I just showed you how to find out, do you need a tutorial? Look at the user's posting history, diaries, and submission. It should be easy enough to tell if it's a real account.
I thought that at first, too, because it sounds like a press release. But slashdot user itwbennett has an actual posting history and submissions that include various things of interest to geeks that don't appear to be corporate press releases. If this is a slashvertisement, it is a slashvertisement for IT World, not these services.
You are saying that this girls actions were criminal? Her actions are the equivalent of shooting someone? That she deserved the punishment she got? Honestly, you think that this kind of attack will somehow help neurotic, imbalanced people? Anonymous was just acting out of love for her, like a parent? No, you don't really care if Jessi gets better, you want her to suffer.
The thing is, yeah, she should suffer a little, she was an idiot online and she deserves to be called an idiot and made to feel embarrassment. A little. But anonymous doesn't come with an off switch, or a little dial that lets everyone involved know how much pain and suffering the group has meted out. Therefore, everyone thinks they are doing just a little bit, punishing just enough, but the overall effect is far out of proportion to whatever wrongs this thirteen year old may have done.
And THAT is the problem with vigilante justice, it is never proportional to the crime.
When was the last time you watched that movie? The highly advanced species were victims of their own "Monsters from the Id." They created a machine that could literally make thoughts into reality, then they went to sleep and their dreams killed them all. They weren't murderously seeking anything. It's not so much a dystopian fable, as it is a direct copy of Shakespeare's "The Tempest."
Feeling a bit threatened? Perhaps the key to your inadequacies lies with you, and not other people. There's really nothing you can do to change the facts, as far as I know, those pills, weights, and pumps don't work. You may as well just accept your shortcomings. I've even heard *snicker* some women prefer it that way *chortle*.
Just as with any commercial transaction, you must be able to pay for what you want, nobody is in the business of catering to you for free. However, you can simply withdraw from society altogether. There are plenty of people in America living close to the land and not paying any taxes. It may be essentially illegal, but it is not in practice, as no one will really come looking for you. Extremely marginal? Yes, of course. You get what you pay for.
What makes you think anyone should be able to demand of others, "You must let me live amongst you, but I won't follow your rules, and I won't help pay for things?"
What a string of non-sequiters. Politician based governance is a new invention, of course. But "politician" is not synonymous with "leaders who abuse their power." And people have been doing much more than complaining, look at Wisconsin. What have you done lately?
Really? It doesn't have anything to do with justice? You DO realize that there are several eastern religions that talk about karma, and that while it isn't the same in all of them, most conceptions of karma can be boiled down to "you reap what you sow." How is that not justice?
It still stems from the misconception that the self is separate from the universe. Being separate, the self is an uncaused cause. We all understand how cause and effect work, if that were all karma were, there would not be a separate word for it, it would just be "causation." No, karma springs from the idea that the self is a separate uncaused cause, and therefore, there needs to be some spiritual method of restoring balance caused by the unbalancing actions of the separate self. That method is karma.
The most common conception of karma is in relation to reincarnation, that how you act in this life determines what you are reincarnated as. That is a form of wishing after justice. The next most common conception is of a kind of universal enforcement of "you reap what you sew," which posits that if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you. As we can see that bad things do not always happen to bad people, that leads right back into believing in reincarnation, karma will ensure those bad people are punished, if not in this lifetime, then the next. That is the sense the OP was using it in.
If you take the self out of the picture, then all the concept of karma is saying is that bad things are bad, while good things are nice. Bad things lead to hurt, while good things lead to happiness. As there is no "self" in this discussion, it doesn't matter who perpetrates the action and who receives the bad feelings. I kick you in the nuts, you feel nut-pain, THAT is real karma. And also not how the OP was using the term at all.
Are we done with school yet, or would you like another lesson?
Being a good troll is no guarantee of being troll-resistant. However, it is not a successful troll unless you get the other party angry. Just engaging in a conversation where the other party does not rise to the bait is a troll fail.
Finally, I have to point out that only someone who has never suffered any sort of real oppression could possibly hold the attitude you do. If you had any awareness of what it was like to be a part of a subjugated minority, you would understand why your attitude is redolent of subconscious racism and classism.
I'm a bit of an exhibitionist, I'll take any excuse I can get to go into my sexual history, so don't get too proud of yourself. For now, I guess I will just assume you are one of us, and are "reclaiming the word" for cocksuckers everywhere. Solidarity, brother!
Karma: a concept for people who want to believe in justice but don't want a daddy-figure meting it out. Sorry, but no. There is no such force as karma, unless we make it. If we want justice, we shouldn't wait for a holy sky father or invisible morality scale to create it, we need to do it ourselves.
Some democratic members of Congress claim to want an investigation. Easy enough to claim to want that as a democratic congressman in a republican congress. Nota bene, the White House hasn't called for an investigation. You think these kinds of investigations are totally partisan? You think there won't be members of the investigative committee who are gunning for Obama? Okay, you might think that, but I doubt Obama does.
Anyone want to take bets on this, what are the odds that there will be an investigation of HBGary? Anyone want to put up some money on the "Sure, there will be an investigation" side?
Sorry, no. Not buying it. Would you call someone a kyke? Would you call someone a nigger, a spick, or a pollack? I doubt it, because you don't want to open up those cans of worms. Well, welcome to the twenty first century, "faggot" is rapidly becoming one of those words you don't want to use because people will give you hell for it. Get used to it, ignorance is no longer an excuse. Thoughtless oppression is not acceptable just because it is thoughtless.
Just to be clear, equating a recent murder by homophobes to a practice like stoning, which hasn't happened here in hundreds of years, is specious reasoning. You know full well they aren't the same.
We live in a country with freedom of speech. Some people think that means "I can say whatever I like without consequences," but that is just not true, because I have freedom of speech as well, and your freedom to say what you like does not remove my freedom to call you out on it. So, I (and a growing majority of people) will continue to say that people who use the word "faggot" as an insult are childish, bigoted, small minded assholes. Sorry if that offends, but that is my position and I am sticking to it.
How are you helping anyone? What are you doing to make the world a better place, and don't say "paying taxes" because you pay taxes for YOUR benefit. You are buying a place in a society you want to be a part of, it is a commercial transaction between you and the society, and if you don't like it, you are free to leave.
Who asked you to sacrifice, and what? What did people do to you in school, and why? I'm genuinely curious.
Well as I may have mentioned, that was in my youth. I have gone through dry spells of over a month, and after a month, any orgasm with another human being is a good orgasm. And I never said I wasn't into it, just not AS into it as with women. I used to identify as bisexual, but years of experience have shown me that I don't get nearly as excited for guys as for women, so now I identify as (mostly) straight. But I can still say, there are guys that I am in love with, and it is that fact, being in love with someone, that makes me want to have sex with them even if their body is, for whatever reason, not a big turn on for me.
As for open relationships, it took me seven years to convince my wife to give it a try. She did, with all of two guys. The first one turned out to be kind of a douche, the second one is still with us, three years later. Not that there is anything wrong with being a slut, as long as you are honest about it, but that's not really what we are about, thus "polyamory" rather than "swinging." In a way, sex is just a shortcut to emotional intimacy for me, which I guess makes me some kind of pansy-ass girly-man, except that chicks really seem to dig it, you know?
Anyway, I certainly hope this is keeping you as amused as it is me. Cheers!
Then I shan't use it anymore, if it offends you. But I am curious where you have heard the phrase before. I thought I made it up. And I never thought it applied to loose women, because I rather like loose women and wouldn't choose to insult them. It's just that sperm is messy, you know? Maybe I should just call people wetspots. Anyway, it's a conundrum, isn't it? How to insult the right person without insulting the wrong people. Perhaps I should just stick to the old tried and true, "Asshole" or "prick" but then people will complain that there is nothing wrong with assholes and pricks, they give us lots of pleasure.
One dude? No, I've been with about ten or so, all good friends who wanted to fool around, so I Iet 'em. As for women, I've been with about thirty or so. I guess that makes me three quarters straight? I'm married eleven years now, but I don't fuck anyone exclusively. The wife and I have an open relationship. I can't wait to see what you try to make of all that, but please keep up the commentary, it's pretty funny! Especially considering your earlier protestations of innocence...
Slashdot Mirror
It's called a strike, it means they aren't going to work.
I just showed you how to find out, do you need a tutorial? Look at the user's posting history, diaries, and submission. It should be easy enough to tell if it's a real account.
I thought it was obvious I was referring to the house, but if you want to pick nits, have fun.
Ah, perhaps I was too harsh.
I thought that at first, too, because it sounds like a press release. But slashdot user itwbennett has an actual posting history and submissions that include various things of interest to geeks that don't appear to be corporate press releases. If this is a slashvertisement, it is a slashvertisement for IT World, not these services.
But it isn't okay. In fact, it's pretty damn far from okay.
You are saying that this girls actions were criminal? Her actions are the equivalent of shooting someone? That she deserved the punishment she got? Honestly, you think that this kind of attack will somehow help neurotic, imbalanced people? Anonymous was just acting out of love for her, like a parent? No, you don't really care if Jessi gets better, you want her to suffer.
The thing is, yeah, she should suffer a little, she was an idiot online and she deserves to be called an idiot and made to feel embarrassment. A little. But anonymous doesn't come with an off switch, or a little dial that lets everyone involved know how much pain and suffering the group has meted out. Therefore, everyone thinks they are doing just a little bit, punishing just enough, but the overall effect is far out of proportion to whatever wrongs this thirteen year old may have done.
And THAT is the problem with vigilante justice, it is never proportional to the crime.
When was the last time you watched that movie? The highly advanced species were victims of their own "Monsters from the Id." They created a machine that could literally make thoughts into reality, then they went to sleep and their dreams killed them all. They weren't murderously seeking anything. It's not so much a dystopian fable, as it is a direct copy of Shakespeare's "The Tempest."
Feeling a bit threatened? Perhaps the key to your inadequacies lies with you, and not other people. There's really nothing you can do to change the facts, as far as I know, those pills, weights, and pumps don't work. You may as well just accept your shortcomings. I've even heard *snicker* some women prefer it that way *chortle*.
Just as with any commercial transaction, you must be able to pay for what you want, nobody is in the business of catering to you for free. However, you can simply withdraw from society altogether. There are plenty of people in America living close to the land and not paying any taxes. It may be essentially illegal, but it is not in practice, as no one will really come looking for you. Extremely marginal? Yes, of course. You get what you pay for.
What makes you think anyone should be able to demand of others, "You must let me live amongst you, but I won't follow your rules, and I won't help pay for things?"
What a string of non-sequiters. Politician based governance is a new invention, of course. But "politician" is not synonymous with "leaders who abuse their power." And people have been doing much more than complaining, look at Wisconsin. What have you done lately?
It's easy enough to tell other people to get over it when you've never had to.
I'd say Anonymous is chaotic neutral: sometimes good, sometimes evil, never lawful.
Really? It doesn't have anything to do with justice? You DO realize that there are several eastern religions that talk about karma, and that while it isn't the same in all of them, most conceptions of karma can be boiled down to "you reap what you sow." How is that not justice?
It still stems from the misconception that the self is separate from the universe. Being separate, the self is an uncaused cause. We all understand how cause and effect work, if that were all karma were, there would not be a separate word for it, it would just be "causation." No, karma springs from the idea that the self is a separate uncaused cause, and therefore, there needs to be some spiritual method of restoring balance caused by the unbalancing actions of the separate self. That method is karma.
The most common conception of karma is in relation to reincarnation, that how you act in this life determines what you are reincarnated as. That is a form of wishing after justice. The next most common conception is of a kind of universal enforcement of "you reap what you sew," which posits that if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you. As we can see that bad things do not always happen to bad people, that leads right back into believing in reincarnation, karma will ensure those bad people are punished, if not in this lifetime, then the next. That is the sense the OP was using it in.
If you take the self out of the picture, then all the concept of karma is saying is that bad things are bad, while good things are nice. Bad things lead to hurt, while good things lead to happiness. As there is no "self" in this discussion, it doesn't matter who perpetrates the action and who receives the bad feelings. I kick you in the nuts, you feel nut-pain, THAT is real karma. And also not how the OP was using the term at all.
Are we done with school yet, or would you like another lesson?
Being a good troll is no guarantee of being troll-resistant. However, it is not a successful troll unless you get the other party angry. Just engaging in a conversation where the other party does not rise to the bait is a troll fail.
Finally, I have to point out that only someone who has never suffered any sort of real oppression could possibly hold the attitude you do. If you had any awareness of what it was like to be a part of a subjugated minority, you would understand why your attitude is redolent of subconscious racism and classism.
I'm a bit of an exhibitionist, I'll take any excuse I can get to go into my sexual history, so don't get too proud of yourself. For now, I guess I will just assume you are one of us, and are "reclaiming the word" for cocksuckers everywhere. Solidarity, brother!
Karma: a concept for people who want to believe in justice but don't want a daddy-figure meting it out. Sorry, but no. There is no such force as karma, unless we make it. If we want justice, we shouldn't wait for a holy sky father or invisible morality scale to create it, we need to do it ourselves.
I thought it stood for "Huge Balls" Gary. As in, that guy must have some huge fucking balls doing what he did.
Some democratic members of Congress claim to want an investigation. Easy enough to claim to want that as a democratic congressman in a republican congress. Nota bene, the White House hasn't called for an investigation. You think these kinds of investigations are totally partisan? You think there won't be members of the investigative committee who are gunning for Obama? Okay, you might think that, but I doubt Obama does.
Anyone want to take bets on this, what are the odds that there will be an investigation of HBGary? Anyone want to put up some money on the "Sure, there will be an investigation" side?
Sorry, no. Not buying it. Would you call someone a kyke? Would you call someone a nigger, a spick, or a pollack? I doubt it, because you don't want to open up those cans of worms. Well, welcome to the twenty first century, "faggot" is rapidly becoming one of those words you don't want to use because people will give you hell for it. Get used to it, ignorance is no longer an excuse. Thoughtless oppression is not acceptable just because it is thoughtless.
Just to be clear, equating a recent murder by homophobes to a practice like stoning, which hasn't happened here in hundreds of years, is specious reasoning. You know full well they aren't the same.
We live in a country with freedom of speech. Some people think that means "I can say whatever I like without consequences," but that is just not true, because I have freedom of speech as well, and your freedom to say what you like does not remove my freedom to call you out on it. So, I (and a growing majority of people) will continue to say that people who use the word "faggot" as an insult are childish, bigoted, small minded assholes. Sorry if that offends, but that is my position and I am sticking to it.
How are you helping anyone? What are you doing to make the world a better place, and don't say "paying taxes" because you pay taxes for YOUR benefit. You are buying a place in a society you want to be a part of, it is a commercial transaction between you and the society, and if you don't like it, you are free to leave.
Who asked you to sacrifice, and what? What did people do to you in school, and why? I'm genuinely curious.
Well as I may have mentioned, that was in my youth. I have gone through dry spells of over a month, and after a month, any orgasm with another human being is a good orgasm. And I never said I wasn't into it, just not AS into it as with women. I used to identify as bisexual, but years of experience have shown me that I don't get nearly as excited for guys as for women, so now I identify as (mostly) straight. But I can still say, there are guys that I am in love with, and it is that fact, being in love with someone, that makes me want to have sex with them even if their body is, for whatever reason, not a big turn on for me.
As for open relationships, it took me seven years to convince my wife to give it a try. She did, with all of two guys. The first one turned out to be kind of a douche, the second one is still with us, three years later. Not that there is anything wrong with being a slut, as long as you are honest about it, but that's not really what we are about, thus "polyamory" rather than "swinging." In a way, sex is just a shortcut to emotional intimacy for me, which I guess makes me some kind of pansy-ass girly-man, except that chicks really seem to dig it, you know?
Anyway, I certainly hope this is keeping you as amused as it is me. Cheers!
Ah, yes, the old "I've been personally hurt by liberals, but I won't say how," trick. How ingenious. Did you come up with that one yourself?
Then I shan't use it anymore, if it offends you. But I am curious where you have heard the phrase before. I thought I made it up. And I never thought it applied to loose women, because I rather like loose women and wouldn't choose to insult them. It's just that sperm is messy, you know? Maybe I should just call people wetspots. Anyway, it's a conundrum, isn't it? How to insult the right person without insulting the wrong people. Perhaps I should just stick to the old tried and true, "Asshole" or "prick" but then people will complain that there is nothing wrong with assholes and pricks, they give us lots of pleasure.
One dude? No, I've been with about ten or so, all good friends who wanted to fool around, so I Iet 'em. As for women, I've been with about thirty or so. I guess that makes me three quarters straight? I'm married eleven years now, but I don't fuck anyone exclusively. The wife and I have an open relationship. I can't wait to see what you try to make of all that, but please keep up the commentary, it's pretty funny! Especially considering your earlier protestations of innocence...