yes, including the cult that feverishly believes there is no God, and without a whisper of proof or any evidence whatsoever.
I agree. I think a lot of atheists/agnostics/et cetera, want to believe that there is *no* morality/god/whatever just as badly as a lot of religious people want to believe there *is*.
I don't believe there's no god. I just don't care. I still have the responsibility to choose what's right and wrong. An institution that tries to choose right and wrong for people is evil. And if I let anyone else choose right and wrong for me, *I'd* be evil.
It's not quite accurate to say I'm against *organized* religion, but that's kind of in the ballpark.
I'm an atheist, but think you go too far. Religions comprise many well-meaning, good hearted people.
I agree with that, too. (Hey, some of my best friends are well-meaning good-hearted people! Just don't tell anyone, I have a rep to maintain.) My problem is that surrendering my own judgment to an institution of any sort -- a government, a religion, a family, or even a private belief system held by me alone ("i am a religion of one": new ad campaign for the Swiss Guards?) -- is an abandonment of my responsibility to live a life that exalts the individual. This supremacy of the individual is the only thing I hold sacred, as a universal moral (arrggh, I really want to say "biological", but I don't know if that will "say what I mean" in other people's brains) axiom.
I liked the "scritcha-scritcha" bit, though, a lot:)
... the point I'm trying to make is that making categorical statements about religion and trying to sort religions into "acceptable faiths" and "evil cults" is just a waste of bandwidth.
Dune is "too complicated" for commerical television, but you want to bring it into the far more abstract medium of anime?!?
Television is the only medium that is dynamic enough, persistent enough and intimate enough to even take a shot at Dune. You're right about a miniseries not being adequate though: It needs to be done Straczynski style, with each book becoming a season. Only the calculus of one episode pounding into you after another can capture the sheer power of the original Herbert storyline.
Ellen
Re:"Corporate Culture"
on
Disconnected
·
· Score: 1
Far be it from me to be disillusioned, but generally, aren't the people you work for and with supposed to be people you like?
That would be great, I guess. I've always thought it would be nice to work for a company I could believe in. I'll get back to you when it happens.
... everywhere you've worked, the participants have been mindless cogs in a larger machine?
Yes. Those who believe that the individuals are more important than institutions are far fewer than one in a thousand. (I'm holding back on judging my current job, as I've been there only three weeks, but the idea of "one in a thousand" seems to apply everywhere, not just in the workplace.)
Instead, if you try to create a bond there, then there's a human level to the interaction that might not normally be there.
You're talking about personal relationships. What originally started this subthread was deliberate efforts by corporations to draw workers into their ideology.
If you feel that strongly about not participating in company activities (outings, retreats, softball, etc) because you're not getting paid, then why bother staying past 40 hours a week, ever.
Well, 1/2-seriously, because you get time-and-a-half. All seriously, I've done that. I've worked 50-hour weeks and gone the extra mile, only to have my labors ignored because I didn't believe the corporate ideology. These companies have made social concerns more important than business concerns -- ideology is now more important than profit.
Perhaps it's because I've always worked for small companies (not a conscious choice, BTW).
I've started working for a small local company... consciously so.:-) I hope it'll be a place where I won't feel like I'm whoring myself out if I like the people there, but it's going to be a while before I trust them or anyone else enough to believe that.
If you don't want to ever mix business with pleasure... quit your job. You can find a new one. But don't ruin it for those of us who enjoy playing with our companies.
See, this is the sort of statement that convinces me that corporate business has become almost a religion. Why should I quit? How is my dissatisfaction preventing your enjoyment? Can't I work for the same company as you without believing in it? Isn't my performance of the work for a paycheck sufficient?
And if you say no, that my presence implies some degree of good faith and loyalty on my part, then right back at you. I expect the same from them. But they have never provided it. Not to go Marxist, but they don't have to. The company never feels the need to bend because they hold all the cards. The act unilaterally because they can. And do you know what their attitude is when you let them know you don't like things that way?
You can find a new job.
Ellen
Re:"Corporate Culture"
on
Disconnected
·
· Score: 2
I feel like I'm responding to a troll, but just in case:
... don't forget when you get a job
at a company, you are there for the
benefit of the company, not just your
own personal gain.
That's the company's take. Even from an Econ 101 point of view, the presumption is that each party is engaged in an "arm's length transaction", that they are there for their personal benefit.
Why should I participate in company activities if I'm not being paid? The only reason I tolerate the presence of the type of person who runs the modern corporate business is because I need the money. Why would I hang out with them for free?
Let me put it another way. Why would I do something that harms me, something that benefits only my employer (presuming they can find the camaraderie they're looking for), for nothing?
As for being disconnected, the corporations involved create this state of mind. They hold meetings where they blather on about corporate vision and other quasi-religious nonsense but don't inform workers of price changes!
After a while it's impossible to take them seriously; you're consumed with the desire to get away from them, as if they were one of those people who won't shut up about his favorite hobby / conspiracy / alien abduction. It's entertaining for about 30 seconds, but by 45, you're looking for escape routes.
For one thing, that would eliminate any sympathy that we might have from the mainstream (it's hard to imagine the public rallying behind a group of anonymous hackers.)
The public-at-large will never support hackers. The reason we have this world is because most people want security, not freedom. The belief that the desire for freedom is universal has been the undoing of every reform in history.
The only system that will guarantee freedom is one that supports individual rights, power and freedom over all other concerns, especially concerns of safety and security. It would have to have this support hard-wired in, without the ability of the will of the majority or judicial review to override the central idea of individual freedom.
The US doesn't have such a system. Even if the US were the democracy it sometimes claims to be, that would only support the will of the majority, which is for security and not for freedom.
Furthermore, our legal system will never change if we simply circumvent it.
If voting could change anything, it would be illegal. For voting, substitute anything.
Without any (openly) dissenting voices, only the opponents of free speech will be heard.
These openly dissenting voices are needed in addition to, not instead of, hidden action.
We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source -- we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [Internet-service provider]. We will firewall it at your PC."
Was this guy beating the podium with his shoe?
Even paraphrased, it's still inspiring. It feels good to remember that no matter what the world's turning into that we are still the philsophical inheritors and guardians of the ideal of freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
Ellen
I have just adjusted Shoeboy's karma manually. --Ellen (Posting anonymously to preserve my precious reputation as an objective Slashdot admin.)
I agree. I think a lot of atheists/agnostics/et cetera, want to believe that there is *no* morality/god/whatever just as badly as a lot of religious people want to believe there *is*.
I don't believe there's no god. I just don't care. I still have the responsibility to choose what's right and wrong. An institution that tries to choose right and wrong for people is evil. And if I let anyone else choose right and wrong for me, *I'd* be evil.
It's not quite accurate to say I'm against *organized* religion, but that's kind of in the ballpark.
I agree with that, too. (Hey, some of my best friends are well-meaning good-hearted people! Just don't tell anyone, I have a rep to maintain.) My problem is that surrendering my own judgment to an institution of any sort -- a government, a religion, a family, or even a private belief system held by me alone ("i am a religion of one": new ad campaign for the Swiss Guards?) -- is an abandonment of my responsibility to live a life that exalts the individual. This supremacy of the individual is the only thing I hold sacred, as a universal moral (arrggh, I really want to say "biological", but I don't know if that will "say what I mean" in other people's brains) axiom.
Hehe. Is Dave Sim still anti-computer...?
EllenExactly. All religions are evil cults.
Ellen RipleyDune is "too complicated" for commerical television, but you want to bring it into the far more abstract medium of anime?!?
Television is the only medium that is dynamic enough, persistent enough and intimate enough to even take a shot at Dune. You're right about a miniseries not being adequate though: It needs to be done Straczynski style, with each book becoming a season. Only the calculus of one episode pounding into you after another can capture the sheer power of the original Herbert storyline.
Ellen
That would be great, I guess. I've always thought it would be nice to work for a company I could believe in. I'll get back to you when it happens. Yes. Those who believe that the individuals are more important than institutions are far fewer than one in a thousand. (I'm holding back on judging my current job, as I've been there only three weeks, but the idea of "one in a thousand" seems to apply everywhere, not just in the workplace.) You're talking about personal relationships. What originally started this subthread was deliberate efforts by corporations to draw workers into their ideology. Well, 1/2-seriously, because you get time-and-a-half. All seriously, I've done that. I've worked 50-hour weeks and gone the extra mile, only to have my labors ignored because I didn't believe the corporate ideology. These companies have made social concerns more important than business concerns -- ideology is now more important than profit. I've started working for a small local company... consciously so.
And if you say no, that my presence implies some degree of good faith and loyalty on my part, then right back at you. I expect the same from them. But they have never provided it. Not to go Marxist, but they don't have to. The company never feels the need to bend because they hold all the cards. The act unilaterally because they can. And do you know what their attitude is when you let them know you don't like things that way?
You can find a new job.
Ellen
I feel like I'm responding to a troll, but just in case:
... don't forget when you get a job
at a company, you are there for the
benefit of the company, not just your
own personal gain.
That's the company's take. Even from an Econ 101 point of view, the presumption is that each party is engaged in an "arm's length transaction", that they are there for their personal benefit.
Why should I participate in company activities if I'm not being paid? The only reason I tolerate the presence of the type of person who runs the modern corporate business is because I need the money. Why would I hang out with them for free?
Let me put it another way. Why would I do something that harms me, something that benefits only my employer (presuming they can find the camaraderie they're looking for), for nothing?
As for being disconnected, the corporations involved create this state of mind. They hold meetings where they blather on about corporate vision and other quasi-religious nonsense but don't inform workers of price changes!
After a while it's impossible to take them seriously; you're consumed with the desire to get away from them, as if they were one of those people who won't shut up about his favorite hobby / conspiracy / alien abduction. It's entertaining for about 30 seconds, but by 45, you're looking for escape routes.
Ellen
kaphka said: The public-at-large will never support hackers. The reason we have this world is because most people want security, not freedom. The belief that the desire for freedom is universal has been the undoing of every reform in history.
The only system that will guarantee freedom is one that supports individual rights, power and freedom over all other concerns, especially concerns of safety and security. It would have to have this support hard-wired in, without the ability of the will of the majority or judicial review to override the central idea of individual freedom.
The US doesn't have such a system. Even if the US were the democracy it sometimes claims to be, that would only support the will of the majority, which is for security and not for freedom.
If voting could change anything, it would be illegal. For voting, substitute anything.
These openly dissenting voices are needed in addition to, not instead of, hidden action.
Ellen
We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will firewall Napster at source -- we will block it at your cable company, we will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your [Internet-service provider]. We will firewall it at your PC." Was this guy beating the podium with his shoe?
Even paraphrased, it's still inspiring. It feels good to remember that no matter what the world's turning into that we are still the philsophical inheritors and guardians of the ideal of freedom.