And we're responsible for your lack of perception?
No but you are responsible for the lack of your own.
You could have noted any number of things including their opposition to mindless marijuana criminalization, but decided to do otherwise.
Their lack of opposition to California's restrictive gun laws discounts libertarianism as the source of their opposition to the stupidity of marijuana prohibition. If they were libertarians, they would be in support of both freedom of religion and freedom from it. If they were libertarians, at least some of them would have spoken out against the suppression of free speech on college campuses(or campi, if you prefer).
We're dealing with old fashioned, run of the mill, political leftists.
That would require changing the Republican Party to be less addicted to having a stranglehold among the Solid South.
Libertarians aren't defined by what Democrats or Republicans do.
Roll your own and keep the source encrypted and under lock and key. If you don't have the resources for that. Then it's only a matter if time before your site is hacked if you're using and CMS
That's a recipe for disaster too. Security through obscurity won't keep you safe. You will not be able to think of all possible attack vectors. Other people will.
Humanity always results in war. What do you think is going to happen when the global community tries to pressure Saudi Arabia into permitting gay marriage? They're going to say go to hell and what will the globalists do? There are only two choices, economic sanctions or military intervention.
I was a kid when Mike Tyson was ascendant in the heavyweight ranks. My step-father used to have a few friends over for like $5.00 each and order the fight.
That was back when 4 friends at $5.00 each would cover the PPV.
Okay, here is the next question: Why is it always about women? Why does Hollywood only use buff guys in leading roles? Why are the male sex symbols never short near-sighted bald guys with beer bellies?
YES. This is an enormous pet peeve of mine.
Women are constantly complaining about unrealistic beauty standards that they'll never be able to live up to while never saying a word about how 99.999999% of men are not built like Channing Tatum, Idris Elba, Chris Hemsworth or Morris Chestnut.
Giving them the freedom to march is giving them freedom to recruit. When they recruit enough, they will attempt to enact these ideas. Their ideas are not some abstract thought game, some theoretical scenario.
They should be able to march and recruit out in the open, so there can be a backlash. If they are openly recruiting, it makes it easier to recruit opposition for them.
If they are driven underground, they'll still exist. They'll still recruit but there won't be that backlash.
Count myself lucky because I'm white, so I don't have to worry if they hit critical mass?
I'm not white. These assholes getting that critical mass is a worst case scenario for me. I believe in ideological consistency. If freedom of speech isn't for the worst among us, then it's not for any of us.
Don't get me wrong, the people at the Daily Stormer are the scum of the earth. I hate them and what they stand for.
It's just that I still remember when "I disagree with what you say but I'll defend, to the death, your right to say it." was the ideal to which we aspired.
During the course of the last week, I have noticed that all kinds of people are being lumped in with Nazis, KKK and White Supremacists. For example, I don't like the idea of confederate monuments but I can understand how someone from Virginia, whose 4th great grandfather went into battle for the Confederacy might not necessarily be racist but still wants to honor his ancestor with a statue in a park.
You don't do much supervision of your putative children either.
I'm not sure how to respond to this. I need clarification. Are you stereotyping all of us breeders or are you stereotyping me because I'm black and you're a racist?
They're running around the store, and you show not a care in the world.
You know nothing about me or my children. I keep them in sight at all times.
You didn't even think about slipping and falling on the floor. You show not the slightest concern for something that injures a lot more people.
They can slip and fall anywhere. That's a common concern. Because of the direction of this discussion, I'm talking about another concern.
No, just the one that lets you pretend to act tough and get all sorts of people to nod in approval.
In no way have I acted in a manner that would suggest I think of myself as a tough guy. I'm just an ordinary father.
As someone else pointed out, I'm not so much concerned with real transgender individuals as I am with a heterosexual man pretending to identify as trans to have access to women's lavatories.
I can point to several incidents of such things happening.
All the new bathroom policies do is make it so that a plain-clothed dude can walk into a women's restroom without being questioned.
My concern is the following scenario...
I'm at Target with my 7 year old daughter. She has to use the restroom. I wait outside while she does the needful. As I'm standing there, I see an obvious male walking towards the ladies room. I stop him and say "My daughter is in there. She'll be done momentarily and then it's all yours."
10 years ago, I would have been considered a reasonable father. 5 years ago, I might have been considered slightly overprotective. Today, I just committed a hate crime.
1. Racism and Sexism have historically have not been considered political or religious speech.
Saying that minorities/women are universally inferior and incapable of doing the same quality of work as white men is racism/sexism and not generally protected as political speech. Saying that one disagrees with one particular implementation of affirmative action because it devalues the accomplishments of high performing minorities/women while benefiting the mediocre IS a political position.
2. Whistle blowing a policy to increase diversity, that people seem to know about, isn't whistle blowing.
Whistle blowing is about exposing illegal/immoral activity. Increasing diversity isn't a factor in it.
Google has deep pockets and there are lawyers salivating over this case.
This guy was a lowly engineer, they're going to have a hard time Brendan Eiching this guy.
I think you mean "at will" because California definitely isn't a right to work state.
In an at will employment state, you can fire an employee for cause or for no reason whatsoever but you can not fire one for a bad reason.
You can fire an employee because you don't like how s/he ties his/her shoes but you can not fire an employee because they complained about unfair treatment.
I mean, if you want one, I think that's fine, but trouble is, if they become prolific, then I foresee problems with govt trying to mandate that all weapons be "smart" (likely cops are excepted)...and I don't like that mandate.
New Jersey actually passed such a law. I don't remember if it actually passed but I remember such a law being debated in California.
The world of politics is like an enormous game of chess but we have a lot of checkers players in the world who are taking turns without any consideration for or ability to conceive of the mid-game and end-game.
Good for you, but most gun owners don't. They say "I need a gun for self defense! A gun isn't any good if it takes me more than a few seconds to get to!"
I can get my hands on a gun in 5-8 seconds.
Besides-- what if your safe malfunctions?
Then, I'll buy another one. Safes are a technology that are hundreds of years old. We know how to make them reliably and how to tell when they're becoming unreliable.
Slashdot Mirror
And we're responsible for your lack of perception?
No but you are responsible for the lack of your own.
You could have noted any number of things including their opposition to mindless marijuana criminalization, but decided to do otherwise.
Their lack of opposition to California's restrictive gun laws discounts libertarianism as the source of their opposition to the stupidity of marijuana prohibition. If they were libertarians, they would be in support of both freedom of religion and freedom from it. If they were libertarians, at least some of them would have spoken out against the suppression of free speech on college campuses(or campi, if you prefer).
We're dealing with old fashioned, run of the mill, political leftists.
That would require changing the Republican Party to be less addicted to having a stranglehold among the Solid South.
Libertarians aren't defined by what Democrats or Republicans do.
LK
Roll your own and keep the source encrypted and under lock and key. If you don't have the resources for that. Then it's only a matter if time before your site is hacked if you're using and CMS
That's a recipe for disaster too. Security through obscurity won't keep you safe. You will not be able to think of all possible attack vectors. Other people will.
LK
I never got any indication that they were anything other than collectivist, globalists.
If they were libertarians, they would have been trying to break the stranglehold the political left has on California politics.
LK
Nationalism always results in war
Humanity always results in war. What do you think is going to happen when the global community tries to pressure Saudi Arabia into permitting gay marriage? They're going to say go to hell and what will the globalists do? There are only two choices, economic sanctions or military intervention.
LK
I too find the draw of these cites to be unexplainable. NYC and Southern California, sound like purgatory to me.
I aspire to one day have a multi-acre plot of land to live as I wish. Not bothering anyone and without anyone bothering me.
For $2.4 million dollars, I could get well over 100 acres, build a house and live comfortably for a long time.
LK
I was a kid when Mike Tyson was ascendant in the heavyweight ranks. My step-father used to have a few friends over for like $5.00 each and order the fight.
That was back when 4 friends at $5.00 each would cover the PPV.
LK
I googled the user name in the article.
It's not doxxing to find publicly available information.
LK
My ex-wife's dad used to have a whole house UPS built from a rectifier, inverter, charge controller and a bunch of deep cycle batteries.
LK
You're probably right.
Judging by the name, it would appear that this guy only graduated high school 2 years ago and recently graduated a free coding camp.
LK
You're retroactively inventing a justification because you do not like the target.
LK
Next question, please.
Okay, here is the next question: Why is it always about women? Why does Hollywood only use buff guys in leading roles? Why are the male sex symbols never short near-sighted bald guys with beer bellies?
YES. This is an enormous pet peeve of mine.
Women are constantly complaining about unrealistic beauty standards that they'll never be able to live up to while never saying a word about how 99.999999% of men are not built like Channing Tatum, Idris Elba, Chris Hemsworth or Morris Chestnut.
LK
Giving them the freedom to march is giving them freedom to recruit. When they recruit enough, they will attempt to enact these ideas. Their ideas are not some abstract thought game, some theoretical scenario.
They should be able to march and recruit out in the open, so there can be a backlash. If they are openly recruiting, it makes it easier to recruit opposition for them.
If they are driven underground, they'll still exist. They'll still recruit but there won't be that backlash.
Count myself lucky because I'm white, so I don't have to worry if they hit critical mass?
I'm not white. These assholes getting that critical mass is a worst case scenario for me. I believe in ideological consistency. If freedom of speech isn't for the worst among us, then it's not for any of us.
LK
The difference here is that a private company that chooses not to let you use their platform is not denying you any rights.
Sort of...
One is still being denied their right to free speech, it's just that when a private company does it, there's no constitutional issue.
LK
Don't get me wrong, the people at the Daily Stormer are the scum of the earth. I hate them and what they stand for.
It's just that I still remember when "I disagree with what you say but I'll defend, to the death, your right to say it." was the ideal to which we aspired.
During the course of the last week, I have noticed that all kinds of people are being lumped in with Nazis, KKK and White Supremacists. For example, I don't like the idea of confederate monuments but I can understand how someone from Virginia, whose 4th great grandfather went into battle for the Confederacy might not necessarily be racist but still wants to honor his ancestor with a statue in a park.
LK
I always wanted an Amiga. Recently I started looking into buying some old hardware on Ebay and the prices put them beyond what I was willing to pay.
I'm not spending that kind of money on a 30 year old computer.
LK
You are not the bathroom police.
Nope. I'm not.
You don't do much supervision of your putative children either.
I'm not sure how to respond to this. I need clarification. Are you stereotyping all of us breeders or are you stereotyping me because I'm black and you're a racist?
They're running around the store, and you show not a care in the world.
You know nothing about me or my children. I keep them in sight at all times.
You didn't even think about slipping and falling on the floor. You show not the slightest concern for something that injures a lot more people.
They can slip and fall anywhere. That's a common concern. Because of the direction of this discussion, I'm talking about another concern.
No, just the one that lets you pretend to act tough and get all sorts of people to nod in approval.
In no way have I acted in a manner that would suggest I think of myself as a tough guy. I'm just an ordinary father.
LK
I need make no such admission because it isn't.
Male sex offenders have been caught in women's lavatories doing unscrupulously things. It's not new.
Thus far, none of them have been actual transgenders. They've been heterosexual men who have been using the trans issue for cover.
LK
As someone else pointed out, I'm not so much concerned with real transgender individuals as I am with a heterosexual man pretending to identify as trans to have access to women's lavatories.
I can point to several incidents of such things happening.
LK
All the new bathroom policies do is make it so that a plain-clothed dude can walk into a women's restroom without being questioned.
My concern is the following scenario...
I'm at Target with my 7 year old daughter. She has to use the restroom. I wait outside while she does the needful. As I'm standing there, I see an obvious male walking towards the ladies room. I stop him and say "My daughter is in there. She'll be done momentarily and then it's all yours."
10 years ago, I would have been considered a reasonable father.
5 years ago, I might have been considered slightly overprotective.
Today, I just committed a hate crime.
LK
Doctors stopped wondering about the how and why of stuff up people's assholes a loooong time ago.
Yeah, I think they cover that during either med school or residency.
People put all manner of strange things into their own and each other's anuses.
LK
1. Racism and Sexism have historically have not been considered political or religious speech.
Saying that minorities/women are universally inferior and incapable of doing the same quality of work as white men is racism/sexism and not generally protected as political speech.
Saying that one disagrees with one particular implementation of affirmative action because it devalues the accomplishments of high performing minorities/women while benefiting the mediocre IS a political position.
2. Whistle blowing a policy to increase diversity, that people seem to know about, isn't whistle blowing.
Whistle blowing is about exposing illegal/immoral activity. Increasing diversity isn't a factor in it.
Google has deep pockets and there are lawyers salivating over this case.
This guy was a lowly engineer, they're going to have a hard time Brendan Eiching this guy.
LK
I think you mean "at will" because California definitely isn't a right to work state.
In an at will employment state, you can fire an employee for cause or for no reason whatsoever but you can not fire one for a bad reason.
You can fire an employee because you don't like how s/he ties his/her shoes but you can not fire an employee because they complained about unfair treatment.
LK
This is about targeting the women's vote. Women hate prostitution as it drops their bargaining position against men.
Precisely. It's the same reason why feminists are so strongly opposed to pornography. It weakens women's position to manipulate men.
With 99%+ effective birth control and access to prostitutes, some men are completely checking out of fatherhood and husbandhood.
LK
I mean, if you want one, I think that's fine, but trouble is, if they become prolific, then I foresee problems with govt trying to mandate that all weapons be "smart" (likely cops are excepted)...and I don't like that mandate.
New Jersey actually passed such a law. I don't remember if it actually passed but I remember such a law being debated in California.
The world of politics is like an enormous game of chess but we have a lot of checkers players in the world who are taking turns without any consideration for or ability to conceive of the mid-game and end-game.
LK
Good for you, but most gun owners don't. They say "I need a gun for self defense! A gun isn't any good if it takes me more than a few seconds to get to!"
I can get my hands on a gun in 5-8 seconds.
Besides-- what if your safe malfunctions?
Then, I'll buy another one. Safes are a technology that are hundreds of years old. We know how to make them reliably and how to tell when they're becoming unreliable.
"Smart" guns, not so much.
LK