thank you, dc genuinely has greater fire hazard implications than ac
as for health, it is a bit more nuanced and complex than i said:
Direct current (DC), because it moves with continuous motion through a conductor, has the tendency to induce muscular tetanus quite readily. Alternating current (AC), because it alternately reverses direction of motion, provides brief moments of opportunity for an afflicted muscle to relax between alternations. Thus, from the concern of becoming "froze on the circuit," DC is more dangerous than AC.
However, AC's alternating nature has a greater tendency to throw the heart's pacemaker neurons into a condition of fibrillation, whereas DC tends to just make the heart stand still. Once the shock current is halted, a "frozen" heart has a better chance of regaining a normal beat pattern than a fibrillating heart. This is why "defibrillating" equipment used by emergency medics works: the jolt of current supplied by the defibrillator unit is DC, which halts fibrillation and gives the heart a chance to recover....
One of the reasons that AC might be considered more dangerous is that it arguably has more ways of getting into your body. Since the voltage alternates, it can cause current to enter and exit your body even without a closed loop, since your body (and what ground it's attached to) has capacitance. DC cannot do that. Also, AC is quite easily stepped up to higher voltages using transformers, while with DC that requires some relatively elaborate electronics. Finally, while your skin has a fairly high resistance to protect you, and the air is also a terrific insulator as long as you're not touching any wires, sometimes the inductance of AC transformers can cause high-voltage sparks that break down the air and I imagine can get through your skin a bit as well.
this experiment is fine if you're doing little LED lights and laptops, but if you're running something like air conditioning or a washing machine you're building a fire hazard and a mortality risk
the decision to use AC over DC was not random nor taken lightly, there are many factors involved (heck, it was a major engineering, corporate, and PR war between Edison and Westinghouse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), but the right decision was made
for our modern world where some people only care about their laptop and smartphone, it does indeed seem silly and wasteful to convert to AC then back to DC, especially if you've ever tried charging electronics in a car. but there are of course many other uses for electricity, and the navel gazing small electronics crowd is but a minor topic
but i do see a time in the future as more people use local solar and other renewables, that a small DC subsystem is made available in the house for electronics like computers
the adult film industry has exploitative parts, yes
so shut down those parts
don't stand against the entire industry
there are plenty of men and women who get into it as a empowerment ego rush, or even just because of the money, but never are in a position because they are forced to do something. it's always a freely chosen choice for them
there also naive kids who are tricked into situations which are basically rape and brutality for pennies. so find those assholes and jail them as the shitbags they are
the chinese govt is doing deep packet inspection and going after VPNs now. let's see how hard the politically fearful shitbags get before they realize letting their own people talk freely about politics is a sign of political maturity and social stability, not some evil threat
yeah, you got me, by expressing any sort of sympathy for someone who has a sexual proclivity which places them on a collision course with morality, means i'm also a pedophile/s
the existence of a progression indicates an impulse which exists independently
the mere creation of a police dept, for example, does not mean martial law is somehow inevitable. this is fear addled ignorance
the slippery slope is a simple logical fallacy like all the others, asking us to trust to fear instead of reason
anyone who depends upon the concept of a slippery slope in the construction of their argument can immediately be dismissed as invalid, unworthy of consideration, and a fearmongering fool
there is indeed porn which is rape fantasy or porn which treats the woman brutally
there is also porn which is entirely respectful and almost romantic
there is also porn which shows a woman or women treating a man like shit
i submit the type of porn someone chooses is a reflection of their own predilections, so if they gravitate towards porn which subjugates and brutalizes women, that's about their organic character that existed before viewing that kind of porn
if you put me in front of gay porn, made me watch it constantly since a young age, would i be gay? i submit i would be quite bored, and never get aroused, and never become gay
you have one stilted prejudicial view of only one sector of porn, and think it applies to all porn, and you call this "evidence"
you're a troll or a moron on this topic. either way, you fail, and you reneed to rethink your position, it is intellectually invalid
building a police department allows for martial law
are you filled with the same irrational fear and loathing about the existence of police, a completely necessary component for society to function?
Furthermore, I vehemently oppose any moral judgment, moral policing, and censorship.
then you are an immature and naive person. all freedoms have limits. mainly when and where those freedoms impinge on the freedoms of others. my freedom to get a good night's sleep, your freedom to listen to loud music at 2 AM. my freedom to speed on the highway, your freedom to not be killed by a speeding douchebag
there is content, like child porn, whose creation is only possible with the denial of freedom to someone else, a child, who can not consent in an informed way to sex. therefore, censoring child porn is the extension of freedom, not the destruction of it
There is also evidence that a lot of exposure to Porn, especially at a young age is detrimental to brain development, especially respect for women. And that respect for women is one of the key differentiators between an advanced society.
yeah, that's complete laughable nonsense. there is no magic substance in media that creates disrespect. disrespect is a function of a person's low character. putting that on media is a lame attempt at avoiding personal responsibility
i would like to see this "evidence" you refer to, as it sounds like a hilarious pile of crap
there are societies in this world where women are treated legally as little more than property
the west is only beginning to emerge from this barbarity, as "mens rights" morons like yourself illustrate, misogyny still exists
but to answer your scenario:
if a woman is going to try to victimize me, my first defense is a valid judge of character and never getting involved with an evil harpy in the first place
but if i am socially clueless and lack the insight that will protect me from getting invovled with a vile woman, she's going to victimize me anyway, even if she lives in a medieval sharia law society as you somehow believe it should be: poison me, assassinate my character with gossip, harm our children, etc.
there are evil people in this world
some are men. some are women
fight the evil shitbags of the world, not women. not men
to react to the very notion of women's rights as wrong simply marks you as a socially inept loser
i'm sorry your experience with some women has been so bad. but now you're constructing an artificial fantasy about how you interact with the opposite sex that only means you will be forever victimized in the way you fear. it's really only a testament to your weak mental faculties your own poor character
how hard do you think it is for someone who controls all of the circuits to block a webpage?
additionally, we already block, with complete legal and moral legitimacy, child porn sites, phishing sites, etc.
the "infrastructure" you refer to is not really difficult. and in fact already exists for completely valid reasons
so this argument "if we block porn, political opinions are next" is complete slippery slope fear based bullshit
if you want a winning argument, focus on the kind of govt that would do such a thing, not the red herring "oh noes teh infrastruture!" failed weak argument
i would never think a country like britain would fall victim to this sort of censorial nonsense, and it is a troubling development
however, i don't buy the argument it is because of feminism
you need to understand that feminism there is the older valid causes against the maltreatment of women and the removal of their rights. which used to be far worse in the west. and is indeed still a major problem in the world, especially in areas like india and islamic countries
but the kind of feminism you seem to be reacting to isn't really feminism at all, it is instead this sort of clueless teenaged reactive naval gazing by immature clowns
kind of like how dismantling all governmental protections against abuses by large market players is called "libertarianism" in the usa. while actual genuine libertarianism of the original european sort has to do with social issues. real valid libertarians are interested in legalizing marijuana, not freeing plutocrats from paying their fair share of taxes
so like the word "libertarian" in the usa has been hijacked corrupted and rendered invalid by a plutocrat agenda, so to have a few headcases coopted the word "feminist" and advanced truly nutty causes that only mark the believer in those causes as having some sort of psychological or social deficiency
furthermore, for you to react to these fringe idiots, and believe what they stand for is actual feminism, just means you have been horribly trolled. snap out of it, you've been fooled
real, valid feminism is a very important ideology in this world, against the very real and very evil treatment of women in many parts of this world
i am aware some countries outlaw fantasy cartoon child porn as well as actual real child porn
while real child porn should never be legal and should always be blocked, i think that fantasy drawings and cartoons do have valid cathartic use and should be legal
also, the legal status quo against fantasy content precludes the tactic of honey pots
outlawing the fantasy content drives it underground, while allowing it to flow freely allows the authorities to track profile, and locate consumers of it
as they should
because viewing this material indicates a proclivity that allows us to find pedophiles
and pedophiles should never be able to exist in open society without monitoring
like drug addiction, we should not incarcerate pedophiles, we should treat them as having a healthcare issue. pedophiles, once identified, should be treated, not jailed
and closely watched nonetheless
because like how valid porn between consenting adults does not prevent all rape, only minimize it, fantasy child porn would also only mitigate child abduction and victimization, not prevent all of it
being a pedophile marks you as fundamentally incompatible with human society in a truly horrible way. i feel sorry for pedophiles, i'd rather have painful cancer than be a pedophile, it is a truly life destroying, life hobbling vile affliction
because to be a pedophile means you have a sexual proclivity which immediately elicits the completely valid parental response and societal response to protect their children. some of that instinct outside the realm of law will find immediate and violent impulse, and even large sympathy for that violent impulse. the imperative to protect children is strong, as it should be, and pedophilia is a valid threat. but even in the realm of legality, society has to strongly consider the potential for grave harm that a pedophile represents in open society. a pedophile is truly screwed in many ways, and there is little empathy for them
pedophilia, like homosexuality, is merely a genetic aberration in the formation of sexual attraction. but while homosexuality is fine because it involves consenting adults, pedophilia will never be ok because it involves one party that can never consent (in an informed way, not a bullshit "i gave you toys and candy and you said 'ok' to my suggestion of sex" because a child can never give informed consent on the topic)
i think maybe in the future we can treat pedophilia with child shaped robots
but even so, treatment will never prevent all pedophiles from hurting real children. and therefore society must always view them in a very critical, suspicious, dim light. because they always represent the potential for grave harm
i think if i were a pedophile i'd choose self-banishment to greenland or something. having a strong sense of morality is only a guide, not a cloak of protection, we all have moments of weakness, and i would never want a moment of weakness of mine to result in harm to a child
No, it just shows your lack of reading comprehension. Go back and find any mention in my posts of morality. It's OK. I'll wait.
agreed 100%
you have no principles or morality in your "thinking" on the topic. that's the actual point
you have mindless contrarianism where one person can do something evil because somebody else did. and then blame that evil action on someone else anyways, due to your lack of understanding of the concept of accountability
you demonstrate your own personal failures of character rather than any valid commentary on geopolitics. you are projecting choices and consequences as understood by your own dim wattage mind:
1. "somebody did something bad so i should be able to do something bad"
two-wrongs-make-a-right logic
2. "the reason i did something bad is because of what someone else did that does not actually logically imply my action, but whatever"
wife beater logic
your arguments depend upon this "thinking", therefore you mark yourself as an immoral and irresponsible douchebag
i actually feel sorry for anyone who has to work with you or is related to you/ friends with you. you're obviously a horrible piece of shit in the way you think about what is justified or not in this world according to #1 and #2 above
"if we legalize marijuana, that means we have to legalize heroin and meth"
"if we legalize gay marriage, that means we have to legalize marrying corpses or animals"
see the problem? people actually think in your world. and they can tell the difference between different topics. we don't slide effortlessly into lack of thought on major issues of liberty and rights. no one does. your argument is illogical FUD
simply having the tool or liberty to do one thing, does not automatically mean that using that tool or liberty in all cases is therefore legitimized or inevitable or even more likely
because people can tell the difference between different topics. we think. we're not blind
the very concept of the slippery slope is a logical fallacy that instantly marks the argument as invalid. it is used to make fear-based demagogue arguments
this doesn't mean i support blocking porn websites, it simply means that the act of blocking websites: phishing sites, child porn sites, etc., does not in any way have anything to do with restricting websites that have genuine free expression use that the govt may not like. to block those, the govt has to actually do that, and therefore is doing something new and different and not in any way related to blocking sites that really do need to be blocked (child porn, phishing, etc.)
you have to remove the thinking human being from the equation to make your bullshit argument work. or do you believe blocking websites requires some vast infrastructure that would not be viable nor exist if we didn't block child porn first? nonsense
you can say having a police dept is a slippery slope to martial law. except there is no actual slippery slope because people can actually tell the difference between different concepts of use for a police dept. as recent controversies in the usa demonstrate. and in fact without a police dept, society quickly succumbs to chaos
think
invoking the concept of the slippery slope removes you from the land of logic and reason and places you firmly in the land of fear based emotion
more socially conservative societies that restrict outlets for harmless sexual release do indeed have higher rates of rape and sexual violence in general. there is much truth to the concept of catharsis as a way to reduce rape and sexual violence. it doesn't prevent everything, just some of it
but bringing up child porn in this context is a red herring because the creation of child porn victimizes actual children, and this is why it is genuinely immoral illegal and verboten
sexual content between consenting adults is completely unrelated to child porn. to believe it is marks you as woefully inadequate to comment intelligently on the topic, or a failed troll
How about because when NATO ignores Russian security concerns and expands recklessly, Russia responds with low-level, plausibly deniable invasions and destabilizations in the states they feel are strategically within their sphere, much like the US does with literally the entire Western hemisphere.
1. we went over this moron. "it's ok for russia to do bad things because USA does bad things" intellectual and moral bankruptcy
first off fuck the usa. it's committed many crimes in this world. but more importantly, your "two wrongs make the right" thinking only goes to show you lack morals and principles. in your world it's ok for anyone to commit any crime they want at any time. the justification being someone else got away with the same crime once, so they should be able to too. it's sophistry and empty contrarianism
it's like "i hate the usa so i have to love the iranian bomb program." or "i hate iran so i have to love american imperialism." both suggestions are fucking idiotic, and it's the way you think about russia and the usa. in reality, populated with people with actual principles, you can hate both iran, and the usa, for their separate crimes. likewise, it's totally possible to hate the usa, and russia, and not give one or the other a pass because "it's not fair mommy, that kid got away with shoplifting too" like an immature douchebag, which is what you are with your words here. by thinking this way you're just announcing your own intellectual and moral failure
2. if NATO did not exist, russia would be doing the same, or worse. why do you blame the malice of one party on someone else? it's like you lack a basic abstract social model of cause and effect in your mind, something developed by most people in elementary school
example: lets say the USA invades canada in 10 years. according to your logic, we can say it's bin laden's fault, because of 9/11, which did this to american politics, and that to american concerns, and turned them into raging warmongers, etc. so it's all bin laden's fault for the usa attacking canada. completely stupid. but that's your logic here
some moron like yourself would agree with this contrived bullshit, because you believe NATO is somehow to blame for what *russia* does. get it? do you possibly sense the social problem you have on assigning responsibility and accountability for what one person does to another person?
another example: i dent your car. you pull out a gun and blow my head off. according to your wife beater logic, i'm at fault for getting my head blown off. because i dented your car
but in reality, you have many choices to responding to me denting your car. swear at me. ignore me. ask me to pay. punch me. insult my friends and family. dent my car back. make jokes. whatever. how you respond to the stresses of life is about YOUR character and YOUR thinking, and you're only demonstrating your own low character and weak mental capacity at understanding who is responsible for what
in fact, blaming your bad choices on who you choose to victimize is called avoiding responsibility. and for you to fall for this lame "poland wanted to dance with NATO so russia had to beat up ukraine" wife beater stupidity, and your other "the usa does bad things so it's ok for russia to do bad things" two wrongs make a right idiocy, it tells us you are person of no morals who blames your bad choices and your crimes on others
your geopolitical analysis tells us nothing about the reality of russia and NATO, and only about your own intellectual and moral failure
your country is probably some broken shithole with many problems all due to local corruption and bad domestic choices, but blind pride means you believe what some chest thumping demagogue feeds you "it's all the usa's fault because they did bad thing {X} to our country in the cold war 50 years ago" and so you never take any responsibility for your own failures, invent fantastic bullshit cause and effect chains of reasoning for why what you do wro
china is outpacing india economically and militarily
india better catch up
if india had any cojones it would also be more assertive on the issue of tibetan independence. mongolia exists because russia could outweigh china's imperialism. tibet does not exist because india could not do the same
Slashdot Mirror
thank you, dc genuinely has greater fire hazard implications than ac
as for health, it is a bit more nuanced and complex than i said:
http://physics.stackexchange.c...
this experiment is fine if you're doing little LED lights and laptops, but if you're running something like air conditioning or a washing machine you're building a fire hazard and a mortality risk
the decision to use AC over DC was not random nor taken lightly, there are many factors involved (heck, it was a major engineering, corporate, and PR war between Edison and Westinghouse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), but the right decision was made
for our modern world where some people only care about their laptop and smartphone, it does indeed seem silly and wasteful to convert to AC then back to DC, especially if you've ever tried charging electronics in a car. but there are of course many other uses for electricity, and the navel gazing small electronics crowd is but a minor topic
but i do see a time in the future as more people use local solar and other renewables, that a small DC subsystem is made available in the house for electronics like computers
the adult film industry has exploitative parts, yes
so shut down those parts
don't stand against the entire industry
there are plenty of men and women who get into it as a empowerment ego rush, or even just because of the money, but never are in a position because they are forced to do something. it's always a freely chosen choice for them
there also naive kids who are tricked into situations which are basically rape and brutality for pennies. so find those assholes and jail them as the shitbags they are
the chinese govt is doing deep packet inspection and going after VPNs now. let's see how hard the politically fearful shitbags get before they realize letting their own people talk freely about politics is a sign of political maturity and social stability, not some evil threat
no, you are indeed making a valid point
i seem to have elicited irrational hysteria in this tool "s.petry"
yeah, you got me, by expressing any sort of sympathy for someone who has a sexual proclivity which places them on a collision course with morality, means i'm also a pedophile /s
fuck you, you smearmongering asswipe
the existence of a progression indicates an impulse which exists independently
the mere creation of a police dept, for example, does not mean martial law is somehow inevitable. this is fear addled ignorance
the slippery slope is a simple logical fallacy like all the others, asking us to trust to fear instead of reason
anyone who depends upon the concept of a slippery slope in the construction of their argument can immediately be dismissed as invalid, unworthy of consideration, and a fearmongering fool
is this the evidence you are referring to?
furthermore there's many different kinds of porn
there is indeed porn which is rape fantasy or porn which treats the woman brutally
there is also porn which is entirely respectful and almost romantic
there is also porn which shows a woman or women treating a man like shit
i submit the type of porn someone chooses is a reflection of their own predilections, so if they gravitate towards porn which subjugates and brutalizes women, that's about their organic character that existed before viewing that kind of porn
if you put me in front of gay porn, made me watch it constantly since a young age, would i be gay? i submit i would be quite bored, and never get aroused, and never become gay
you have one stilted prejudicial view of only one sector of porn, and think it applies to all porn, and you call this "evidence"
you're a troll or a moron on this topic. either way, you fail, and you reneed to rethink your position, it is intellectually invalid
building a police department allows for martial law
are you filled with the same irrational fear and loathing about the existence of police, a completely necessary component for society to function?
then you are an immature and naive person. all freedoms have limits. mainly when and where those freedoms impinge on the freedoms of others. my freedom to get a good night's sleep, your freedom to listen to loud music at 2 AM. my freedom to speed on the highway, your freedom to not be killed by a speeding douchebag
there is content, like child porn, whose creation is only possible with the denial of freedom to someone else, a child, who can not consent in an informed way to sex. therefore, censoring child porn is the extension of freedom, not the destruction of it
yeah, that's complete laughable nonsense. there is no magic substance in media that creates disrespect. disrespect is a function of a person's low character. putting that on media is a lame attempt at avoiding personal responsibility
i would like to see this "evidence" you refer to, as it sounds like a hilarious pile of crap
there are societies in this world where women are treated legally as little more than property
the west is only beginning to emerge from this barbarity, as "mens rights" morons like yourself illustrate, misogyny still exists
but to answer your scenario:
if a woman is going to try to victimize me, my first defense is a valid judge of character and never getting involved with an evil harpy in the first place
but if i am socially clueless and lack the insight that will protect me from getting invovled with a vile woman, she's going to victimize me anyway, even if she lives in a medieval sharia law society as you somehow believe it should be: poison me, assassinate my character with gossip, harm our children, etc.
there are evil people in this world
some are men. some are women
fight the evil shitbags of the world, not women. not men
to react to the very notion of women's rights as wrong simply marks you as a socially inept loser
i'm sorry your experience with some women has been so bad. but now you're constructing an artificial fantasy about how you interact with the opposite sex that only means you will be forever victimized in the way you fear. it's really only a testament to your weak mental faculties your own poor character
how hard do you think it is for someone who controls all of the circuits to block a webpage?
additionally, we already block, with complete legal and moral legitimacy, child porn sites, phishing sites, etc.
the "infrastructure" you refer to is not really difficult. and in fact already exists for completely valid reasons
so this argument "if we block porn, political opinions are next" is complete slippery slope fear based bullshit
if you want a winning argument, focus on the kind of govt that would do such a thing, not the red herring "oh noes teh infrastruture!" failed weak argument
i would never think a country like britain would fall victim to this sort of censorial nonsense, and it is a troubling development
however, i don't buy the argument it is because of feminism
you need to understand that feminism there is the older valid causes against the maltreatment of women and the removal of their rights. which used to be far worse in the west. and is indeed still a major problem in the world, especially in areas like india and islamic countries
but the kind of feminism you seem to be reacting to isn't really feminism at all, it is instead this sort of clueless teenaged reactive naval gazing by immature clowns
kind of like how dismantling all governmental protections against abuses by large market players is called "libertarianism" in the usa. while actual genuine libertarianism of the original european sort has to do with social issues. real valid libertarians are interested in legalizing marijuana, not freeing plutocrats from paying their fair share of taxes
so like the word "libertarian" in the usa has been hijacked corrupted and rendered invalid by a plutocrat agenda, so to have a few headcases coopted the word "feminist" and advanced truly nutty causes that only mark the believer in those causes as having some sort of psychological or social deficiency
furthermore, for you to react to these fringe idiots, and believe what they stand for is actual feminism, just means you have been horribly trolled. snap out of it, you've been fooled
real, valid feminism is a very important ideology in this world, against the very real and very evil treatment of women in many parts of this world
thank you, that's a valid clarification
i am aware some countries outlaw fantasy cartoon child porn as well as actual real child porn
while real child porn should never be legal and should always be blocked, i think that fantasy drawings and cartoons do have valid cathartic use and should be legal
also, the legal status quo against fantasy content precludes the tactic of honey pots
outlawing the fantasy content drives it underground, while allowing it to flow freely allows the authorities to track profile, and locate consumers of it
as they should
because viewing this material indicates a proclivity that allows us to find pedophiles
and pedophiles should never be able to exist in open society without monitoring
like drug addiction, we should not incarcerate pedophiles, we should treat them as having a healthcare issue. pedophiles, once identified, should be treated, not jailed
and closely watched nonetheless
because like how valid porn between consenting adults does not prevent all rape, only minimize it, fantasy child porn would also only mitigate child abduction and victimization, not prevent all of it
being a pedophile marks you as fundamentally incompatible with human society in a truly horrible way. i feel sorry for pedophiles, i'd rather have painful cancer than be a pedophile, it is a truly life destroying, life hobbling vile affliction
because to be a pedophile means you have a sexual proclivity which immediately elicits the completely valid parental response and societal response to protect their children. some of that instinct outside the realm of law will find immediate and violent impulse, and even large sympathy for that violent impulse. the imperative to protect children is strong, as it should be, and pedophilia is a valid threat. but even in the realm of legality, society has to strongly consider the potential for grave harm that a pedophile represents in open society. a pedophile is truly screwed in many ways, and there is little empathy for them
pedophilia, like homosexuality, is merely a genetic aberration in the formation of sexual attraction. but while homosexuality is fine because it involves consenting adults, pedophilia will never be ok because it involves one party that can never consent (in an informed way, not a bullshit "i gave you toys and candy and you said 'ok' to my suggestion of sex" because a child can never give informed consent on the topic)
i think maybe in the future we can treat pedophilia with child shaped robots
but even so, treatment will never prevent all pedophiles from hurting real children. and therefore society must always view them in a very critical, suspicious, dim light. because they always represent the potential for grave harm
i think if i were a pedophile i'd choose self-banishment to greenland or something. having a strong sense of morality is only a guide, not a cloak of protection, we all have moments of weakness, and i would never want a moment of weakness of mine to result in harm to a child
truly a life-crippling, monstrous affliction
agreed 100%
you have no principles or morality in your "thinking" on the topic. that's the actual point
you have mindless contrarianism where one person can do something evil because somebody else did. and then blame that evil action on someone else anyways, due to your lack of understanding of the concept of accountability
you demonstrate your own personal failures of character rather than any valid commentary on geopolitics. you are projecting choices and consequences as understood by your own dim wattage mind:
1. "somebody did something bad so i should be able to do something bad"
two-wrongs-make-a-right logic
2. "the reason i did something bad is because of what someone else did that does not actually logically imply my action, but whatever"
wife beater logic
your arguments depend upon this "thinking", therefore you mark yourself as an immoral and irresponsible douchebag
i actually feel sorry for anyone who has to work with you or is related to you/ friends with you. you're obviously a horrible piece of shit in the way you think about what is justified or not in this world according to #1 and #2 above
here's some bullshit arguments similar to yours:
"if we legalize marijuana, that means we have to legalize heroin and meth"
"if we legalize gay marriage, that means we have to legalize marrying corpses or animals"
see the problem? people actually think in your world. and they can tell the difference between different topics. we don't slide effortlessly into lack of thought on major issues of liberty and rights. no one does. your argument is illogical FUD
simply having the tool or liberty to do one thing, does not automatically mean that using that tool or liberty in all cases is therefore legitimized or inevitable or even more likely
because people can tell the difference between different topics. we think. we're not blind
the very concept of the slippery slope is a logical fallacy that instantly marks the argument as invalid. it is used to make fear-based demagogue arguments
this doesn't mean i support blocking porn websites, it simply means that the act of blocking websites: phishing sites, child porn sites, etc., does not in any way have anything to do with restricting websites that have genuine free expression use that the govt may not like. to block those, the govt has to actually do that, and therefore is doing something new and different and not in any way related to blocking sites that really do need to be blocked (child porn, phishing, etc.)
you have to remove the thinking human being from the equation to make your bullshit argument work. or do you believe blocking websites requires some vast infrastructure that would not be viable nor exist if we didn't block child porn first? nonsense
you can say having a police dept is a slippery slope to martial law. except there is no actual slippery slope because people can actually tell the difference between different concepts of use for a police dept. as recent controversies in the usa demonstrate. and in fact without a police dept, society quickly succumbs to chaos
think
invoking the concept of the slippery slope removes you from the land of logic and reason and places you firmly in the land of fear based emotion
more socially conservative societies that restrict outlets for harmless sexual release do indeed have higher rates of rape and sexual violence in general. there is much truth to the concept of catharsis as a way to reduce rape and sexual violence. it doesn't prevent everything, just some of it
but bringing up child porn in this context is a red herring because the creation of child porn victimizes actual children, and this is why it is genuinely immoral illegal and verboten
sexual content between consenting adults is completely unrelated to child porn. to believe it is marks you as woefully inadequate to comment intelligently on the topic, or a failed troll
how socially clueless and sheltered can someone be?
you have asperger's maybe?
there's some sort of large social deficit at work here resulting in spouting this nonsense
1. we went over this moron. "it's ok for russia to do bad things because USA does bad things" intellectual and moral bankruptcy
first off fuck the usa. it's committed many crimes in this world. but more importantly, your "two wrongs make the right" thinking only goes to show you lack morals and principles. in your world it's ok for anyone to commit any crime they want at any time. the justification being someone else got away with the same crime once, so they should be able to too. it's sophistry and empty contrarianism
it's like "i hate the usa so i have to love the iranian bomb program." or "i hate iran so i have to love american imperialism." both suggestions are fucking idiotic, and it's the way you think about russia and the usa. in reality, populated with people with actual principles, you can hate both iran, and the usa, for their separate crimes. likewise, it's totally possible to hate the usa, and russia, and not give one or the other a pass because "it's not fair mommy, that kid got away with shoplifting too" like an immature douchebag, which is what you are with your words here. by thinking this way you're just announcing your own intellectual and moral failure
2. if NATO did not exist, russia would be doing the same, or worse. why do you blame the malice of one party on someone else? it's like you lack a basic abstract social model of cause and effect in your mind, something developed by most people in elementary school
example: lets say the USA invades canada in 10 years. according to your logic, we can say it's bin laden's fault, because of 9/11, which did this to american politics, and that to american concerns, and turned them into raging warmongers, etc. so it's all bin laden's fault for the usa attacking canada. completely stupid. but that's your logic here
some moron like yourself would agree with this contrived bullshit, because you believe NATO is somehow to blame for what *russia* does. get it? do you possibly sense the social problem you have on assigning responsibility and accountability for what one person does to another person?
another example: i dent your car. you pull out a gun and blow my head off. according to your wife beater logic, i'm at fault for getting my head blown off. because i dented your car
but in reality, you have many choices to responding to me denting your car. swear at me. ignore me. ask me to pay. punch me. insult my friends and family. dent my car back. make jokes. whatever. how you respond to the stresses of life is about YOUR character and YOUR thinking, and you're only demonstrating your own low character and weak mental capacity at understanding who is responsible for what
in fact, blaming your bad choices on who you choose to victimize is called avoiding responsibility. and for you to fall for this lame "poland wanted to dance with NATO so russia had to beat up ukraine" wife beater stupidity, and your other "the usa does bad things so it's ok for russia to do bad things" two wrongs make a right idiocy, it tells us you are person of no morals who blames your bad choices and your crimes on others
your geopolitical analysis tells us nothing about the reality of russia and NATO, and only about your own intellectual and moral failure
your country is probably some broken shithole with many problems all due to local corruption and bad domestic choices, but blind pride means you believe what some chest thumping demagogue feeds you "it's all the usa's fault because they did bad thing {X} to our country in the cold war 50 years ago" and so you never take any responsibility for your own failures, invent fantastic bullshit cause and effect chains of reasoning for why what you do wro
china is outpacing india economically and militarily
india better catch up
if india had any cojones it would also be more assertive on the issue of tibetan independence. mongolia exists because russia could outweigh china's imperialism. tibet does not exist because india could not do the same
because the govt doesn't require you report to a govt building to get your cash and undergo a registration and a background check, genius
well, to collect the reward they have to show up at the govt office and submit to a little background examination, so...
so what is going in the spratlys exactly, moron?
nevermind with india, senkakus, paracels, etc.
you have to at least try to make sense
when i say "language evolves," that does not evoke random douchebags on the in the internet, it evokes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
good!