In a profanity-laced tirade, Brown threatens in the video to strike back at Smith.
"So that's why Robert Smith's life is over," Brown said. "But when I say his life is over, I don't say I'm going to go kill him. But I am going to ruin his life and look into his (expletive) kids."
Brown then smiles before adding: "How do you like them apples?"
no. i just made up the bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes, etc., in my head
or: bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes may say they are rioting because of reason {xyz}, but {xyz} does not conform with my worldview, so we'll just accuse bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes of poltiically motivated distortion
if i yell fire in a crowded theatre, people may trample and kill others motivated out of self-preservation. so me, the one shouted fire, i'm the one culpable
if i call mohammed a nasty word, and people start rioting and killing, they are motivated by religious extremism. do you believe a religious zealot who will kill because of his religion is a defensible position, like self-preservation? hell no! so where does the buck stop? with the religious zealot
if i insult your mother and you kill someone, who is culpable for the dead person? you? or me because i insulted my mother? do you see how crazy this gets?
at some point you have to learn to put proper blame where it is properly due
they would like to make money, musk would like to make money, the railroad robber barons of old, the iconic image that pops to mind when i think industrialist, they would have liked to make money when they started a business venture
but they frequently lost their shirt. you wouldn't call them philanthropists because they spent a fortune to build a railroad line that promptly went bankrupt
likewise, if musk makes no money, he's not a philanthropist. he just started a business that failed, which happens most of the time
the difference is the scale and the machine-oriented subject of the venture. he is an industrialist, doing what they always do: take a giant risk with a fortune on a gamble involving a complicated outlay on tons of machinery and the long-term effort of a huge cast of engineers
you are inserting your worldview on their actions. ask them why they are rioting, and they will say it is because of this video. but you are just as blind as them, because you don't hear what they are saying, you just wrap your worldview over them, and invent your own motivations
they are specifically angry about this video. they say, not me
why are you making excuses for this kind of behavior?
this is where you reply to me and continue to insert your worldview into the motivations of other people who are clearly not rioting because of the reasons you think they are
the object of sexual attraction is biologically innate
so you can put a criminal in jail, and they mature and develop impulse control, and when they get out of jail the person can actually be cured of criminal behavior for the rest of their lives. but once a pedophile, always a pedophile, forever. nothing cures it. so your analogy does not stand. pedophilia is not criminal behavior, it's innate biological behavior
finally, i'm trying to honestly search for the best moral answer to a morally difficult situation. you do yourself no favors by heaping scorn on me. you are ignorant or blind to the seriousness and complexity of the problem of pedophilia if you think the answer is simple. only if the answer was simple would your level of scorn be appropriate for my hesitancy
finally, you also do yourself no favors by misrepresenting what i say:
Also, by your argument, we should banish men from society if they are unable to acquire a sexual partner, because such men are timebombs waiting to go off for rape.
i said nothing remotely like that. this is just some weird fear of yours talking, this weird idea has nothing to do with what i said, and what you said is easy to prove as a completely invalid, laughable inference
i mean if we are going to say the kind of law the top story is referencing is a form of hysteria, we can also point to posts like yours as another kind of hysteria as well. we need less hysteria all around, period
so next time calm the bleep down, take a deep breath, then post
if you have to rape one child in order that hundreds of other children are not raped, can you do that? i don't think so. if killing one man means others might live, you can't do that, as a corollary. sure, people choose to volunteer themselves as food for others in situations of starvation or to draw enemy fire so others escape, for example. but these acts are self-chosen of heroic sacrifice, not decisions imposed on them by other people. and a child can never informed consent to be part of such a film
and even if you are using historical material how can you condone use of that material? could you condone the free use of a snuff film or nazi medical experiment footage, as a corollary. this is vile criminal material, a record of a horribly transgressive act of victimization. it is material that begs to be destroyed, not to be preserved so you can let others leer at it
i do agree that violent and sexually transgressive material serves as a sort of catharsis, a way to release asocial impulses harmlessly though
perhaps if the material were completely artificial, completely computer generated. i would condone that. and i know, that stuff is outlawed. so that stuff shouldn't be outlawed
the way i see pedophilia: it's sort of like being a homosexual, it's an innate biological desire
biologically, if you are born a pedophile, it's like being born with cancer. through no fault of your own, your genetics has created a mind that finds the wrong thing to focus on sexually. it's a biological error. it's "wrong", it's an "error" BIOLOGICALLY, because attraction to the same sex or prepubescent children results in no offspring
however, homosexuality is not MORALLY wrong, because it is between consenting adults. therefore, homosexuality should be 100% legal
meanwhile, pedophilia means you are attracted to someone whereby any actions you take on your attraction results in inevitable psychological harm, because a prepubescent child can never informed consent to sex. and you have permanently warped their self-image, confidence, and how they think about transgressive, inappropriate, unwanted behavior at a very impressionable age. you've done real substantial damage to another human being. simply by acting on your erroneous but innate and irremovable desires as a pedophile
what a horrible hell
the worst part is, if i am correct about pedophilia being like homosexuality, we must admit then that it can never be cured. you can't cure homosexuality (nor should you try)
but then if pedophilia is an innate biological attraction, it means you are dealing with a human being who is doomed. i mean really, really doomed. to a lifetime of suffering. they must continually suppress their natural desires. what does this do to their happiness? or, act on their desires, and be a horrible transgressive criminal. that's their choice
what a horrible curse. cancer sounds better
willpower is not infinite. no matter how moral the person. therefore everyone who is a pedophile is a potential time bomb. you simply cannot trust them on their own in society
perhaps this explains why so many pedophiles are attracted to the priesthood. as a moral person, who is aware they carry around a permanent desire that means they are in constant danger of acting immorally in a moment of weakness, their reaction is to embrace moral fortitude as hard as they can. and yet so many still fall, and still transgress against children, simply because you are dealing with a strong innate desire and the human mind is not a steel cage, we all have moments of weakness
someday, they will be alone with a child, through accident or chance, no matter how hard they try not to be, and if that day overlaps with a moment of weakness, that we all have, then you have doomed an innocent child to suffer a transgression which will screw them up psychologically. imagine carrying around this curse!
we are left with a horrible conclusion: the only way to "treat" pedophiles, in my mind, is permanent banishment from society
it is an awful thought
but i honestly cannot think of a superior arrangement if pedophilia is like homosexuality and is therefore innate. such people, once identified, simply cannot be allowed to roam freely in society where there is also children, because we have as our duty as moral people to understand the danger they present to children, and themselves
permanent banishment. can anyone think of a better way? castration has been shown to not work. but my mind finds it an inescapable conclusion about the nature of the pedophilia, if i understand it correctly
I insult a guy's mother, and the guy's response to my insult is to kill a government official from the country I come from.
Many people posting here are saying I should be responsible for that guy murdering someone. Because I insulted his mother. Really?
OK, my insult is wrong, yes. Am I responsible for murder? Because I incited the guy to murder? What does that mean? Is the man a human being who is responsible for his own actions? Or a swarm of angry bees?
Isn't it rather insulting to say that the guy is just a force of nature, and not a human being? Well, you are saying that I am responsible for him murdering someone, not him. So clearly YOU don't consider this man to actually be a man at all, but just a beast without thought or reason.
This is my thinking:
1. If I make an ugly movie, I am responsible for making an ugly movie.
2. If I kill a human being, I am responsible for killing a human being.
#1 and #2 have nothing to do with each other. Really.
To think otherwise means you don't believe in personal responsibility and accountability at all. Without believing in that concept, is anything we call moral behavior possible?
At some point you are going to have to come to grips with the existence of a guy where all you have to do is insult his mother, and he goes on a killing rampage.
It seems some people posting here are trying very hard to avoid the obvious implications of a world where a man like that is not uncommon. You better stop trying to avoid the obvious.
you don't understand what you are talking about. it's like instead of me buying a brick for a $1.00, a guy inserts himself between the seller and me the buyer in a millisecond and makes me pay $1.01 for the brick. this tax is a parasitical useless fee on millions of transactions
order doesn't matter. as long as all orders happen on the same tempo. you do realize your "problem" is different, if it can be considered a "problem" at all
you don't know what you are talking about. you place an order, the flash trade gets in front of you at a better price, the price goes up, the flash trader sells, your order goes through. you've just paid a tax to a parasite that adds nothing of value to the system
"HFT is a zero-sum game..."
if it were a zero sum game they would show a profit of zero at the end of the day. please shut up
and that's ok. that's a different problem, if you can consider it a problem at all
the problem now is that you place an order, and some guy is making 8 or 10 transactions in front of, because of, and off of your order before you even get a confirmation. you are paying him a tax, he isn't adding anything to the market, he's just parasitically leaching value from it and not adding anything of value himself
except for another confirmation of the age-old lesson that those with money can make more money off the rest of us easily and unfairly by warping the marketplace
you're over reading the problem. the point is simply that putting the heartbeat in the time span where average connections with average code on average servers solves the problem of people with a lot of money warping the marketplace to collect a tax on everyone else. you're way out of scope and talking about different issues
Slashdot Mirror
?!
i think this thread is attracting all the crackpots
oh, i'm talking to a wack job, sorry, i didn't know
carry on then, don't mind me, i'm lucid
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49031630
are you saying he shouldn't be arrested for that?
no. i just made up the bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes, etc., in my head
or: bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes may say they are rioting because of reason {xyz}, but {xyz} does not conform with my worldview, so we'll just accuse bbc, al jazeera, cnn, nytimes of poltiically motivated distortion
(holds up egg)
this is your brain on drugs
(cracks egg in frying pan)
this is your brain on drugs on cybernetics
(hundreds of little robots swarm and deftly fuse the egg back together)
any questions?
he threatened an fbi agent
it's really not that complicated
if i yell fire in a crowded theatre, people may trample and kill others motivated out of self-preservation. so me, the one shouted fire, i'm the one culpable
if i call mohammed a nasty word, and people start rioting and killing, they are motivated by religious extremism. do you believe a religious zealot who will kill because of his religion is a defensible position, like self-preservation? hell no! so where does the buck stop? with the religious zealot
if i insult your mother and you kill someone, who is culpable for the dead person? you? or me because i insulted my mother? do you see how crazy this gets?
at some point you have to learn to put proper blame where it is properly due
you could say that all of them are speculative
they would like to make money, musk would like to make money, the railroad robber barons of old, the iconic image that pops to mind when i think industrialist, they would have liked to make money when they started a business venture
but they frequently lost their shirt. you wouldn't call them philanthropists because they spent a fortune to build a railroad line that promptly went bankrupt
likewise, if musk makes no money, he's not a philanthropist. he just started a business that failed, which happens most of the time
the difference is the scale and the machine-oriented subject of the venture. he is an industrialist, doing what they always do: take a giant risk with a fortune on a gamble involving a complicated outlay on tons of machinery and the long-term effort of a huge cast of engineers
you are inserting your worldview on their actions. ask them why they are rioting, and they will say it is because of this video. but you are just as blind as them, because you don't hear what they are saying, you just wrap your worldview over them, and invent your own motivations
they are specifically angry about this video. they say, not me
why are you making excuses for this kind of behavior?
this is where you reply to me and continue to insert your worldview into the motivations of other people who are clearly not rioting because of the reasons you think they are
you are just as blind as they are
You get that with the expensive legal team. There are consultants that specialize in picking jurors.
the object of sexual attraction is biologically innate
so you can put a criminal in jail, and they mature and develop impulse control, and when they get out of jail the person can actually be cured of criminal behavior for the rest of their lives. but once a pedophile, always a pedophile, forever. nothing cures it. so your analogy does not stand. pedophilia is not criminal behavior, it's innate biological behavior
as for your second paragraph:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3113343&cid=41321067
finally, i'm trying to honestly search for the best moral answer to a morally difficult situation. you do yourself no favors by heaping scorn on me. you are ignorant or blind to the seriousness and complexity of the problem of pedophilia if you think the answer is simple. only if the answer was simple would your level of scorn be appropriate for my hesitancy
finally, you also do yourself no favors by misrepresenting what i say:
i said nothing remotely like that. this is just some weird fear of yours talking, this weird idea has nothing to do with what i said, and what you said is easy to prove as a completely invalid, laughable inference
i mean if we are going to say the kind of law the top story is referencing is a form of hysteria, we can also point to posts like yours as another kind of hysteria as well. we need less hysteria all around, period
so next time calm the bleep down, take a deep breath, then post
yeah but how do you make the child porn?
if you have to rape one child in order that hundreds of other children are not raped, can you do that? i don't think so. if killing one man means others might live, you can't do that, as a corollary. sure, people choose to volunteer themselves as food for others in situations of starvation or to draw enemy fire so others escape, for example. but these acts are self-chosen of heroic sacrifice, not decisions imposed on them by other people. and a child can never informed consent to be part of such a film
and even if you are using historical material how can you condone use of that material? could you condone the free use of a snuff film or nazi medical experiment footage, as a corollary. this is vile criminal material, a record of a horribly transgressive act of victimization. it is material that begs to be destroyed, not to be preserved so you can let others leer at it
i do agree that violent and sexually transgressive material serves as a sort of catharsis, a way to release asocial impulses harmlessly though
perhaps if the material were completely artificial, completely computer generated. i would condone that. and i know, that stuff is outlawed. so that stuff shouldn't be outlawed
God bless those deaf people who choose not to hear. It means I will wait in a shorter line.
the way i see pedophilia: it's sort of like being a homosexual, it's an innate biological desire
biologically, if you are born a pedophile, it's like being born with cancer. through no fault of your own, your genetics has created a mind that finds the wrong thing to focus on sexually. it's a biological error. it's "wrong", it's an "error" BIOLOGICALLY, because attraction to the same sex or prepubescent children results in no offspring
however, homosexuality is not MORALLY wrong, because it is between consenting adults. therefore, homosexuality should be 100% legal
meanwhile, pedophilia means you are attracted to someone whereby any actions you take on your attraction results in inevitable psychological harm, because a prepubescent child can never informed consent to sex. and you have permanently warped their self-image, confidence, and how they think about transgressive, inappropriate, unwanted behavior at a very impressionable age. you've done real substantial damage to another human being. simply by acting on your erroneous but innate and irremovable desires as a pedophile
what a horrible hell
the worst part is, if i am correct about pedophilia being like homosexuality, we must admit then that it can never be cured. you can't cure homosexuality (nor should you try)
but then if pedophilia is an innate biological attraction, it means you are dealing with a human being who is doomed. i mean really, really doomed. to a lifetime of suffering. they must continually suppress their natural desires. what does this do to their happiness? or, act on their desires, and be a horrible transgressive criminal. that's their choice
what a horrible curse. cancer sounds better
willpower is not infinite. no matter how moral the person. therefore everyone who is a pedophile is a potential time bomb. you simply cannot trust them on their own in society
perhaps this explains why so many pedophiles are attracted to the priesthood. as a moral person, who is aware they carry around a permanent desire that means they are in constant danger of acting immorally in a moment of weakness, their reaction is to embrace moral fortitude as hard as they can. and yet so many still fall, and still transgress against children, simply because you are dealing with a strong innate desire and the human mind is not a steel cage, we all have moments of weakness
someday, they will be alone with a child, through accident or chance, no matter how hard they try not to be, and if that day overlaps with a moment of weakness, that we all have, then you have doomed an innocent child to suffer a transgression which will screw them up psychologically. imagine carrying around this curse!
we are left with a horrible conclusion: the only way to "treat" pedophiles, in my mind, is permanent banishment from society
it is an awful thought
but i honestly cannot think of a superior arrangement if pedophilia is like homosexuality and is therefore innate. such people, once identified, simply cannot be allowed to roam freely in society where there is also children, because we have as our duty as moral people to understand the danger they present to children, and themselves
permanent banishment. can anyone think of a better way? castration has been shown to not work. but my mind finds it an inescapable conclusion about the nature of the pedophilia, if i understand it correctly
depressing
I insult a guy's mother, and the guy's response to my insult is to kill a government official from the country I come from.
Many people posting here are saying I should be responsible for that guy murdering someone. Because I insulted his mother. Really?
OK, my insult is wrong, yes. Am I responsible for murder? Because I incited the guy to murder? What does that mean? Is the man a human being who is responsible for his own actions? Or a swarm of angry bees?
Isn't it rather insulting to say that the guy is just a force of nature, and not a human being? Well, you are saying that I am responsible for him murdering someone, not him. So clearly YOU don't consider this man to actually be a man at all, but just a beast without thought or reason.
This is my thinking:
1. If I make an ugly movie, I am responsible for making an ugly movie.
2. If I kill a human being, I am responsible for killing a human being.
#1 and #2 have nothing to do with each other. Really.
To think otherwise means you don't believe in personal responsibility and accountability at all. Without believing in that concept, is anything we call moral behavior possible?
At some point you are going to have to come to grips with the existence of a guy where all you have to do is insult his mother, and he goes on a killing rampage.
It seems some people posting here are trying very hard to avoid the obvious implications of a world where a man like that is not uncommon. You better stop trying to avoid the obvious.
How dare they eat our precious, precious oil.
agreed. that's also a good idea
you don't understand what you are talking about. it's like instead of me buying a brick for a $1.00, a guy inserts himself between the seller and me the buyer in a millisecond and makes me pay $1.01 for the brick. this tax is a parasitical useless fee on millions of transactions
order doesn't matter. as long as all orders happen on the same tempo. you do realize your "problem" is different, if it can be considered a "problem" at all
you don't really understand what you are talking about do you?
those are good questions. get your ass to google. i'm not your father
you don't know what you are talking about. you place an order, the flash trade gets in front of you at a better price, the price goes up, the flash trader sells, your order goes through. you've just paid a tax to a parasite that adds nothing of value to the system
"HFT is a zero-sum game..."
if it were a zero sum game they would show a profit of zero at the end of the day. please shut up
and that's ok. that's a different problem, if you can consider it a problem at all
the problem now is that you place an order, and some guy is making 8 or 10 transactions in front of, because of, and off of your order before you even get a confirmation. you are paying him a tax, he isn't adding anything to the market, he's just parasitically leaching value from it and not adding anything of value himself
except for another confirmation of the age-old lesson that those with money can make more money off the rest of us easily and unfairly by warping the marketplace
you're over reading the problem. the point is simply that putting the heartbeat in the time span where average connections with average code on average servers solves the problem of people with a lot of money warping the marketplace to collect a tax on everyone else. you're way out of scope and talking about different issues