coupled with and overall economy in which most of the population is nothing more than a drain.
So if we use the current model, there will be a need for a massive culling of the non-employable. The method of achieving an 80 percent reduction of worldwide population has to be carefully managed.
The nuclear option is crude and injures the people who are deemed worthy of continued existence - it isn't to say we won't use it - humans can be remarkably stupid.
Natural die - off coupled with tight population control is very slow.
If we are going to use traditional thinking, we are going to have a creepy "final solution" applied to the population at large. It will be grimly amusing to watch people's racism as they choose who to eliminate.
But there will be billions lost as industries that were feeding those billions lose the source of their government income, which was providing food and shelter for the useless and now dead surplus population.. They aren't going to like that.
This is a massively complicated issue. 19th century economics will not solve it. Our lizard brain is not going to solve it.
And many of the people who foam at the mouth railng about how much they hate socialism are collecting Social Security,Disability benefits, Medicare, Medicade, Food Stamps, and WIC, and other social benefits.
And the angry mobe pissed at everyone receiving social benefits but they fully deserve theirs - sometimes they have mod points.
We get it. Today's crypto conservatives are suffering from Red Queen syndrome:
"Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
Anyone storing private information is liable 100% for its unauthorized release.
They would be completely on the hook for compensating any losses and remediating any financial fallout.
Remember though, that places like Facebook have a lot of authorized releases. I don't know if you ever go there, but everyone there has friends who take "intelligence tests" or personality tests which then post something like "Billy is a great friend, but a terrible enemy", or "If you can't handle suzy at her worst, you don't deserve her at her best". Stupid shit like that. These doofuses went to some website suggested by Facebook, then plugged in a bunch of personal data, and got a response that gratifies their self-absorption, while the people sponsoring that site take that personal info, and weaponize it. Purely voluntary - even wanted by these dolts, and not political until weaponized. And if for a moment, we ignore the people who it helped and hurt this past election cycle, this is merely a weapon exposed by the Russians and outfits like Cambridge Analytica, and now Russian operatives like Wikileaks founder Assange - look for him to head out to hide in the land of the people he helped - these weapons were simply available. So they were used. The real hat trick is the next several election cycles, when the party who gleefully accepted the confusion and outcome might be run through by a pike of their own forging. Being neither Democrat nor Republican, My gaddamned popcorn is mighty tasty these days.
The United States literally has Social Security benefits. USA is much more socialist than say India. In India you dont work you starve. Elon was able to create SpaceX because he lives in a socialist country which catches you if you try something and fail.
And many of the people who foam at the mouth railng about how much they hate socialism are collecting Social Security,Disability benefits, Medicare, Medicade, Food Stamps, and WIC, and other social benefits.
A sizable percentage of US citizens have a self damaging desire to go back to the 1950's or even better, the late 1800's.
That is indeed possible to take the USA to the conditions of the late 1800's. Problem is, the conditions of that time will be pretty much third world.
The forest was disappearning, erosion scouring the soil down to the rocks. But the trees kept voting for the axe, because it had a wooden handle. That made them think "It was one of us!"
Does that sound like some fellow who has spent over 30 years dealing with third wavers?
Well, yeah, it does... Your arguments seem to focus on them as a group rather than on specific arguments that are considered part of the third wave movement.
Look at it from my point of view, as someone trying to debate with you. You say "third wave feminists did/think/said X". Okay, what am I supposed to do with that?
You can agree, or disagree. One of the first issues that you might ask is why do I dislike third wave feminists. Because then we can go into more reasons.
Certainly their ease with castigating white males is not even my major issue with them.
My major issue is that they espouse the idea of the weak woman - so weak that Victorian women would call them sissies.
These are women for whom winking at them is sexual harassment and damages them. Just as an example. THat is remarkably weak.
The thing I find interesting is a I married an actual strong woman, who would go toe to toe with men, and who wouldn't put up with any BS. But it was actual BS, not winking. Her paycheck and mine were similar - She was actually paid more than the business owner.
Because she was worth that to the business. The men she supervised listened to her without question. And she never pulled the woman card.
So yeah, I'm all about equality. But kowtowing to weakness such as third wavers demand must be served is a sure fire path to failure.
There is a difference between equality and equity.
I can only defend my own position or discuss the ideas of third wave feminism in general.
Well then defend. I'm kind of wishing you would. Let's start - should the statutes of limitation and due process be waived, and a man lose his livelihood if he does anything that a woman defines as sexual harassment, including things like winking at her, asking her out on a date?
Should all employees be paid the same based on sex? Should pay based on output be eliminated? Shoulds women get preferential hiring?
Lotta good stuff to debate.
I can't defend or even really speculate about the motives of individuals I don't know and have not met, and with respect about whom I only have your side of the story.
If you want to discuss something like intersectionality or transmisogyny then that's fine, or if you want to identify a specific organization that has some published material (web site, manifesto etc.) so I can at least evaluate them myself then please do.
I recall times posting many links for you. I also recall you telling me you were too busy to look at them.
But general complaints about "third wave feminists have been calling me a racist/sexist for 30 years" isn't really an argument... It's a complaint at best.
Actually, I have had very little problem with being called misogynist by third wavers. There is a lot you can tell about people by simply watching and listening. If somoeone comes in with fire in their eyes, I only need to hear them speak for a while. I was raised by the fire in the eyes crowd. In person, I know when to keep my mouth shut when dealing with people who can harm me if I open it. So left and right wing, when in person, they know me as the quiet guy.
When the slightest disagreement gets you declared as a misogynist and you know you are playing havoc with your career, you tend to practice avoidance rather than debate.
So are you retired, or is Ol Olsoc a pseudonym, or do third wave feminists just not read Slashdot?
I'm retired. My colleagues tell me the situation hasn't improved. But as noted before, I did not debate with them - I only watched what happened to any man who was stupid enough to debate them.
How? Because the U.S. isn't and wasn't intended to be a National Democracy. The most votes isn't the only thing which determines decisions. Protection of minority and individual rights against a tyranny of the majority is built into our system of government.
There is a big difference between protecting the rights of minorities and rule by minorities.
While you completely accept as non-racist and non sexist when somoene on your side talks about a particular sex and particular race being sexist and racist
No, I absolutely reject that. That's my point, I would never say anything like that, and I don't know why you think I would.
Let's back up a moment. You wrote:
"You may think it's true, it may even be true, but all it does it poison the well. It makes debate difficult when you start by attacking some unspecified proportion of a poorly defined group who are not around to defend themselves, and it's a logical fallacy when you use it to support your own arguments."
Does that sound like some fellow who has spent over 30 years dealing with third wavers? I even worked enthusiastically with trying to get young women involved with STEM, mainly the science and engineering end.
And I'll repeat, there is no debating the topic. Disagreeing with a third waver is dangerous for a male. The best you can do is being called a sexist. The worst you can do is they march off to human resources, and demand they "do something about that misogynist."
You quoted some text... But it's just me talking about trying to avoid things that screw up debate.
Yeah, and for the umpteenth time, there is No debate. When the slightest disagreement gets you declared as a misogynist and you know you are playing havoc with your career, you tend to practice avoidance rather than debate.
I'm not certain if you have spent much time in an academic environment. At one point this was a place to be exposed to different viewpoints. Controversial speakers did the circuits and you got to hear and speak with them. It was fun. Getting to ask Anne Coulter questions or get entertained with Bill Maher's caustic and politically incorrect humor was a blast. It was interesting to hear from Gloria Steinham. I could never quite get behind her stated belief that "A woman needs a man like a Fish needs a bicycle".
Today, Jerry freaking Seinfeld is too controversial for college campuses. Have an opinion that is not in lockstep with the third wavers, and you will be banned from speaking. And if not banned, you'll have protesters outside trying to deny access to your talk.
The situation has improved ever so slightly, as college administrators have finally figured out that the agents of outrage do not stop. Today Anne Coulter and Bill Maher, next Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock. Tomorrow?
Saying that many third wave feminists are racist and sexist has plenty of evidence to show that to be the truth. I've done enough research to see that.
Yeah, see that's problematic. You may think it's true, it may even be true, but all it does it poison the well. It makes debate difficult when you start by attacking some unspecified proportion of a poorly defined group who are not around to defend themselves, and it's a logical fallacy when you use it to support your own arguments.
Yeah see, you make some prejudicial statements about me.
I've worked in a University environment for over 30 years. That puts me in the direct line of third wave feminists. And in that environment when the lady talks - you listen. There is no such thing as debate. I wanted to keep my career.
Worse, after all the complaining about "SJWs" calling everyone racist and sexist... Well, you are pretty loose with those terms too.
You see - you use the same tactics. While you completely accept as non-racist and non sexist when somoene on your side talks about a particular sex and particular race being sexist and racist, you will not allow another person to point out that the very statement is sexist and rscist.
You prove my point excellently - I am not supposed to debate. I am supposed to nod my head and accept it. And any other opinion is verboten.
"You are the real racists!!!11!!". Wonderful. Two more and I have Bingo.
You'll get there, I have faith in you.
It seems odd to me that you would get that impression from what I wrote. It's very difficult to have a discussion when the other person takes what you say in the worst possible light rather than trying to understand your position and assuming good faith.
I do understand that some people would find that odd. Perhaps I can illustrate
Saying that many white people in America have had a problem with Racism is not a racist statement.
Saying White Americans are racist surely is. Saying that white supremacists are racist is not racist - it's in their descriptive name
Saying that women are sexist is surely sexist and prejudicial.
Saying that many third wave feminists are racist and sexist has plenty of evidence to show that to be the truth. I've done enough research to see that.
People with light pigmentation can be racist. People with dark pigmentation can be racist. Males can be sexist. Females can be sexist.
As an American, I have much of the baggage of our highly racist past. So I double parse my statements to try to make certain I don't say something stupid.
As a person who believes in the equality of the sexes with equitable opportunity, I have been left behind by the female supremacist racist and sexist attitude of third wave feminism. Yet this is not a blanket condemnation. I can make the decision on whether a woman is racist or sexist after interacting with her a while.
So I try to be color blind, and I try to be gender blind. The reason I go on about third wave feminism is merely warning people that where they end up might not be where they think they are going.
And finally, who is likely to be right - a person who weighs everything or the person who is so completely certain of their ideology that no criticism is allowed.
Because that no criticism allowed dogma is how ideologues can believe that they can make clearly racist and sexist commentary that through the magic of ideology, are not racist or sexist. Its the difference between wanting to fix the problem and wanting to just win.
What is mean it's, can you really just swap the words white and black to determine if something is racist, or are there things that are dependent on historic actions?
It of course is dependent on circumstances. But if a derogatory remark about any race or sex is made, it is racist. or sexist or both.
It seems odd to me that you would single out "white" people as being exempt from racism and racial slurs. Am I so naive to think that if a person professes to be non-racist that they would not pre-judge people by the color of their skin or the accident of birth that determines their gender?
Or am I cynical enough to believe that these people are simply just as racist as the people they hate, and simply believe that they are right, so the ends and any end at all - justifies their hatred, and lying about to others, and worse, themselves, is a perfectly acceptable thing to do because their cause is just. Then again, I sometimes have trouble understanding the far left and far right. They have different targets for their hatred, but their minds appear to have the same need to hate other humans that they never met. Because they think they know all about them. Probably based on fear of "the other".
Don't you think that there might be some historic context though?
Hell yeah. There has been some real atrocities performed by white people. The USA has an ongoing racial problem. The Germans in World War 2 and the events leading up to it were terribly racist. Europe has gone through some horrible ethnic cleansing efforts even since then.
But the problem isn't "white people" or "white men". Ask a Korean about how they feel about the Japanese. Ask the Armenians about the Turks. Ask the Tutsi about the Hutus. There might be a local genocide in the offing in Africa as the South African national Assembly has voted by a huge margin to allow confistcation of white owned property https://www.thetribunepapers.c... . Shades of 1930's Germany.
So here is where we find ourselves. In the USA, white people are going to find themsleves in a minority in the not too distant future.
And as the far left is allowing itself to delude itself that white males are the problem, and that somehow racism in the pursuit of eliminating racism will somehow work. perhaps we'll be dealing with that sort of thing in the future.
It's just a case of becoming what you hate. For your reading pleasure, these people care about the end results of racism, be it left or right http://www.genocidewatch.org/
Or maybe, just maybe, right wingers are unable to comprehend jokes and humor?
You'l have to ask a right winger. I just speak truth to either side.
"Yes, did you see? She wore a T-shirt captioned "I bathe in male tears!" She must hate men!"
That is a whole awful lot of semen to take a bath in! Because Male tears is slang for male ejaculate.
So... you think the "white male lead is a problem" thing was serious, huh?
Here's the issue. If you can simply say that anything that blows up in your face is a joke - Then the kooks on the right can say that Their disgrace as a president was just joking when he bragged about grabbing women by the pussy.
Sorry muchacho - you want special privileges. Just like the far right does.
It doesn't matter one bathtub of male tears what I think - although that must have been one hell of a bukake moment, amirite?
You don't think... given how improbable it is that someone would say "Movies are failing because they do something almost every movie has done since Harold Lloyd was hanging from clocks at the top of tall buildings, and how similar the criticism is to the protests of the manosphere against movies like Rogue One with merely the roles reversed, that it might have been a joke?
One thing I've found is that neither the far left or far right have much of a sense of humor. While the middle left does indeed make the best humor, the extremes are too full of themselves to actually be funny. It tends to come out as either sadistic or bitter.
I'd make a joke about it, but you'd probably take me seriously...
Sorry squiggleslash - I definitely do not take you seriously.
When you replace an existing white male character with a black woman for no other purpose than getting rid of the white male character that is both sexist and racist.
But I guess that's alight because, you know, white men deserve it.
Right - when it becomes gratuitous, or even worse taunting.
When it comes to racism and sexism, we all have things to learn. But both far left and far right reject that their position is racist and sexist. That in itself is a big clue.
Many (most?) IOT devices require Internets access in order to function. Here's a more practical and common example of iot devices: IP security cameras. Few and far between are the IP cam's you can use without internet connectivity. Another example? Streaming video player devices.. guess where they stream content from? Want a thermostat that trends your cooling data, crunches the numbers, and attempts to reduce your power consumption? it's going to send that data off to a server farm for number crunching. There's a long list.
Then you accept that hackers will pwn you and the risk is worth it.
Funny. Every time a kerfluffle about sexism starts online it's you manbabies crying "bitches can't take a joke"
Take your projection, and stuff it up your arse, you bigoted wanker.
Do tell us more - Also consider posting as an AC - I do understand that you are racist and sexist - I am firmly in the middle, and you left wing kooks merely serve to entertain me. As do the Right Wingnuts, it's especially fun to see you at each other's throats.
Sorry, but from a not idelogical perspective you are teh same thing as those you coonsider your enemies - A racist sexist bigot. Now get back to making me laugh sparky - it's raining here, and I'm stuck at the computer with the need to piss someone off - and you show potential, muchacho.
Who are "they"? Do you have a link to them saying this?
All the reviews I have read say it flopped because it was not a very good movie.
I'm curious - is serviscope_minor a sock puppet of yours? Just noticed after I ignore that one's posts, you pop up. And there are some similarities, except he's much ruder, and fun to ignore.
But I've seen a litany of reasons. But only a few touched on fan revolt.
But that was the one that was about a straight white male... Surely if diversity was the problem then the other three new-era films would have flopped and Solo would have been a huge success.
Maybe it's just not a very good film, or we have reached Star Wars saturation point.
No, the sequence of events was that after Rogue one, there was some murmering among the fans regarding the direction the franchise was taking. That was the time that Kennedy told the world that she wasn't there to serve men.
Next up, the Last Jedi was simply a lame film. Yes, there were some social Justice aspects, but also some awful plot lines, and some simply ridiculous parts of the movie. Think Princess Leia's Mary Poppins debacle. Now there have been some not so good Star Wars films in the past, but Kennedy et al met any criticism with condescension. A complaint is a gift, and they refused the gift. So the fans who complained simply said they were going to stay way. And they did.
As I noted in another post, Disney and Kennedy can turn the Star Wars Franchise into an intergalactic RuPaul's Drag Race, or here comes Honey Boo-Boo In Orbit if they like. They own the rights.
But don't blame the male fans after chasing them away. Oh - plenty of female Star Wars fans stayed home as well.
I think this could be the first time I've ever seen a genuine "SJW" in the wild. Someone who makes spurious accusations of racism and bigotry and is easily offended.
Unless... You are not being serious. I can't tell. May be a skilful troll.
90 percent troll. But when you want to tell if a person is racist - review their comments and replace white with black, and men with women and review. If the new statement is racist or sexist - the original one is too. That isn't spurious unless you support racism and sexism against white males - and just don't recognize it.
And I'm actually pretty hard to offend - but I don't at all mind offending others - especially if the purposeful offending statement carries the truth. Otherwise, I am happy to sit and watch the far left and far right accuse each other of whatever offends them at the moment, not understanding that they are looking in a mirror, and mereely seeing their own reflections.
So far the more diverse Star Wars have done well at the box office, it's the one about a white guy that flopped.
Or was it the annoying android?
A lot of Star Wars fans we not pleased with the direction that the movies were taking. And it wasn't merely the social justice aspect. It was that the story lines were getting rather bad, and plot holes, and a few things that made no sense. Taking a new Jedi and turning this new into a Mary Sue character, or Marty Stu if you please just annoys people - In addition, the people involved with producing the movies were pretty dismissive of any criticism. As Kathleen Sullivan noted:
"I have a responsibility to the company that I work with. I don’t feel that I have a responsibility to cater in some way. I would never just seize on saying, 'Well, this is a franchise that’s appealed primarily to men for many, many years, and therefore I owe men something.'"
That's pretty offensive. I've seen a lot of female Star Wars fans - many of them who are pissed at the new direction. But here's the interesting part - while giving lip service to her responsibility to the company she works with, does she not have the responsibility to make that company money? When she gave her giant "Fuck you!" to the fans who put the Star Wars franchise where it was - both male and female fans.
Movies and comics are entertainment, and nothing else. You pick an audience and produce works that you believe will attract them to give you money in return for being entertained. Kennedy and Disney are allowed to Change Star Wars into an intergalactic version of Glee if they so wish. But will the people they have chosen to be their new audience give their money just like the audience they discarded?
There is a vanishingly small but no zero chance that the reason that Solo failed was because it had a white man as the leading character. While that might be the case, you will need to explain how other movies with white male lead characters have excelled and made a lot of money for their producers in the same time period that somehow people decided that Solo needed to fail. Hard to defend the argument. Occam's razor says that since a lot of fans who were upset at being chased away and were vocal about it did exactly what they said they would do.
It all comes down to this. The people that Disney needs to replace the people they abandoned need to step up and pay it forward. Solo, which was apparently a decent movie after Ron Howard took over and recued it from the disaster it was heading to after the people Kennedy used to produce it, was ignored by the abandoned fans, while the new socially conscious fans did not replace them.
The movie is going to lose between 50 and 80 million dollars in the end. Disney will need to decide if they want to lose that much money in order to appease those who demand that matters that happened in a far away galaxy a long time ago must have 21st century social justice issues at the expense of good storytelling or not. One thing is for certain. The old Star Wars movies were pretty certain to generate a lot of money, and Disney and Lucasfilms could demand a lot of money and length of showing from the theaters. I suspect they will need to lessen the demands - a lot.
It is quite a funny snark, yes. And was similar to my thinking, who uses cheques these days, and why?
While checks are becoming less and less common, there are a number of things going on that still use them. Certainly the bank that we have that line of credit through has a procedure. You apply for the line of credit, and the way it works is that they create a checking account that just sits there. If for some reason you need money quickly - say you are the winning bid on some real estate auction, you write a check out to the auctioneer. The money is transferred into the checking account when he deposits it, and as a line of credit, it is treated as a loan against whatever collateral you provided.
There are a lot of outdated technologies that a person might be called upon to use. As the executor of my father's estate, I used a Fax machine - a lot. Not because I reveled in the past, or needed a new well dig in my village, but because I had the choice of either faxing documents or hand delivering them. That would have been an interesting road trip across the country. A couple times.
Do you have the ability to just type a bank branch & person's account number into your banking app (or bank website) and transfer money, for free, that way? It may take a business day or two to show up in their account, unless you both use the same bank, but it works and has no fee, you transfer $101.01, they get $101.01.
I have a lot of different ways to pay. Credit card, gas card, PayPal, ApplePay, regular checking account, LOC checking account, or even cash. If the seller has online presence, I'll use that.
The determinant of how I pay is not me - it is the person I am paying. If it were me, I'd put everything but fuel on my cashback card. Since I pay the thing off every month, that gives me a 2 percent discount on almost everything I buy.
Really, that 'white male lead is the problem' meme started as fucking joke in progressive circles. I was there, I saw the first appearance of it, and I had to chuckle, as I just knew the screams of rage that would cause from the knuckle-dragging basement dwellers.
As you just went on to prove. Thank you.
Problem is, every time the far left gets caught in some racist and sexist moment. it automagically becomes a joke
But allow this knuckle dragger to go on here.
We live in an age where one's commentary lives forever once on the internet.
It is not remotely difficult to find examples of people claiming that white men are the problem a simple DDG search or Google search will provide examples - try it
Huff Post White Men Of Academia Have An ‘Objectivity’ Problem https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
White males are a problem population, according to Saida Grundy of Boston U. https://www.thenewamerican.com...
https://www.damemagazine.com/2...
Here's one that is an interesting read https://www.huffingtonpost.com... Authored by a woman of African descent, it is both racist and has a kernal of truth in it.
I'm bored now - you want any more do the work yourself.
Are there people that are considered "white" who are obvious racists? Oh hell yes. And history is littered with their crimes.
But yes Virginia, there are people of all races and creeds and political affiliations that are racist. "white" is considered a race. Men are considered a sex. Unless you are referring to medical issues that might affect one group over another like the issues fair skinned people have in tropical sunny environments to issues faced by people with dark pigmentation face with Vitamin D shortage in northern environments, referring to angry white men is the same as referring to angry black men.
And y'all can deny you are racist just as well as the guy who likes to dress in bedsheets and burn crosses on the lawns of people they have identified by race.
tl;dr version: The far left shouldn't make jokes that look and read exactly how they feel. If you make a "joke" that reads exactly how people who are serious racists write, you'll have to forgive people who look at your "joke" and believe you mean the same.
Yeah they did. They just don't like hearing about how they come across.
That's pretty sad. Not knowing one's self never works out well.
You just hate Jews, my dude.
Gal Gadot is a fucking Goddess... And she killed Muslims while in the IDF. That paired with her tits and ass makes her a one in a billion woman.
I had no idea she was Jewish. That's nice. Anyhow - good internet rage.
Linda Carter 2, Gal Gadot 1