You know, to be honest I just assumed you could never actually be anonymous on the internet. The way I figured it, phone calls could always be tracked via which line you were using to make a call. Similarly, someone's online identity could always be tracked based on whatever utility bills your were using to access the internet. Of course, that's not really the most technical way of phrasing it, but I never once assumed that my identity was hidden in any effective manner on the internet.
You know, I am starting to think that a lot of folks only opened up FB accounts begrudgingly. I know a number of people that preferred MySpace over Facebook until MySpace decided to start cloning Facebook's "features" and UI. I also know a number of people who only started a Facebook account to be in on various party/event invitations and only started using it as their primary social media platform when everything else became too bloated and kludgy to use.
Finally, a number of folks I know never started their own accounts. Rather, their girlfriends or friends or family members started one for them, and they only took it over to keep the originator from jacking up their reputation by posting random stuff under their identity.
I wonder if a large portion of FB users never really wanted to use FB at all, but only got pulled into the service by what they would consider, "not their fault," circumstances. It would explain the large love-hate relationship that recent statistics seem to imply, along with the wholesale, "Fuck you Facebook!" movement that is coinciding with G+'s birth.
So, honest question, do you take pride in, "not really using any social networks but kind of sort of using them just so you can claim your online identity," or do you honestly see absolutely no benefit in being able to send out mass messages to friends conveniently segmented into various groups, being able to video chat with multiple people at once, being able to organize social events via a pseudo-permanent single web location, and being able to quickly, effectively, and openly communicate with various people on various shared interests with various levels of privacy?
I'm not asking to be snarky. I understand that you can do many of these things with e-mail lists and what not via some time and effort to set up. But is there absolutely no appeal to you to have such capabilities (and more) centered in one easy-to-use website location?
So, when we do find the Higgs (if we do) will we be able to start taking advantage of the Mass Eeffect? If not, what's to be gained from the discovery?
You never said that there are no NASA plans to replace the shuttle human flight capability, just no plans in general. My assertion is that there are plans to replace the shuttle's human spaceflight capability, whether or not they are intiiated or funded by NASA is completely irrelevant. And if we are being quite frank with each other, replacing the NASA operated shuttle program with privately funded LEO taxis that compete for NASA contracts is probably a lot better for the space industry in general. Keeping human spaceflight capability in the hands of NASA creates a government run monopoly that is kept in the stranglehold of whimsical politicians. Getting human spaceflight capabilites out of the pockets of Congress is, in my opinion, the only way human spaceflight is going to be allowed to be sustained long enough to do anything interesting. But that is really a matter of opinion.
If your lamentations were over the lack of a NASA program, rather than the lack of a replacement program in general, you should have been more specific. Don't get pissy at me due to your own ambiguity. If your lamentations are over the lack of a viable shuttle alternatives in general, then I stand by my assertion that you are deeply mistaken.
And for the record, the shuttle never could have gotten us to the Moon, Mars, or asteroids. It couldn't go beyond LEO. The current plan to replace the defunt Orion program is titled the MPCV (Multi-Purpose Crewed Vehicle), and it is being actively developed. Both Constellation and DIRECT did little more than add one more rocket booster architecture to an already healthy line of United States developed and operated booster families (EELV, Orbital, SpaceX, the list goes on). So what, exactly, are you lamenting and why? We will get to the Moon. We will get to Mars. We just aren't going to take some pork-ridden politician's wet dream to get there.
I figure the best way for Google to bring in the games factor is to start a new project along the lines of Google Games! and have it be a separate Google service that can be linked/rolled into your Google+ account in whichever manner you choose to configure it (kind of like how you can loosely link your YouTube account to your G+ account).
That way if someone does not have a Google Games account, they don't/won't have to recieve any games updates/content from any of their friends that do have an account. In other words, keep separate services separate and make users have to opt-in to linking the services
Okay, so far what you are describing sounds like an awesome future to me. I'm not sure if that is what you are going for or not. But we have toxin-resistant humans, mad-scientist driven evil corporations, and one plucky hero created accidentally by a biomedical scientist with nothing but the best intentions. I mean, sure, my odds of turning out to be, "Geck-maon!"... able to regrow any limb are somewhat slim. But hell, in a future packed with ferociously psychopathic corporate villains, I am willing to take those odds. Here is hoping I have a reason to get something amputated soon!
Well if that's really what it is then the official Puppy Linux distro would do well to adopt some of those encryption GUIs. I've yet to find one I like that is easy to get installed and configured in the Puppy.
I see no realistic plans to replace the shuttle's capability of putting a human in space
Which is precisely what the Dragon was designed to do: take over the task of putting a human in space in a manner far more efficient than the shuttle. The OP was not bemoaning all the lost "features" of the shuttle, and I hope that was for good reason. Using the shuttle to service the Hubble was a tremendous waste of money and was about the least efficient means of solving the, "OMG the Hubble is dying!" problem. It would have been cheaper and safer for NASA to build a second Hubble and launch it unmanned. Servicing the Hubble from the shuttle was nothing but a PR stunt (an impressive one, to be sure, but still stupid from a technical point of view).
The little bird I linked to is how human spaceflight should be done. Launch meatbags on a small, light, simple craft that maximizes safety and minimizes complexity while heavy cargo and robotic overlord space missions are launched on separate, unmanned platforms. Separating those two problems allows two much more efficient solutions to be developed rather than inventing some bastardized flying brick to try to do both.
The shuttle, however, is an example of what happens when you don't separate those two problems. You get a big, complex, dangerous, heavy, assymetrical, contol systems nightmare that puts squishy meatbags right next door to complex, fragile robotic systems in some attempt at replicating the Millenium Falcon...or something.
So, can the Dragon service the Hubble? No. Should it be able to? No. Should the Shuttle have serviced the Hubble? No.
Is the Dragon following a much more intelligent and elegant design path to solving the problem of developing a permanent human presence in space? Yes. A thousand times more than the Shuttle ever would have.
Well I don't know what reality you are living in, but here in the real world we have this little bird that was just tested on orbit last Spring. It's scheduled for another couple of test flights later this year. I hear that the development of its emergency abort system (something the shuttle didn't have) is being developed expediantly. Once that item is checked off, we should be able to put people back into orbit in no time.
But don't let my factually backed optimism rain on your pity party.
Can't blame them really. They're experts at their job, and I'm sure their shareholders would agree, they're doing quite well at their job.
They hell I can't! If they were robotic automatons that were preprogrammed with the single goal of generating a metric fuckton of profit for their shareholders and that were lacking the free will to reevaluate their values, then you would be correct, I couldn't blame them.
However, the record companies are not run by robotic automatons. They are run by humans and, quite frankly, as human beings, they should have the cognitive capacity to understand complex mental abstractions such as morality, healthy social balance, empathy, and temperance. Trying to earn a profit is not a morally corrupt quest. Trying to earn a profit at the expense and livlihood of your fellow human beings, and at the disruption of the society that you, yourself, are part of is downright stupid, if not flagrantly evil.
So you bet your ass I can and will blame these lying, piss-poor pieces of shit that were raised with such a moral apathy that they hardly even resemble a shell of what a thinking, intelligent, contributing member of this species is.
You may think it is okay to be an apologist for sociopaths, but I, personally, hold my fellow human beings to higher standards than that if they are going to continue calling themselves human.
I want to display my expertise, start a conversation or just plain brag about how well-read I am? Wouldn't that just drive any (remaining) friends away?
While I agree that bragging about how well-read you are will probably just piss folks off, there is nothing wrong with wanting to display your expertise. If you've worked hard to get to a certain point in your life, and you have developed a certain level of intimate knowledge on a particular subject, that would certainly be a lifetime achievement that you would probably be proud to show off from time to time.
That's not to say that you should be a giant d-bag and start every sentence with, "Well, I am an expert in....." But speaking intelligently on a subject that is relevant to your expertise is perfectly acceptable. For instance, if you work in the space industry, then you can offer a fairly unique insight when your friends start talking about the end of the Space Shuttle program and what it means for America's future space exploration activities. Similar situations could occur for doctors with regards to insight on the healthcare debate, environmental science majors with insight on the climate change controversy, and so on.
Displaying your expertise shouldn't drive your friends away unless you are a smug wanker about it.
Oh sure, for years now Slashdot has been railing on about how great Google is and how they are the Messiah company of the modern computing industry. But now what? Now that Google has produced a direct competitor to Slashdot's famous Karma-whoring....errrrr....Karma building system will you still sing their praises?
Eh Taco? Is Google still the bell of the Slashdot ball or are you going to jump in bed with Jobs and Balmer now and start harpooning Google since they are about to eat your Karma building lunch?
Oh who am I kidding, we 'dotters are far too paranoid to partake in such a scheme fun by Google.
In my experience, exercise is the single ebst cure for insomnia. It is very hard not to sleep if you actually push your body to the point where it needs to rest to repair itself.
The trick, however, then becomes how to get enough exercise to use up your body's energy in the day, without pushing yourself so hard that you run out of time and deprive yourself of sleep when you need it. That's my current problem, way too many nights with 4-5 hours of sleep a night when I would really love to have the time to get 10-12.
However, it sure seems like there are an awful lot of really crazy people here in Springfield,...
I know! Right?
At first it was just Sideshow Bob but now it seems like everyone is a bit unhinged: Groundskeeper Willy, Mr. Burns, Smithers, Moe, and the list goes on!
Hell, Maggie shot someone, and Lisa Simpson even kissed Millhouse! What is this world coming to!?
You are aware that the word redneck evolved as a racial slur for people who were born in the United States to mixed parents of Native American and Caucasian descent right? Combining that old racial slur with the word bigot is not only hypocritical, but also extremely ironic as, at the time of its inception, redneck was used to label people, put them down, and cast them out of "civilized society," for being related to savages. So well done.
Or at least start Americans with karma -1 by default?
*Snicker* That's delightful. So you want to start all Americans off with a moderation handicap because of the cruel words of one American? And you support doing that after complaining that said American is a bigot? Nothing like a fresh pot of hypocritical bullshit in the morning to start off your Saturday eh?
Don't get me wrong, the orginal poster was an asshole saying some stupid shit. But when it comes right down to it, your post is no better. In fact, it might be a little worse due to the added holier-than-though attitude. High five for going above and beyond though!
Frankly it's not that hard to be whoever you want to be in this society (I live in the states, California if you must know). Make your choices. Stand by them. And take responsibility if they cause harm. If folks ostracize you for being weird or strange, well fuck 'em!
Typically the folks who are intimidated by the people with strong enough personalities to be themselves are a bit of a downer anyways. I can tell you right now, myself and most of my close friends and family have never compromised our individuality or freedom of spirit in order to achieve social acceptance. Do we raise a lot of eyebrows and butt heads with a lot of folks? Sure! But that's fine because the people we get along with are the really excellent ones. The folks who don't go running away in terror at something unexpected or uncertain tend to be the folks with the potential and passion to lead impressive, awesome lives!
My point is not to blow smoke up my own ass, but, rather, to say, "Be yourself and fuck what everyone else thinks!"
And quite frankly, as nerds, we should recognize just how far that attitude can get you in life. Do you think Elon Musk wrings his hands every night worrying about what the VP's of Boeing and Lockheed-Martin think about him? Do you think Bill Gates made his decisions based on who he would impress rather than what he wanted to do? Was Wozniak the kind of fella that would sell out just to get a pat on the back? What about good ol' Feynman? You can't tell me that he was considered "normal," by most folk growing up. His wit alone would have made him unique and quirky.
So yeah, in America today it is very easy to worry about whether or not you really can be yourself. But if you make a point to stop worrying about it and you just do it, 9/10 times you'll get by just fine. And the haters that want to look down on you for having the courage to be yourself, well, screw 'em. Chances are they are probably just intimidated anyways.
It's easy to get depressed in today's society (especially if Slashdot is your primary lens to what is happening in the world today!) but that is no excuse to sell yourself out. Be strong. Be bold. Be you. And I promise you life will push you towards others who are just as strong and bold as yourself.
And just for some practical advice: if you find yourself looked down upon, ostracized, or judged often, try laughing at the folks doing it. It helps show them that life shouldn't be taken so seriously.
I'm pretty sure, "that kid," was referring to the young folks who effectively get excommunicated from social circles in school because they are the "poor kid," or the "smelly kid," or the "dirty kid," or, "the kid whose mom can't afford a car," the "kid who can't even afford school lunches," etc.
If you reread deniable's comment you will see that he is making reference to the fact that young people have an exceptional talent at marginalizing and ignoring other kids due to social status. If a kid's family can't afford a computer or internet access, you can bet your ass he is going to get shit for that growing up, and, if its anything like my school, this will continue to the point where he has one or two close friends and most everyone else ignores him.
I think that is the kid and the problem deniable was referring to. But please don't let that stop your angry rant about evil young people and how they should be treated like animals.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, to be honest I just assumed you could never actually be anonymous on the internet. The way I figured it, phone calls could always be tracked via which line you were using to make a call. Similarly, someone's online identity could always be tracked based on whatever utility bills your were using to access the internet. Of course, that's not really the most technical way of phrasing it, but I never once assumed that my identity was hidden in any effective manner on the internet.
Maybe I'm just paranoid like that though.
You know, I am starting to think that a lot of folks only opened up FB accounts begrudgingly. I know a number of people that preferred MySpace over Facebook until MySpace decided to start cloning Facebook's "features" and UI. I also know a number of people who only started a Facebook account to be in on various party/event invitations and only started using it as their primary social media platform when everything else became too bloated and kludgy to use.
Finally, a number of folks I know never started their own accounts. Rather, their girlfriends or friends or family members started one for them, and they only took it over to keep the originator from jacking up their reputation by posting random stuff under their identity.
I wonder if a large portion of FB users never really wanted to use FB at all, but only got pulled into the service by what they would consider, "not their fault," circumstances. It would explain the large love-hate relationship that recent statistics seem to imply, along with the wholesale, "Fuck you Facebook!" movement that is coinciding with G+'s birth.
So, honest question, do you take pride in, "not really using any social networks but kind of sort of using them just so you can claim your online identity," or do you honestly see absolutely no benefit in being able to send out mass messages to friends conveniently segmented into various groups, being able to video chat with multiple people at once, being able to organize social events via a pseudo-permanent single web location, and being able to quickly, effectively, and openly communicate with various people on various shared interests with various levels of privacy?
I'm not asking to be snarky. I understand that you can do many of these things with e-mail lists and what not via some time and effort to set up. But is there absolutely no appeal to you to have such capabilities (and more) centered in one easy-to-use website location?
They do if they are written by Randall Munroe.
So, when we do find the Higgs (if we do) will we be able to start taking advantage of the Mass Eeffect? If not, what's to be gained from the discovery?
You never said that there are no NASA plans to replace the shuttle human flight capability, just no plans in general. My assertion is that there are plans to replace the shuttle's human spaceflight capability, whether or not they are intiiated or funded by NASA is completely irrelevant. And if we are being quite frank with each other, replacing the NASA operated shuttle program with privately funded LEO taxis that compete for NASA contracts is probably a lot better for the space industry in general. Keeping human spaceflight capability in the hands of NASA creates a government run monopoly that is kept in the stranglehold of whimsical politicians. Getting human spaceflight capabilites out of the pockets of Congress is, in my opinion, the only way human spaceflight is going to be allowed to be sustained long enough to do anything interesting. But that is really a matter of opinion.
If your lamentations were over the lack of a NASA program, rather than the lack of a replacement program in general, you should have been more specific. Don't get pissy at me due to your own ambiguity. If your lamentations are over the lack of a viable shuttle alternatives in general, then I stand by my assertion that you are deeply mistaken.
And for the record, the shuttle never could have gotten us to the Moon, Mars, or asteroids. It couldn't go beyond LEO. The current plan to replace the defunt Orion program is titled the MPCV (Multi-Purpose Crewed Vehicle), and it is being actively developed. Both Constellation and DIRECT did little more than add one more rocket booster architecture to an already healthy line of United States developed and operated booster families (EELV, Orbital, SpaceX, the list goes on). So what, exactly, are you lamenting and why? We will get to the Moon. We will get to Mars. We just aren't going to take some pork-ridden politician's wet dream to get there.
I figure the best way for Google to bring in the games factor is to start a new project along the lines of Google Games! and have it be a separate Google service that can be linked/rolled into your Google+ account in whichever manner you choose to configure it (kind of like how you can loosely link your YouTube account to your G+ account).
That way if someone does not have a Google Games account, they don't/won't have to recieve any games updates/content from any of their friends that do have an account. In other words, keep separate services separate and make users have to opt-in to linking the services
Okay, so far what you are describing sounds like an awesome future to me. I'm not sure if that is what you are going for or not. But we have toxin-resistant humans, mad-scientist driven evil corporations, and one plucky hero created accidentally by a biomedical scientist with nothing but the best intentions. I mean, sure, my odds of turning out to be, "Geck-maon!" ... able to regrow any limb are somewhat slim. But hell, in a future packed with ferociously psychopathic corporate villains, I am willing to take those odds. Here is hoping I have a reason to get something amputated soon!
Well if that's really what it is then the official Puppy Linux distro would do well to adopt some of those encryption GUIs. I've yet to find one I like that is easy to get installed and configured in the Puppy.
I see no realistic plans to replace the shuttle's capability of putting a human in space
Which is precisely what the Dragon was designed to do: take over the task of putting a human in space in a manner far more efficient than the shuttle. The OP was not bemoaning all the lost "features" of the shuttle, and I hope that was for good reason. Using the shuttle to service the Hubble was a tremendous waste of money and was about the least efficient means of solving the, "OMG the Hubble is dying!" problem. It would have been cheaper and safer for NASA to build a second Hubble and launch it unmanned. Servicing the Hubble from the shuttle was nothing but a PR stunt (an impressive one, to be sure, but still stupid from a technical point of view).
The little bird I linked to is how human spaceflight should be done. Launch meatbags on a small, light, simple craft that maximizes safety and minimizes complexity while heavy cargo and robotic overlord space missions are launched on separate, unmanned platforms. Separating those two problems allows two much more efficient solutions to be developed rather than inventing some bastardized flying brick to try to do both.
The shuttle, however, is an example of what happens when you don't separate those two problems. You get a big, complex, dangerous, heavy, assymetrical, contol systems nightmare that puts squishy meatbags right next door to complex, fragile robotic systems in some attempt at replicating the Millenium Falcon...or something.
So, can the Dragon service the Hubble? No. Should it be able to? No. Should the Shuttle have serviced the Hubble? No.
Is the Dragon following a much more intelligent and elegant design path to solving the problem of developing a permanent human presence in space? Yes. A thousand times more than the Shuttle ever would have.
Well I don't know what reality you are living in, but here in the real world we have this little bird that was just tested on orbit last Spring. It's scheduled for another couple of test flights later this year. I hear that the development of its emergency abort system (something the shuttle didn't have) is being developed expediantly. Once that item is checked off, we should be able to put people back into orbit in no time.
But don't let my factually backed optimism rain on your pity party.
Very well said.
There is at least one company that shares your Shuttle II program vision.
Can't blame them really. They're experts at their job, and I'm sure their shareholders would agree, they're doing quite well at their job.
They hell I can't! If they were robotic automatons that were preprogrammed with the single goal of generating a metric fuckton of profit for their shareholders and that were lacking the free will to reevaluate their values, then you would be correct, I couldn't blame them.
However, the record companies are not run by robotic automatons. They are run by humans and, quite frankly, as human beings, they should have the cognitive capacity to understand complex mental abstractions such as morality, healthy social balance, empathy, and temperance. Trying to earn a profit is not a morally corrupt quest. Trying to earn a profit at the expense and livlihood of your fellow human beings, and at the disruption of the society that you, yourself, are part of is downright stupid, if not flagrantly evil.
So you bet your ass I can and will blame these lying, piss-poor pieces of shit that were raised with such a moral apathy that they hardly even resemble a shell of what a thinking, intelligent, contributing member of this species is.
You may think it is okay to be an apologist for sociopaths, but I, personally, hold my fellow human beings to higher standards than that if they are going to continue calling themselves human.
"I am a socialist liberal who wants to kill babies"
Well they do have such beady little eyes....
I didn't realize, "woman," was a profession.
I want to display my expertise, start a conversation or just plain brag about how well-read I am? Wouldn't that just drive any (remaining) friends away?
While I agree that bragging about how well-read you are will probably just piss folks off, there is nothing wrong with wanting to display your expertise. If you've worked hard to get to a certain point in your life, and you have developed a certain level of intimate knowledge on a particular subject, that would certainly be a lifetime achievement that you would probably be proud to show off from time to time.
....." But speaking intelligently on a subject that is relevant to your expertise is perfectly acceptable. For instance, if you work in the space industry, then you can offer a fairly unique insight when your friends start talking about the end of the Space Shuttle program and what it means for America's future space exploration activities. Similar situations could occur for doctors with regards to insight on the healthcare debate, environmental science majors with insight on the climate change controversy, and so on.
That's not to say that you should be a giant d-bag and start every sentence with, "Well, I am an expert in
Displaying your expertise shouldn't drive your friends away unless you are a smug wanker about it.
The future is one step closer: courtesy of SMBC.
Oh sure, for years now Slashdot has been railing on about how great Google is and how they are the Messiah company of the modern computing industry. But now what? Now that Google has produced a direct competitor to Slashdot's famous Karma-whoring....errrrr....Karma building system will you still sing their praises?
Eh Taco? Is Google still the bell of the Slashdot ball or are you going to jump in bed with Jobs and Balmer now and start harpooning Google since they are about to eat your Karma building lunch?
Oh who am I kidding, we 'dotters are far too paranoid to partake in such a scheme fun by Google.
=D
In my experience, exercise is the single ebst cure for insomnia. It is very hard not to sleep if you actually push your body to the point where it needs to rest to repair itself.
The trick, however, then becomes how to get enough exercise to use up your body's energy in the day, without pushing yourself so hard that you run out of time and deprive yourself of sleep when you need it. That's my current problem, way too many nights with 4-5 hours of sleep a night when I would really love to have the time to get 10-12.
However, it sure seems like there are an awful lot of really crazy people here in Springfield,...
I know! Right?
At first it was just Sideshow Bob but now it seems like everyone is a bit unhinged: Groundskeeper Willy, Mr. Burns, Smithers, Moe, and the list goes on!
Hell, Maggie shot someone, and Lisa Simpson even kissed Millhouse! What is this world coming to!?
Can we block redneck bigots from this site?
You are aware that the word redneck evolved as a racial slur for people who were born in the United States to mixed parents of Native American and Caucasian descent right? Combining that old racial slur with the word bigot is not only hypocritical, but also extremely ironic as, at the time of its inception, redneck was used to label people, put them down, and cast them out of "civilized society," for being related to savages. So well done.
Or at least start Americans with karma -1 by default?
*Snicker* That's delightful. So you want to start all Americans off with a moderation handicap because of the cruel words of one American? And you support doing that after complaining that said American is a bigot? Nothing like a fresh pot of hypocritical bullshit in the morning to start off your Saturday eh?
Don't get me wrong, the orginal poster was an asshole saying some stupid shit. But when it comes right down to it, your post is no better. In fact, it might be a little worse due to the added holier-than-though attitude. High five for going above and beyond though!
With the utmost respect to Nietzsche, fuck that!
Frankly it's not that hard to be whoever you want to be in this society (I live in the states, California if you must know). Make your choices. Stand by them. And take responsibility if they cause harm. If folks ostracize you for being weird or strange, well fuck 'em!
Typically the folks who are intimidated by the people with strong enough personalities to be themselves are a bit of a downer anyways. I can tell you right now, myself and most of my close friends and family have never compromised our individuality or freedom of spirit in order to achieve social acceptance. Do we raise a lot of eyebrows and butt heads with a lot of folks? Sure! But that's fine because the people we get along with are the really excellent ones. The folks who don't go running away in terror at something unexpected or uncertain tend to be the folks with the potential and passion to lead impressive, awesome lives!
My point is not to blow smoke up my own ass, but, rather, to say, "Be yourself and fuck what everyone else thinks!"
And quite frankly, as nerds, we should recognize just how far that attitude can get you in life. Do you think Elon Musk wrings his hands every night worrying about what the VP's of Boeing and Lockheed-Martin think about him? Do you think Bill Gates made his decisions based on who he would impress rather than what he wanted to do? Was Wozniak the kind of fella that would sell out just to get a pat on the back? What about good ol' Feynman? You can't tell me that he was considered "normal," by most folk growing up. His wit alone would have made him unique and quirky.
So yeah, in America today it is very easy to worry about whether or not you really can be yourself. But if you make a point to stop worrying about it and you just do it, 9/10 times you'll get by just fine. And the haters that want to look down on you for having the courage to be yourself, well, screw 'em. Chances are they are probably just intimidated anyways.
It's easy to get depressed in today's society (especially if Slashdot is your primary lens to what is happening in the world today!) but that is no excuse to sell yourself out. Be strong. Be bold. Be you. And I promise you life will push you towards others who are just as strong and bold as yourself.
And just for some practical advice: if you find yourself looked down upon, ostracized, or judged often, try laughing at the folks doing it. It helps show them that life shouldn't be taken so seriously.
I'd mod you funny. That was well done.
I'm pretty sure, "that kid," was referring to the young folks who effectively get excommunicated from social circles in school because they are the "poor kid," or the "smelly kid," or the "dirty kid," or, "the kid whose mom can't afford a car," the "kid who can't even afford school lunches," etc.
If you reread deniable's comment you will see that he is making reference to the fact that young people have an exceptional talent at marginalizing and ignoring other kids due to social status. If a kid's family can't afford a computer or internet access, you can bet your ass he is going to get shit for that growing up, and, if its anything like my school, this will continue to the point where he has one or two close friends and most everyone else ignores him.
I think that is the kid and the problem deniable was referring to. But please don't let that stop your angry rant about evil young people and how they should be treated like animals.