Incorrect. I am not ignorant that the meanings exist; I just reject them as useless and incorrect. You're the one being ignorant by not even attempting to understand my position. I would expect no less from someone that uses language in an effort to get their 'opponents' riled up, even if that usage is blatantly illogical.
I'm well aware that it has more than one definition; I just don't accept some of them, as they're misleading. A word becomes useless when you give it so many definitions than don't even fit it.
You guys would be pretty pissed if "6oo6le" copied Google to the point of even using the playskool colour theme on the letters, but it's A-OK to rip off BlackBerry 100% because you don't like them.
Who would? I wouldn't. And unless you can show the one you replied to would be angry about such a thing, you have no grounds to call him a hypocrite.
Not all court orders are legal, ignoramus. If the judicial branch goes against the constitution, all that means is that they're complicit in the crimes against the American people.
Ok , so you're just some lame hippy giving it the rebel yell when really you should have grown out of that by now.
Calling me a hippy isn't going to debunk any of your arguments. I'm more of a libertarian than anything else. But even if you aren't, questioning authority figures is the only intelligent thing to do, for reasons I've already explained. I'm not going to get rid of my "anti authority demons"; everyone is fallible, and power corrupts. Do you take issue with either of those statements, which history has proven time and time again, regardless of the type of authority figure? It sounds more like you need to be more questioning.
Either that or you're imagining that I'm wildly different from how I actually am. Questioning authority figures isn't the same as being a hippy.
I'm sure they'll feel great not being told what to do or what to learn - until they have to enter real life and find out that to get a job that do actually need to know a bit more than Che Guevaras life story and how to knit hemp.
You're assuming a number of things are true that simply aren't true at all. One of those things is that our public school system is anything but abysmal. Another is that I'm teaching them things like how to knit hemp. Neither of those are true.
Why do we have to be shocked? I wasn't shocked when Snowden 'revealed' the NSA's domestic spying. I wasn't shocked when the DMCA passed. I wasn't shocked when the government took over airports and started molesting anyone who wanted to get on a plane. I'm not shocked that our government spies on friendly countries. The notion that people in power cannot be trusted is not shocking to me in the least. I do not get shocked; I get angry.
All authority figures are fallible. All people are fallible. All authority figures should be questioned. I'd rather not have people dictating that people shouldn't question authority in certain instances because they think it's "petty, juvenile, and achieves nothing other than the laughter of adults who've seen and heard it all before" (which is completely subjective). Our school system is designed to indoctrinate and instill obedience in people (Which is why my kids don't go to public schools.), and the last thing I want are kids who don't question authority figures.
Also, there's nothing wrong with being "petty" or "juvenile" in my eyes, especially with the way many people use those words. Whether the argument has any merit is what matters, not whether it's "petty" or "juvenile."
I can't see why doing the same things over and over would help someone understand the "why," either. In order to get a deep, intuitive understanding of the material, I always needed to mull over it, not do repetitive exercises. The repetitive exercises certainly don't bring anything new to the table.
And not everyone is the same. Doing a few problems and then thinking about why it all worked was more than enough for me; making me do repetitive exercises just ending up giving me bad grades (because I never did them) and wasted my time. One-size-fits-all is garbage.
This was neither "reasonable" nor "justified." They'll pretend it was, but given that these people despise freedom and privacy in all forms, why would that be a surprise?
You're merely restating something I'm already well aware of, and criticized. We are not "the land of the free and the home of the brave" at all; we're merely a country full of people who pretend to care about freedom, but in reality, just want to use laws to force their own morals down everyone else's throats.
That is pretty uncontroversial.
Because most people are morons, and not just when it comes to nonsensical "protect the children!" rhetoric. You can see this by how many people tolerate the TSA and NSA spying; sure, they're criticized by some, but are more than a few people willing to stop voting for the two evil parties, or do anything remotely meaningful? No.
In reality even email is not private. Once you release something that way you have no control over where it goes after that.
In reality, nothing is private, because someone could violate your privacy if they put enough effort into it. Your house? Don't make me laugh. The government could trivially install surveillance equipment in it.
Arguing against privacy is not a good idea, even if it's something that other people can find out quite easily. It just doesn't lead to a good result.
Even given your false dichotomy, are you seriously promoting that killing an unborn human is better than that same human being born and raised poorly?
Better for who? Better for the one who would have to give birth? Probably. Better for the baby? Probably not. Guess whose body that baby resides in?
As to your last blurb, it's because they think deeper than the bifurcation method you use.
There's nothing to think deeply about; they're just hypocritical pieces of trash. No war (or whatever term they're using to describe these wars in an effort to avoid calling them wars) in a very long time has been anything but pointless and unjust.
Prosecutors intimidate full-grown adults into accepting plea deals to get a lesser punishment for crimes they did not commit. I would imagine intimidating a teenager would be even easier. In my eyes, this has absolutely nothing to do with age, and has everything to do with intimidation.
Questioning authority is a teenage cliche? I thought it was something everyone in every single country should be doing, as ensuring that your country retains its freedom, or helping your fellow man acquire freedom, requires vigilance.
I'm guessing that the sheriff was involved (due to quite likely child pornography)
It never ceases to amaze me how you don't actually own yourself in "the land of the free and the home of the brave." Very few people here care about freedom, and even if what you're doing is 100% consensual, they'll still come after you. Disgusting. Yeah, we're really "civilized."
In fact, if you ask most Americans, If doing something against the law will "protect them from terrorism" they will gladly allow it. the PATRIOT ACT goes against most of the constitution yet most Americans love it and adore it.
And at the same time, they pretend that they want the US to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave," when in reality, they openly despise freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
But what if you have noisy neighbors that affect your property value? Then it's OK if the government/city/police intervenes?
No.
Also, this is a legal matter. You'd better start using the correct terminology (And stealing is not the correct terminology.).
Incorrect. I am not ignorant that the meanings exist; I just reject them as useless and incorrect. You're the one being ignorant by not even attempting to understand my position. I would expect no less from someone that uses language in an effort to get their 'opponents' riled up, even if that usage is blatantly illogical.
Obviously me.
I'm well aware that it has more than one definition; I just don't accept some of them, as they're misleading. A word becomes useless when you give it so many definitions than don't even fit it.
They stole the design? Poor Blackberry must not even have the original design any longer!
You guys would be pretty pissed if "6oo6le" copied Google to the point of even using the playskool colour theme on the letters, but it's A-OK to rip off BlackBerry 100% because you don't like them.
Who would? I wouldn't. And unless you can show the one you replied to would be angry about such a thing, you have no grounds to call him a hypocrite.
Also, it would be a double standard.
Not all court orders are legal, ignoramus. If the judicial branch goes against the constitution, all that means is that they're complicit in the crimes against the American people.
Ok , so you're just some lame hippy giving it the rebel yell when really you should have grown out of that by now.
Calling me a hippy isn't going to debunk any of your arguments. I'm more of a libertarian than anything else. But even if you aren't, questioning authority figures is the only intelligent thing to do, for reasons I've already explained. I'm not going to get rid of my "anti authority demons"; everyone is fallible, and power corrupts. Do you take issue with either of those statements, which history has proven time and time again, regardless of the type of authority figure? It sounds more like you need to be more questioning.
Either that or you're imagining that I'm wildly different from how I actually am. Questioning authority figures isn't the same as being a hippy.
I'm sure they'll feel great not being told what to do or what to learn - until they have to enter real life and find out that to get a job that do actually need to know a bit more than Che Guevaras life story and how to knit hemp.
You're assuming a number of things are true that simply aren't true at all. One of those things is that our public school system is anything but abysmal. Another is that I'm teaching them things like how to knit hemp. Neither of those are true.
This shocks people???
Why do we have to be shocked? I wasn't shocked when Snowden 'revealed' the NSA's domestic spying. I wasn't shocked when the DMCA passed. I wasn't shocked when the government took over airports and started molesting anyone who wanted to get on a plane. I'm not shocked that our government spies on friendly countries. The notion that people in power cannot be trusted is not shocking to me in the least. I do not get shocked; I get angry.
Murderers murdering? Say it ain't so!
All authority figures are fallible. All people are fallible. All authority figures should be questioned. I'd rather not have people dictating that people shouldn't question authority in certain instances because they think it's "petty, juvenile, and achieves nothing other than the laughter of adults who've seen and heard it all before" (which is completely subjective). Our school system is designed to indoctrinate and instill obedience in people (Which is why my kids don't go to public schools.), and the last thing I want are kids who don't question authority figures.
Also, there's nothing wrong with being "petty" or "juvenile" in my eyes, especially with the way many people use those words. Whether the argument has any merit is what matters, not whether it's "petty" or "juvenile."
I can't see why doing the same things over and over would help someone understand the "why," either. In order to get a deep, intuitive understanding of the material, I always needed to mull over it, not do repetitive exercises. The repetitive exercises certainly don't bring anything new to the table.
And not everyone is the same. Doing a few problems and then thinking about why it all worked was more than enough for me; making me do repetitive exercises just ending up giving me bad grades (because I never did them) and wasted my time. One-size-fits-all is garbage.
Legally, the school can give permission for her, because they're in a limited role as her legal guardian while she's there
That just shows that our laws are completely screwed.
This was neither "reasonable" nor "justified." They'll pretend it was, but given that these people despise freedom and privacy in all forms, why would that be a surprise?
Not until you are legally an adult (18).
You're merely restating something I'm already well aware of, and criticized. We are not "the land of the free and the home of the brave" at all; we're merely a country full of people who pretend to care about freedom, but in reality, just want to use laws to force their own morals down everyone else's throats.
That is pretty uncontroversial.
Because most people are morons, and not just when it comes to nonsensical "protect the children!" rhetoric. You can see this by how many people tolerate the TSA and NSA spying; sure, they're criticized by some, but are more than a few people willing to stop voting for the two evil parties, or do anything remotely meaningful? No.
In reality even email is not private. Once you release something that way you have no control over where it goes after that.
In reality, nothing is private, because someone could violate your privacy if they put enough effort into it. Your house? Don't make me laugh. The government could trivially install surveillance equipment in it.
Arguing against privacy is not a good idea, even if it's something that other people can find out quite easily. It just doesn't lead to a good result.
Even given your false dichotomy, are you seriously promoting that killing an unborn human is better than that same human being born and raised poorly?
Better for who? Better for the one who would have to give birth? Probably. Better for the baby? Probably not. Guess whose body that baby resides in?
As to your last blurb, it's because they think deeper than the bifurcation method you use.
There's nothing to think deeply about; they're just hypocritical pieces of trash. No war (or whatever term they're using to describe these wars in an effort to avoid calling them wars) in a very long time has been anything but pointless and unjust.
Prosecutors intimidate full-grown adults into accepting plea deals to get a lesser punishment for crimes they did not commit. I would imagine intimidating a teenager would be even easier. In my eyes, this has absolutely nothing to do with age, and has everything to do with intimidation.
*yawn* Must be teenage cliche week.
Questioning authority is a teenage cliche? I thought it was something everyone in every single country should be doing, as ensuring that your country retains its freedom, or helping your fellow man acquire freedom, requires vigilance.
I'm guessing that the sheriff was involved (due to quite likely child pornography)
It never ceases to amaze me how you don't actually own yourself in "the land of the free and the home of the brave." Very few people here care about freedom, and even if what you're doing is 100% consensual, they'll still come after you. Disgusting. Yeah, we're really "civilized."
Completely incorrect. Everyone has that right. To say otherwise is a mere fallacy.
In fact, if you ask most Americans, If doing something against the law will "protect them from terrorism" they will gladly allow it. the PATRIOT ACT goes against most of the constitution yet most Americans love it and adore it.
And at the same time, they pretend that they want the US to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave," when in reality, they openly despise freedom.
Except if TFS is to be believed, he wasn't pushing for an overall ban on violent video games, just ban their sale to minors.
It's okay; he's only trying to oppress some people.
And while he might act like a child, he is still legally an adult, so his actions cannot be seen as hypocritical.
I don't see how they could be seen as hypocritical unless he was playing a violent video game and was a child.