"Bleeding heart liberals" I really like it when people use this term, it shows how fucking stupid they really are. It doesn't matter who is in office asshole, they will always fuck the average person over because that's how the status quo has worked ever since human beings started living in villages.
Though I can't say that the poster you are responding to is a reasonable, and rational human being, I can say that you are a fucking moron if you think that a 675,000 dollar fine is better than 5 years in prison. Thats more than most people make in 14 years, and it will ruin this kids life over something that isn't even a big deal.
A 675,000 dollar fine ruins this kids life. That's more than most people make in fourteen years. How will he ever get above the poverty level? Frankly, 5-10 years in a white collar prison would be a cake walk. To argue that that is not "cruel and unusual", if that is what you are doing, is a fucking brain-dead thing to do.
Two at a time, when hundreds are waiting to replace them. It means nothing. You cannot let evil people use your compassion against you. I am an atheist to the full extent of the word, and I can say that I truthfully regret that civilians are hurt or even killed in conflicts like these. I am so compassionate and empathetic, that I myself fucking cry sometimes thinking about how innocent people are hurt. However, I really am starting to get pissed off why it happens at all, and it makes me re-evaluate my own ethics because I don't see "good" prevailing at all. War, murder, and torture shouldn't happen at all, but it seems like fuck-bags continue to resort to the only thing they can for advantage over other people, and that is fear through violence and death. Once you let people that harm others gain an advantage over you, which is easy to do if you aren't a sociopath, you give them opportunities to continue their bad behavior. Why do you think ruthless behavior works to get people to obey a set of rules? Because no sane person is willing to one-up ruthless people and most people are born with some degree of sanity until they are brain-washed or desensitized (this is of course assuming they aren't simply born with a defective frontal lobe). You have to do things that are distasteful to your own humanity to get people like this to stop. So, I say to you; What is better? 10 children dead after a bomb drop in the heart of some cartel's compound, or millions of people living in fear, so much so they let 10,000 more die at the hands of these people? Its gone on too long, and too many people just let it happen and then bitch about it being caused by something that is a secondary agenda, like legalizing drugs. Yes, I believe drugs should be legal too, but you cannot let assholes continue to dismember people because drugs are illegal. Fucking kill them since that is the only thing they understand, and its quite a poetic justice since that is the same thing they threaten upon others to gain power.
Nice assumptions. I bet you don't think twice when you recreationally drink a glass of whiskey, or a beer. So all drug users are drug addicts in your book? Liberals are all dependent on government? Sure thing. Except it has been statistically proven that the more educated a person is (thus employable) the more likely they are to be liberal. It must have taken years to wind your brain into such inconsistent, irrational spaghetti.
I see no significant alcohol black market nor cigarette black market trying to avoid government controls / taxes. Most people opt for convenience and go to the liquor store rather than driving out to the woods to find a moonshiner. Self-destructive behavior affecting others can be prevented by actually punishing people that do so. They already take kids away from people all the time for being addicts. Drug related crime would possibly increase in the form of theft, but keep in mind that legalizing drugs would drop their price so drug habits would be more affordable. That would offset some of the need for theft to support a habit. Also keep in mind 50 percent of people in prison are there for possession of drugs or selling drugs. You would eliminate a significant number of criminal cases, and 50 percent of people in prisons by legalizing drugs. I sincerely doubt any increase in drug-related crime would make up for that significant decrease.
That already happens with alcohol, except we leave the alcoholics to die miserably in the streets, or if they are a "functional alcoholic" they eventually die from heart disease, cirrhosis or a myriad of other problems. Their only "other' option is to go to some AA based recovery, either the free one or the clinics that use AA as a cookbook approach and charge you for it. AA basically forces you to accept God, or you "will never be cured". This coming from clinics that are supposed to be offering medical and psychiatric treatment is an absolute atrocity. Its as if you go to the doctor to fix your chronic depression, and they just tell you "Hmm, that sucks. Ill pray for you". You go to a doctor or psychiatrist to help you with concrete scientific treatments for things, not make-believe. Having been through treatment of this kind I can say its a big fucking joke. The best idea is to try to beat addiction through medical means since it actually offers concrete results that are verifiable. AA stopped keeping track of their own retention rate because its so fucking bad. They only manage to keep about 15 percent of the people who are members, but this statistic is many years old. The ones that stick around are usually zealots. I have had several actually get upset at me and tell me I will come crawling back some day and they wont take me, just because I am an atheist and this pretty much is totally opposite of the 2nd and 3rd step.
I am aware of certain drugs like Naltrexone that allow one to beat addiction to opiates/alcohol in a high percentage of cases (much higher than the AA 15 percent) by binding to endorphin and opiate receptors in your brain, thus making no "reward' for using. There are also new drugs under development in Finland along similar lines. Then there is something I read in a Discover magazine lately that tricks your immune system into fighting off active ingredients in cocaine as well as nicotine. This cures you by simply making it impossible for you to use and feel anything since your immune system has little cells that bind to the chemicals, and make it so they can't bind to receptors in your brain. This is the sort of help we should be giving addicts, not fairy tales.
Its a little different killing a real person and killing something that behaves like a robot in a video game. In battle, only 15-20 percent of soldiers will even bother to fire, and even then they wont try to kill a person so they will fire sort of above their heads or to the side, not even really aiming at them. Killing another human is not something you evolved to do unless you are caught between a rock and a hard place and you must, or you have some mental defect, or you have been brainwashed into thinking your victim is less-than-human. Pretty much all of the atrocities committed by mankind are committed when a person or group of people is either convinced, or convinces themselves that someone else is less-than-human. This includes dehumanizing prisoners, dehumanizing Jews, dehumanizing Black people, etc. A video game is not even remotely the same thing. You know its just some dumb robot without feelings and its funny when its body flies through the air and lands in a fire or something since the act is almost like watching a cartoon. Ever watch Looney Tunes or Tom and Jerry? That is pretty violent, but its funny because its not real. If you saw a mouse blow the head off of a cat with a dynamite cigar in real life, you would probably be mortified more than curious why the hell a mouse could do such a thing since it was mindless violence against a creature that can feel pain and turns into a bloody mess afterwards. There is a definite difference between a game and reality, just like cartoons and reality, and anyone who says people truly believe otherwise is a fucking moron since its hard-wired into your brain.
You see, that I would support. It actually makes musicians a commodity with bargaining potential rather than someone you can just steal from and get rid of.
Hear hear. I really don't think people would let a terrorist hijack another plane. Before 9/11 people thought hijackings ended at some point on the ground, not burrowing into a building. When people realize there is a good chance they will die, some of them with balls will react.
Yes, it is unfortunate. It actually causes legal issues for people that want to preserve history. An appropriate example for this article; say I wanted to preserve a collection of vintage games. I expose myself to legal risk by doing so, but to my knowledge there is not a legal repository of these games in existence where a person can access them to learn. Music is similar. Undoubtedly there have been some games, or some music that are no longer in existence because the original media is worn with age.
"Harm others", its not a well-posed problem to identify how much you "harmed" a copyright holder. Not to mention the penalties for doing so pretty much violate the 8th and 4th amendment. If 10 people downloaded a copyrighted item from you, and you obtained it illegally, you only directly caused the copyright holder damages of 11x in dollar damage, where x is the cost of the item if you purchased it. Slap on some penalties and it still shouldn't be 150,000 dollars or more. Damages are disproportionate to the crime in copyright law.
Who says I am complaining? I am merely stating facts. Passing off the blame on users for a known issue before addressing it in full is never a good way to handle business, asshole.
I really liked Daggerfall and Morrowind. I spent countless hours playing those games and seeing all there is to see. I mostly would steal from banks and vaults then finance purchasing properties, etc. Then I would go our and randomly explore. I easily spent 50+ hours on each without running out of stuff to do. They weren't glitchy games for me, and they had plenty to do so I am unsure why you think they are so disgusting.
Ive played all those games, and I can say I preferred Fallout 3. Baldur's Gate was good as well. I was probably born around the same time as you. However, one game I haven't found a match to is Star Control II.
Slashdot Mirror
Greatly exceed? By 67.5 times? Give me a fucking break. If you permanently injure someone you don't have as bad of a punishment.
"Bleeding heart liberals" I really like it when people use this term, it shows how fucking stupid they really are. It doesn't matter who is in office asshole, they will always fuck the average person over because that's how the status quo has worked ever since human beings started living in villages.
Though I can't say that the poster you are responding to is a reasonable, and rational human being, I can say that you are a fucking moron if you think that a 675,000 dollar fine is better than 5 years in prison. Thats more than most people make in 14 years, and it will ruin this kids life over something that isn't even a big deal.
A 675,000 dollar fine ruins this kids life. That's more than most people make in fourteen years. How will he ever get above the poverty level? Frankly, 5-10 years in a white collar prison would be a cake walk. To argue that that is not "cruel and unusual", if that is what you are doing, is a fucking brain-dead thing to do.
Sounds reasonable to me.
Two at a time, when hundreds are waiting to replace them. It means nothing. You cannot let evil people use your compassion against you. I am an atheist to the full extent of the word, and I can say that I truthfully regret that civilians are hurt or even killed in conflicts like these. I am so compassionate and empathetic, that I myself fucking cry sometimes thinking about how innocent people are hurt. However, I really am starting to get pissed off why it happens at all, and it makes me re-evaluate my own ethics because I don't see "good" prevailing at all. War, murder, and torture shouldn't happen at all, but it seems like fuck-bags continue to resort to the only thing they can for advantage over other people, and that is fear through violence and death. Once you let people that harm others gain an advantage over you, which is easy to do if you aren't a sociopath, you give them opportunities to continue their bad behavior. Why do you think ruthless behavior works to get people to obey a set of rules? Because no sane person is willing to one-up ruthless people and most people are born with some degree of sanity until they are brain-washed or desensitized (this is of course assuming they aren't simply born with a defective frontal lobe). You have to do things that are distasteful to your own humanity to get people like this to stop. So, I say to you; What is better? 10 children dead after a bomb drop in the heart of some cartel's compound, or millions of people living in fear, so much so they let 10,000 more die at the hands of these people? Its gone on too long, and too many people just let it happen and then bitch about it being caused by something that is a secondary agenda, like legalizing drugs. Yes, I believe drugs should be legal too, but you cannot let assholes continue to dismember people because drugs are illegal. Fucking kill them since that is the only thing they understand, and its quite a poetic justice since that is the same thing they threaten upon others to gain power.
Nice assumptions. I bet you don't think twice when you recreationally drink a glass of whiskey, or a beer. So all drug users are drug addicts in your book? Liberals are all dependent on government? Sure thing. Except it has been statistically proven that the more educated a person is (thus employable) the more likely they are to be liberal. It must have taken years to wind your brain into such inconsistent, irrational spaghetti.
Only a few enforcers would show up to kill this fictional man. Its better to schedule a fuel-air bomb drop on their compounds.
I see no significant alcohol black market nor cigarette black market trying to avoid government controls / taxes. Most people opt for convenience and go to the liquor store rather than driving out to the woods to find a moonshiner. Self-destructive behavior affecting others can be prevented by actually punishing people that do so. They already take kids away from people all the time for being addicts. Drug related crime would possibly increase in the form of theft, but keep in mind that legalizing drugs would drop their price so drug habits would be more affordable. That would offset some of the need for theft to support a habit. Also keep in mind 50 percent of people in prison are there for possession of drugs or selling drugs. You would eliminate a significant number of criminal cases, and 50 percent of people in prisons by legalizing drugs. I sincerely doubt any increase in drug-related crime would make up for that significant decrease.
That already happens with alcohol, except we leave the alcoholics to die miserably in the streets, or if they are a "functional alcoholic" they eventually die from heart disease, cirrhosis or a myriad of other problems. Their only "other' option is to go to some AA based recovery, either the free one or the clinics that use AA as a cookbook approach and charge you for it. AA basically forces you to accept God, or you "will never be cured". This coming from clinics that are supposed to be offering medical and psychiatric treatment is an absolute atrocity. Its as if you go to the doctor to fix your chronic depression, and they just tell you "Hmm, that sucks. Ill pray for you". You go to a doctor or psychiatrist to help you with concrete scientific treatments for things, not make-believe. Having been through treatment of this kind I can say its a big fucking joke. The best idea is to try to beat addiction through medical means since it actually offers concrete results that are verifiable. AA stopped keeping track of their own retention rate because its so fucking bad. They only manage to keep about 15 percent of the people who are members, but this statistic is many years old. The ones that stick around are usually zealots. I have had several actually get upset at me and tell me I will come crawling back some day and they wont take me, just because I am an atheist and this pretty much is totally opposite of the 2nd and 3rd step.
I am aware of certain drugs like Naltrexone that allow one to beat addiction to opiates/alcohol in a high percentage of cases (much higher than the AA 15 percent) by binding to endorphin and opiate receptors in your brain, thus making no "reward' for using. There are also new drugs under development in Finland along similar lines. Then there is something I read in a Discover magazine lately that tricks your immune system into fighting off active ingredients in cocaine as well as nicotine. This cures you by simply making it impossible for you to use and feel anything since your immune system has little cells that bind to the chemicals, and make it so they can't bind to receptors in your brain. This is the sort of help we should be giving addicts, not fairy tales.
Its a little different killing a real person and killing something that behaves like a robot in a video game. In battle, only 15-20 percent of soldiers will even bother to fire, and even then they wont try to kill a person so they will fire sort of above their heads or to the side, not even really aiming at them. Killing another human is not something you evolved to do unless you are caught between a rock and a hard place and you must, or you have some mental defect, or you have been brainwashed into thinking your victim is less-than-human. Pretty much all of the atrocities committed by mankind are committed when a person or group of people is either convinced, or convinces themselves that someone else is less-than-human. This includes dehumanizing prisoners, dehumanizing Jews, dehumanizing Black people, etc. A video game is not even remotely the same thing. You know its just some dumb robot without feelings and its funny when its body flies through the air and lands in a fire or something since the act is almost like watching a cartoon. Ever watch Looney Tunes or Tom and Jerry? That is pretty violent, but its funny because its not real. If you saw a mouse blow the head off of a cat with a dynamite cigar in real life, you would probably be mortified more than curious why the hell a mouse could do such a thing since it was mindless violence against a creature that can feel pain and turns into a bloody mess afterwards. There is a definite difference between a game and reality, just like cartoons and reality, and anyone who says people truly believe otherwise is a fucking moron since its hard-wired into your brain.
You see, that I would support. It actually makes musicians a commodity with bargaining potential rather than someone you can just steal from and get rid of.
Nice hypocrisy there. Bitching about me bitching. Why not just take some of your own advice asshole?
Hear hear. I really don't think people would let a terrorist hijack another plane. Before 9/11 people thought hijackings ended at some point on the ground, not burrowing into a building. When people realize there is a good chance they will die, some of them with balls will react.
To be fair the source engine was pretty good when it first came out.
Yes, it is unfortunate. It actually causes legal issues for people that want to preserve history. An appropriate example for this article; say I wanted to preserve a collection of vintage games. I expose myself to legal risk by doing so, but to my knowledge there is not a legal repository of these games in existence where a person can access them to learn. Music is similar. Undoubtedly there have been some games, or some music that are no longer in existence because the original media is worn with age.
It would be nice, and rational. Too bad copyright law is anti-consumer and pretty much only benefits corporations.
"Harm others", its not a well-posed problem to identify how much you "harmed" a copyright holder. Not to mention the penalties for doing so pretty much violate the 8th and 4th amendment. If 10 people downloaded a copyrighted item from you, and you obtained it illegally, you only directly caused the copyright holder damages of 11x in dollar damage, where x is the cost of the item if you purchased it. Slap on some penalties and it still shouldn't be 150,000 dollars or more. Damages are disproportionate to the crime in copyright law.
Who says I am complaining? I am merely stating facts. Passing off the blame on users for a known issue before addressing it in full is never a good way to handle business, asshole.
That would infringe on peoples desire to have passwords like "cats" or "1234".
Apple should really look into this more, rather than just passing off the blame. Typical.
Who cares? Im tired of seeing this appear in articles.
All the cell providers are notorious for ripping people off. Its about time the DoJ did something within their power.
I really liked Daggerfall and Morrowind. I spent countless hours playing those games and seeing all there is to see. I mostly would steal from banks and vaults then finance purchasing properties, etc. Then I would go our and randomly explore. I easily spent 50+ hours on each without running out of stuff to do. They weren't glitchy games for me, and they had plenty to do so I am unsure why you think they are so disgusting.
Ive played all those games, and I can say I preferred Fallout 3. Baldur's Gate was good as well. I was probably born around the same time as you. However, one game I haven't found a match to is Star Control II.