Pessimism, f-ck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work.
I think someone has been watching too much Gordon Ramsey's Kitchen shows. Seriously, I find myself swearing at times (specially after a few late ones) but if I was making a public interview after my rocket basically fizzled, I think I would be able to knock it off for a tick.
Just because someone was 'emotionally weak' is no reason to excuse those who torment them. That's like saying that just because someone couldn't handle being shot at repeatedly that they 'deserved' to die.
I should have made it clear in my initial post. I am not saying the woman should not be put into a legal court to defend her actions. But it should be against a bullying charge - not a felony. She bullied. Her bullying aided/led to someone killing themselves. Charge her for bullying to the full extent. Don't charge her for murder.
knew the child was mentally ill and chose to provoke her, I think there should be consequences, but any such law should require preexisting knowledge of mental illness.
One in four people in America is mentally ill Citation. Now look at the number of people who bully one another, who are mean to one another - who are downright despicable to one another. You cannot charge one person solely because it has been a publicized case like this without looking and seeing that bullying/mean-hearted-ness is the norm rather than the exception. Then throw the weight of the entire legal system behind one person? No way.
would have had to have been exceptionally dense not to know that _something_ was going on.
Yup. But _something_ going on is not the same as a suicidal person. I bet there isn't a single teenager in the WORLD who can't be said to have _something_ going on, whether it is getting more mature, learning about relationships, a greater sexual exploration. Any and all of these things lead to different behavior.
Take someone with a weak heart, strap them in a roller coaster and they might die right there and then. Take someone emotionally unstable, strap them in an emotional roller coaster and them might die right there and then.
And if you did in fact give free amusement park tickets to someone with a weak heart, and they went on a roller coaster of their own free will, and they did in fact have a heart attack and die - would the person giving them the tickets be charged with a felony like in this case? Even if they knew the person had a weak heart? I doubt ANY charges would be laid and if they were a $20 lawyer would get them off scott free.
While I think this is a sad story, and I feel for all involved, I simply cannot agree that a new law should be made to handle this case and charge the mother. Yes - she did a horrible thing. Yes - it is likely a cause that pushed the teen over the edge. No - it could not have in any stretch of imagination been the one sole contributing factor to the death. A straw on the camels back? Perhaps. But I think that anyone can clearly see the failure of logic in charging someone for a felony for placing a straw on the camels back, when there is in fact a bulging load there already.
Speaking from personal experience, you don't get that depressed from a single person posting on a website/sending emails. You don't go from being a happy-go-lucky normal individual to a suicidal person overnight, over a month or likely even over a year. I started being depressed often from the age of about ten or eleven. I had a suicide attempt when I was twenty three. I do not blame anyone directly. I was in a bad place, and in retrospect the problem lay totally with ME. Why can't people learn to look at their own issues before pointing fingers and pushing blame to everyone else so quickly?
Firstly, I utterly disagree with your simplified and clearly exceptionally incorrect assumptions. You are only making yourself look uninformed.
If your child -- YOUR CHILD -- was depressed enough to commit suicide, how could you not know?
Most people who are severely depressed actually hide their feelings from others, which includes not letting people know they are suicidal. Have a quick read of things like Black Dog Institute to catch up to the rest of the world.
Secondly, I do in fact totally agree that the original case is bogus - which I assume is what you mean by your comments here. BUT I do once again need to point out here that this article is in fact about a case arguing that posing as someone who you aren't should not be a criminal offense. This article is NOT about the actual courtcase against the mother who drove the teen to suicide.
While I am not condoning tormenting someone like this, I don't believe that it could in fact be a murder trial from it. I feel very sorry for the teen that was in this, and I think that the mother has acted in a horrible way, but not in the same way as someone who picks up a knife/gun/whatever and stabs/shoots/whatever someone else till they die.
I mean seriously. The church kicked their great great... great grandfathers ass, and he was a kickass Knight Templar, and now this lot wants to have a big sook and cry about it? I mean really, what would a Knight Templar have to say about that? I dare say this new lot would get driven through by the original members just for the principle of it.
Machine: Uh oh, Jeremy stoped sticking his finger into his nose. I better call this one in!
Operator: Ummm... Why has it shown me Jeremy just sitting there?
Machine: Nope, there he goes again, digging away at his nose, everything back to normal. Better stop transmitting. ...
Machine: Whoa, he stopping barking for boogers again! Better show the boss!!
Operator: Why does this dumbass machine keep showing me Jeremy just sitting there for goodness sake...
Machine: Boss! Boss! Come on, look! DIFFERENT! ABNORMAL!
Operator: *Hmmm what's for lunch...*
Of course he does. For the most part. Ask any religious person if he exists. He has been around for a long time, mainly doing nothing much - but watching. Which is a little too convenient if you ask those non-religious types. So, he came along (or always existed) made us (just ask any American high school student) and has basically sat back and observed his (or her) little experiment plod along. Of course there is the other school of thinking that has God as a entity that we created so that we would not feel so amazingly alone in such a large and seemingly mysterious world.
It took several months for Snowy River to dry out, leaving scientists with another set of questions about where the water came from and where it went.
Well, it came in at one end of the cave, likely uphill from the other end. It then made it's way through the cave that is at the center of this puzzlement. Amazingly, and rather surprisingly it went out the other end of the cave, downhill from the aforementioned uphill part of the cave. That's also the opposite direction of where it came from. Next question please.
Yeah, loads of elbow room on a boat to sustain such rampant population growth as ours now? Enough resources on a GAS giant to build something that supports the weight of a city that houses a population? Unless you can build a city mined from the outer shell of a gas giant where the pressure is plausible, you are going to have to do a lot of trips with the U-Haul to get your material to the place to build your city. Sounds expensive to me. Sounds like it goes against the whole logic of making it worthwhile.
I have recently started reading just about anything Tad Williams which is utterly sensational. Otherland is a bit on the long side (four books, about 4-5000 pages all up) but is a wonderful blend of both sci-fci (short term future, earth based) and many other worlds (visited through a VR system) where the majority of the books unfold.
Really worth the read. It pulled my back into reading after years of not reading.
That there isn't any type of classification in between LAW and THEORY
Makes things like this sit in the same bucket as one of my drunken musings. "I have a theory that.... in..... etc". There should be a state of a theory where they can say "Well, we can't yet prove all of it, but we have managed to prove x amount, or in x years of testing, it has yet to be unproven".
Maybe term it Conjecture? It's the fitting word to use.
Considering that the "Entertainment Software Association" was listed as one plaintiff, it seems that this case was not levied in reality against the "buyers" but against the "sellers" of the software. Well, not actually even the sellers, but people associated with the selling and manufacture.
I am just a silly Slashie, but it seems to be like trying to sue the Motion Picture Association of America for when some kids sneak into cinema to watch an M rated movie if they are a few months shy of the age limit. Maybe sue Paramount because some teenage girls ducked in and saw Johnny Depp in Pirates III?
Recently Sweden's recent information tapping laws and this US take on labelling anything that has information as fair game to seize, copy and snoop one make for some creeping "big brother is watching you" wins.
Actually, I wasn't aware that any and all printed matter was able to be seized or copied when crossing borders. The article implies that this has been done to allow the same level of access across all media types, but that means that customs can just jump in and copy my diary when I enter the US? Why do I feel like I skipped a page in this unfolding story?
This is FANTASTIC news for operating systems competing with Windows.
The choices to a complete new users have just improved from an open source point of view:
a) Install Windows Vista. High system specs, buggy to use, even harder to fix, has stupid problems. Also very pricey.
b) Install Linux Distro. Low system specs, buggy to use, some things can be very difficult to fix, has techie aura surrounding it. Did someone say its free?
Gone is good old option c - just install XP which is pretty stable, just about everything works with it and anyone can fix it.
This isn't a broken window at all. The broken window assumes that both parties are in the same local region - quoting that exact story, the tailor and the glazier are both local men. Here, one part of the story is a local business (the steel mill for example) and it is competing with a totally unrelated foreign business. The distinguishing difference is that your money can either stay in your local area - meaning that you actually do gain something AND retain the money in a local enterprise - or it can leave for another distant business where you gain the goods in return for the money - but your local area does not benefit from the sale past that.
Slashdot Mirror
Pessimism, f-ck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work.
I think someone has been watching too much Gordon Ramsey's Kitchen shows. Seriously, I find myself swearing at times (specially after a few late ones) but if I was making a public interview after my rocket basically fizzled, I think I would be able to knock it off for a tick.
Fucking space cowboys!
Just because someone was 'emotionally weak' is no reason to excuse those who torment them. That's like saying that just because someone couldn't handle being shot at repeatedly that they 'deserved' to die.
I should have made it clear in my initial post. I am not saying the woman should not be put into a legal court to defend her actions. But it should be against a bullying charge - not a felony. She bullied. Her bullying aided/led to someone killing themselves. Charge her for bullying to the full extent. Don't charge her for murder.
knew the child was mentally ill and chose to provoke her, I think there should be consequences, but any such law should require preexisting knowledge of mental illness.
One in four people in America is mentally ill Citation. Now look at the number of people who bully one another, who are mean to one another - who are downright despicable to one another. You cannot charge one person solely because it has been a publicized case like this without looking and seeing that bullying/mean-hearted-ness is the norm rather than the exception. Then throw the weight of the entire legal system behind one person? No way.
would have had to have been exceptionally dense not to know that _something_ was going on.
Yup. But _something_ going on is not the same as a suicidal person. I bet there isn't a single teenager in the WORLD who can't be said to have _something_ going on, whether it is getting more mature, learning about relationships, a greater sexual exploration. Any and all of these things lead to different behavior.
Take someone with a weak heart, strap them in a roller coaster and they might die right there and then. Take someone emotionally unstable, strap them in an emotional roller coaster and them might die right there and then.
And if you did in fact give free amusement park tickets to someone with a weak heart, and they went on a roller coaster of their own free will, and they did in fact have a heart attack and die - would the person giving them the tickets be charged with a felony like in this case? Even if they knew the person had a weak heart? I doubt ANY charges would be laid and if they were a $20 lawyer would get them off scott free.
While I think this is a sad story, and I feel for all involved, I simply cannot agree that a new law should be made to handle this case and charge the mother. Yes - she did a horrible thing. Yes - it is likely a cause that pushed the teen over the edge. No - it could not have in any stretch of imagination been the one sole contributing factor to the death. A straw on the camels back? Perhaps. But I think that anyone can clearly see the failure of logic in charging someone for a felony for placing a straw on the camels back, when there is in fact a bulging load there already.
Speaking from personal experience, you don't get that depressed from a single person posting on a website/sending emails. You don't go from being a happy-go-lucky normal individual to a suicidal person overnight, over a month or likely even over a year. I started being depressed often from the age of about ten or eleven. I had a suicide attempt when I was twenty three. I do not blame anyone directly. I was in a bad place, and in retrospect the problem lay totally with ME. Why can't people learn to look at their own issues before pointing fingers and pushing blame to everyone else so quickly?
If your child -- YOUR CHILD -- was depressed enough to commit suicide, how could you not know?
Most people who are severely depressed actually hide their feelings from others, which includes not letting people know they are suicidal. Have a quick read of things like Black Dog Institute to catch up to the rest of the world.
Secondly, I do in fact totally agree that the original case is bogus - which I assume is what you mean by your comments here. BUT I do once again need to point out here that this article is in fact about a case arguing that posing as someone who you aren't should not be a criminal offense. This article is NOT about the actual courtcase against the mother who drove the teen to suicide.
While I am not condoning tormenting someone like this, I don't believe that it could in fact be a murder trial from it. I feel very sorry for the teen that was in this, and I think that the mother has acted in a horrible way, but not in the same way as someone who picks up a knife/gun/whatever and stabs/shoots/whatever someone else till they die.
Would make for better TV than "Think you can dance?" in my opinion.
I mean seriously. The church kicked their great great ... great grandfathers ass, and he was a kickass Knight Templar, and now this lot wants to have a big sook and cry about it? I mean really, what would a Knight Templar have to say about that? I dare say this new lot would get driven through by the original members just for the principle of it.
Stop crying Emo Templar.
Machine: Uh oh, Jeremy stoped sticking his finger into his nose. I better call this one in!
...
Operator: Ummm... Why has it shown me Jeremy just sitting there?
Machine: Nope, there he goes again, digging away at his nose, everything back to normal. Better stop transmitting.
Machine: Whoa, he stopping barking for boogers again! Better show the boss!!
Operator: Why does this dumbass machine keep showing me Jeremy just sitting there for goodness sake...
Machine: Boss! Boss! Come on, look! DIFFERENT! ABNORMAL!
Operator: *Hmmm what's for lunch...*
Of course he does. For the most part. Ask any religious person if he exists. He has been around for a long time, mainly doing nothing much - but watching. Which is a little too convenient if you ask those non-religious types. So, he came along (or always existed) made us (just ask any American high school student) and has basically sat back and observed his (or her) little experiment plod along. Of course there is the other school of thinking that has God as a entity that we created so that we would not feel so amazingly alone in such a large and seemingly mysterious world.
It took several months for Snowy River to dry out, leaving scientists with another set of questions about where the water came from and where it went.
Well, it came in at one end of the cave, likely uphill from the other end. It then made it's way through the cave that is at the center of this puzzlement. Amazingly, and rather surprisingly it went out the other end of the cave, downhill from the aforementioned uphill part of the cave. That's also the opposite direction of where it came from. Next question please.
relatively big lumps that were mostly stopped by the hairs in the nose (as any Londoner knows).
Hey, I've been to London, sometimes the REALLY big clumbs get blocked bot by your nose hair, but my your geezer teeth.
Algae ownage? I'd love to read that guy's thesis!
It likely contains lots of "Pow", "Kersplat" and "Cha-ching"'s
++ Common sense.
Yeah, loads of elbow room on a boat to sustain such rampant population growth as ours now? Enough resources on a GAS giant to build something that supports the weight of a city that houses a population? Unless you can build a city mined from the outer shell of a gas giant where the pressure is plausible, you are going to have to do a lot of trips with the U-Haul to get your material to the place to build your city. Sounds expensive to me. Sounds like it goes against the whole logic of making it worthwhile.
Is who shot first. Han or Greedo?
I have recently started reading just about anything Tad Williams which is utterly sensational. Otherland is a bit on the long side (four books, about 4-5000 pages all up) but is a wonderful blend of both sci-fci (short term future, earth based) and many other worlds (visited through a VR system) where the majority of the books unfold.
Really worth the read. It pulled my back into reading after years of not reading.
That there isn't any type of classification in between LAW and THEORY
Makes things like this sit in the same bucket as one of my drunken musings. "I have a theory that.... in..... etc". There should be a state of a theory where they can say "Well, we can't yet prove all of it, but we have managed to prove x amount, or in x years of testing, it has yet to be unproven".
Maybe term it Conjecture? It's the fitting word to use.
You Bluff.
You have been eaten by a Grue.
You die.
At that point you can say this to the electron:
You have been eaten by a grue.
You die.
Considering that the "Entertainment Software Association" was listed as one plaintiff, it seems that this case was not levied in reality against the "buyers" but against the "sellers" of the software. Well, not actually even the sellers, but people associated with the selling and manufacture.
I am just a silly Slashie, but it seems to be like trying to sue the Motion Picture Association of America for when some kids sneak into cinema to watch an M rated movie if they are a few months shy of the age limit. Maybe sue Paramount because some teenage girls ducked in and saw Johnny Depp in Pirates III?
*slap forehead*
Recently Sweden's recent information tapping laws and this US take on labelling anything that has information as fair game to seize, copy and snoop one make for some creeping "big brother is watching you" wins.
Actually, I wasn't aware that any and all printed matter was able to be seized or copied when crossing borders. The article implies that this has been done to allow the same level of access across all media types, but that means that customs can just jump in and copy my diary when I enter the US? Why do I feel like I skipped a page in this unfolding story?
This is FANTASTIC news for operating systems competing with Windows.
The choices to a complete new users have just improved from an open source point of view:
a) Install Windows Vista. High system specs, buggy to use, even harder to fix, has stupid problems. Also very pricey.
b) Install Linux Distro. Low system specs, buggy to use, some things can be very difficult to fix, has techie aura surrounding it. Did someone say its free?
Gone is good old option c - just install XP which is pretty stable, just about everything works with it and anyone can fix it.
Rejoice opensource!
This isn't a broken window at all. The broken window assumes that both parties are in the same local region - quoting that exact story, the tailor and the glazier are both local men. Here, one part of the story is a local business (the steel mill for example) and it is competing with a totally unrelated foreign business. The distinguishing difference is that your money can either stay in your local area - meaning that you actually do gain something AND retain the money in a local enterprise - or it can leave for another distant business where you gain the goods in return for the money - but your local area does not benefit from the sale past that.