you can't be serious. i just realize ive either been trolled, or am talking with someone so willfully blind to the truth, that even if it were gift wrapped and placed in their hands, would probably still complain it was missing a 'sprig of lavender.' either wayy, i'm moving on.
ok - so hey - you are now playing a game called 'kill all puppies'. I task you with the following choices - a) kill 100 puppies b) kill 1000 puppies c) kill 1,000,000 puppies. what's that? you abstain from choosing a b c ? sorry! you are still playing the game
hey everyone! this guy plays a game called 'kill all puppies'!! what a horrible person!!!
tired of debating this point. if you choose to continue to believe things are a certain way, then so be it. for the rest of us, there's the reality that the fix is in.
troll: wikipedia - In Internet slang, a troll (/trol/,/trl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
While the original article may have been presented as a response to trolling such as that which the jerkoffs who targeted Zelda Williams, the headline raises the larger question of trolling in general, which by the general definition (at least by wikipedia) includes conversation hijackers and those who try to subvert valid points. had you explored the second issue i referenced (project mockingbird) and took it further to understand the reality that many trolls (typically of type 3 above) are engaging in their activities deliberately and with political motivations and funding, maybe you would have understood that connection.
While i see now in hindsight it may have been inadvertent, you missed my point altogether and instead insinuated that i was somehow representing that type [3] trolls above were engaging in types [1] or [2] behavior.
judging from the stupidity of your comment, i can only hope that (for your sake), you yourself are one of said trolls, at the very least getting paid for spewing such idiocy. trolling is far more than just posting x-rated photos and the such.
for instance, deliberately trying to redirect a conversation to paint someone with a legitimate point as someone who is 'wacko' (like you are yourself trying to do) can be considered trolling. it's the internet equivalent to someone asking you 'so... when did you stop beating your wife?'
who said anything about peace, rainbows and unicorns? or having qualms with competition? and what sort of nonsense is this about you understanding the use of the first spear? talk about delusional... and if you best logical defense is to paint my argument as an extreme version of something it is not, well.. then it makes sense you post as an AC.
Rather than defend the X number of kids who 'are learning'... how about devote the same dollar resources to the actual broken national public education system and create 1,000,000X kids who are learning? im sick of the fallacious argument of 'well, if not for military funding, we wouldn't have X, Y, or Z wonderful science!' It falsely presumes that human beings need war as a motivating factor to devote resources toward technological betterment, and that there would not have otherwise been any progress.
to take anything that even smells of MIC (with the propensity to shapes young minds) without a pound of salt is to be willfully ignorant of the fact patterns of the last 50 years.
while i grok you on the details, you seem to be on a very different wavelength on the motivations. using pre-teens to design weapons which can be run by people who otherwise could not harness the mental competence to do so on their own, also means that the operators themselves lack the ability to do anything other than follow the orders of their masters. kill ---- there. drone ------ there.
the more i think about it, the more i think the article should probably be re-titled 'DARPA Uses Tomorrow's Military Software to Indoctrinate Pre-Teens'. Every despot can tell you, if you get the youth to buy into your jive, and get them ready to fight for you.. you own tomorrow. In today's stage of warfare, having jingoistic pre-teen 'rifle-clubs' is passe'. Having pre-teen military video game clubs.. well, these are the goons of tomorrow.
maybe they can even fast-track some of the kids that excel and have them skip high-school and go straight to killer-drone-operator...cool! i just killed some more people!
if you're going to increasingly recruit military from an under-class who have been left behind by the education system (and so have few other career options but to act as the enforcers of the state) you need to make sure the tech is comfortably within their technical grasp.
ism ism ism. i bet you're one of those people who cheers 'we won!' when a dozen or so men you've never met before (and never will) but wear uniforms that have your states name on them beat another team at a game involving a ball and stick.
i dont see any suggestions in my statement. thanks for trying to put words in my mouth, but no thanks. you are either naive beyond words, or a shill. i hate to break it to you, but the real world doesn't work the way you learned in class.
sigh. the propaganda is strong with this one. ultimately, no good guys on either side, but before you hate someone or something because you are told to, ask - cui bono?
your statement assumes two things incorrectly:
1) that an abstention from playing a game that is rigged somehow still leaves the party culpable to the actions of said game.
but more importantly,
2) that voting for A, B, C, or D would have in any way shape of form influenced the outcome, as all of the above cowtow to the same deep state policies regardless.
hey, go easy on him. when you get past the phony unemployment numbers, honest work is hard to get.. and being an online shill CAN pay. of course, you're right - that's still no excuse for not paying attention in training.
who's this 'we' of which you speak? i don't remember being asked if i wanted to embargo anyone ever.
p.s. chastising putin for imperial ambitions is probably the funniest (saddest, and ironic) thing ive heard all day.
Slashdot Mirror
you can't be serious. i just realize ive either been trolled, or am talking with someone so willfully blind to the truth, that even if it were gift wrapped and placed in their hands, would probably still complain it was missing a 'sprig of lavender.' either wayy, i'm moving on.
someone HAS said something. jeez - have you been sleeping this past year?
oh, and there's also this.
http://www.activistpost.com/20...
sigh.
open a history book hombre.
ok - so hey - you are now playing a game called 'kill all puppies'. I task you with the following choices - a) kill 100 puppies b) kill 1000 puppies c) kill 1,000,000 puppies. what's that? you abstain from choosing a b c ? sorry! you are still playing the game
hey everyone! this guy plays a game called 'kill all puppies'!! what a horrible person!!!
tired of debating this point. if you choose to continue to believe things are a certain way, then so be it. for the rest of us, there's the reality that the fix is in.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-G...
is that anything like anal bum cover? i think that was a jeopardy category
troll: wikipedia - In Internet slang, a troll (/trol/, /trl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
While the original article may have been presented as a response to trolling such as that which the jerkoffs who targeted Zelda Williams, the headline raises the larger question of trolling in general, which by the general definition (at least by wikipedia) includes conversation hijackers and those who try to subvert valid points. had you explored the second issue i referenced (project mockingbird) and took it further to understand the reality that many trolls (typically of type 3 above) are engaging in their activities deliberately and with political motivations and funding, maybe you would have understood that connection.
While i see now in hindsight it may have been inadvertent, you missed my point altogether and instead insinuated that i was somehow representing that type [3] trolls above were engaging in types [1] or [2] behavior.
judging from the stupidity of your comment, i can only hope that (for your sake), you yourself are one of said trolls, at the very least getting paid for spewing such idiocy. trolling is far more than just posting x-rated photos and the such.
for instance, deliberately trying to redirect a conversation to paint someone with a legitimate point as someone who is 'wacko' (like you are yourself trying to do) can be considered trolling. it's the internet equivalent to someone asking you 'so... when did you stop beating your wife?'
easy way for the 'government' to drastically cut down on internet trolling: stop funding it.
or didyou think that operation mockingbird was a one-time deal?
i appreciate the apology. i imagine steve buscemi crossing his name off a list with a crayon and then smearing lipstick all over his face.
who said anything about peace, rainbows and unicorns? or having qualms with competition? and what sort of nonsense is this about you understanding the use of the first spear? talk about delusional... and if you best logical defense is to paint my argument as an extreme version of something it is not, well.. then it makes sense you post as an AC.
Rather than defend the X number of kids who 'are learning'... how about devote the same dollar resources to the actual broken national public education system and create 1,000,000X kids who are learning? im sick of the fallacious argument of 'well, if not for military funding, we wouldn't have X, Y, or Z wonderful science!' It falsely presumes that human beings need war as a motivating factor to devote resources toward technological betterment, and that there would not have otherwise been any progress.
to take anything that even smells of MIC (with the propensity to shapes young minds) without a pound of salt is to be willfully ignorant of the fact patterns of the last 50 years.
while i grok you on the details, you seem to be on a very different wavelength on the motivations. using pre-teens to design weapons which can be run by people who otherwise could not harness the mental competence to do so on their own, also means that the operators themselves lack the ability to do anything other than follow the orders of their masters. kill ---- there. drone ------ there.
the more i think about it, the more i think the article should probably be re-titled 'DARPA Uses Tomorrow's Military Software to Indoctrinate Pre-Teens'. Every despot can tell you, if you get the youth to buy into your jive, and get them ready to fight for you.. you own tomorrow. In today's stage of warfare, having jingoistic pre-teen 'rifle-clubs' is passe'. Having pre-teen military video game clubs.. well, these are the goons of tomorrow.
maybe they can even fast-track some of the kids that excel and have them skip high-school and go straight to killer-drone-operator...cool! i just killed some more people!
if you're going to increasingly recruit military from an under-class who have been left behind by the education system (and so have few other career options but to act as the enforcers of the state) you need to make sure the tech is comfortably within their technical grasp.
an occasional
goes a long way bro
ism ism ism. i bet you're one of those people who cheers 'we won!' when a dozen or so men you've never met before (and never will) but wear uniforms that have your states name on them beat another team at a game involving a ball and stick.
i dont see any suggestions in my statement. thanks for trying to put words in my mouth, but no thanks. you are either naive beyond words, or a shill. i hate to break it to you, but the real world doesn't work the way you learned in class.
be careful - they charge you 10 cents more per gallon if you pay by credit card.. sneaky!
i seriously hope for your sake you are at least getting paid for this.
sigh. the propaganda is strong with this one. ultimately, no good guys on either side, but before you hate someone or something because you are told to, ask - cui bono?
not a bad article..
http://www.theguardian.com/com...
your statement assumes two things incorrectly:
1) that an abstention from playing a game that is rigged somehow still leaves the party culpable to the actions of said game.
but more importantly,
2) that voting for A, B, C, or D would have in any way shape of form influenced the outcome, as all of the above cowtow to the same deep state policies regardless.
hey, go easy on him. when you get past the phony unemployment numbers, honest work is hard to get.. and being an online shill CAN pay. of course, you're right - that's still no excuse for not paying attention in training.
remember the gulf of tonkin! grrr!
who's this 'we' of which you speak? i don't remember being asked if i wanted to embargo anyone ever.
p.s. chastising putin for imperial ambitions is probably the funniest (saddest, and ironic) thing ive heard all day.