go ahead, hate hypocrisy. there's plenty of hypocrisy in the usa's words and actions
but if you think china, as an autocratic and capitalist empire, is going to exhibit any improvement over the behavior of the usa in the world, you are a fool
you, your children, or your grandchildren, will be practically nostalgic for the usa, when they live in the age of chinese dominance
we aren't talking about a democracy friend, we aren't talking about a country with democratic principles. there is no respect for the individual, there is no rule by consensus. it is command and control
if china were to adopt democratic principles, i would be the first to embrace china and celebrate china's rise. but if china doesn't, it's not going to be a pretty world with a nondemocracy being the most powerful entity in it, and you know that to be true
you don't have to like the usa friend, that's perfectly reasonable and within your rights
but it's just humorous to see you make the complaints you do, when china is guilty of the same crimes, as well as plenty of other countries. that doesn't excuse the usa, but it does put your venom against the usa in the proper light: you are not motivated by principals
do you consider yourself a principled person? good. then apply your principles to anyone who offends those principles
or, continue to hate the usa uniquely. that's ok by me. then just admit you have an anti-american prejudice. which again, is ok, plenty of people do, even a lot of americans
but at least you should admit what you are
because currently, you don't operate on principals, you operate on tribalism and vendettas, which means you are of the same dimwitted nationalist chest thumping that you are complaining about and that creates all of the crimes that bothers you
revenge excuses crimes by one party, because they are done in retribution against the crimes of another party? ok
but it doesn't really work that way in real life. for example, china is committing plenty of crimes in africa now, and south america, and against its own people
so then in some future world, some jackwad like you will post on a chinese bulletin board to the powers in beijing as they lose their grasp on power: "you have lived off of others' souls, while maintaining that chinese empire of yours, thanks to the capitalism you built over blood and slavery."
and then someone else commits revenge
etc., etc., etc. endless cycle of revenge
my point is simple: revenge begets revenge, begets revenge, endlessly
so revenge doesn't work
what you want is: justice. and in your words is no justice at all, but only malevolence
and therefore, you, yourself, think just as villanously as the american villany you perceive
want to know how dick cheney thinks? look in the mirror. in your words, is the same venom
i was saying a lot of things against china, but the only thing i have against china is the autocracy, really. i wanted to make sure no one thought i had nationalistic or racist issues, so i said i'm not a xenophobe, and i really am not
if you are so hypersensitive that just the bare fact of me saying "i'm not antichinese" then that must mean i'm somehow antichinese, you've got some trigger happy judgments there pal. some would call you overly judgmental. others might even call your hair triggered judgmentalism being prejudiced
you're correct, i should have said "western world", or some better term, not just the usa
europe, canada, australia, india, brazil: the threat is the same. when an autocracy is married to capitalism in such a way that they can treat their citizens as slaves: no right to choose their own leaders, free range abuse and no means of recourse, then in this autocratic capitalism can outcompete democratic capitalism. nominally, democratic capitalism is superior to autocratic capitalism because it is more stable with happier citizens. but it is also more expensive to produce things, since where workers have rights they agitate for better treatment
i used to be against protectionism. but now, i think we need protectionism more than ever. globalism only works when it is between nations that play fairly. and by that, i mean treat their citizens with respect. denmark shouldn't have any protectionism with australia which shouldn't have any protectionism with brazil. but all 3 should stop trading with china
currently, in the blind pursuit of greed, democratic capitalism is giving away its means of production to a country which does not share the same values. in the interest of the well-being of the workers of democracies, democracies should not trade with a nation that does not view its citizens as deserving of the reigns of power
of course, no one is going to listen to this: it hurts the bottom line. therefore, it will take many years before enough see the threat looming
there will be a day of reckoning years from now when, after all that pursuit of profit winds up creating a chinese autocratic colossus, the democracies of the world will be playing defense. all of their factories will be in china. all of their corporations will be bought out and headquartered in beijing. china is in this way becoming the ultimate expression of pure capitalistic power: no citizens rights, all pursuit of coin
at which point, the conflict will be taken to the interior of democracies, between capitalist forces controlled by china (buying off politicians, for instance), and the principles of democratic respect for the common man. the problem being, at that point too much power will be in chinese hands, and the fight might be lost. china, the autocracy, will take over the world without firing a single shot, because the corporations who are taking advantage of cheap labor in china now, in the future, after the buyouts, will simply be agents of beijing to enforce the flow of capital into china, by subduing democratic instincts in their former home countries
i'm not a xenophobe, i have nothing against china or chinese people. but i do have a burning fear and hatred of autocracy. if china would go democratic, i would not have a problem with the rise of china in the world. but as an autocracy, i must do all i can to sound the alarm and fight the rise of china, the autocracy (i would not fight china, the democracy, which would the greatest thing to come to pass, if it ever does)
you own the means of production in a limited and short term fashion. pretty soon, your claim and your basis for ownership evaporate
if you own the factory, you actually own the means of production, and therefore you actually are in power
the usa has moved all of its production to china, retaining the intellectual property "keys". these keys will rapidly become useless and unenforceable, and all the purple faced tirades about piracy will be met with a shrug. and the usa will find itself locked out of those factories, and without power
the pursuit of profit has resulted in a very short sighted situation where all the means of production are being moved to an autocracy that does not share our values. it will take a number of years, but this will not end well. and it is all because the captains of industry want fractionally higher stock market returns, and joe six pack wants more cheap plastic crap at walmart. for these empty goals, the common man and the man in power in the usa are selling their country's soul
you've invented an acronym that bothers me more than IANAL
My mind always reads that as "I anal", or in "I'm anal", Which makes sense if you're a lawyer meaning anal in the psychological sense, but it has certain sexual overtones as well that I don't want to think about on a website mostly populated by men.
Now you've invented an acronym for saying you're not a seismologist, IANAS, and my brain processes it as "I anus" or "I'm an anus."
Never mind why you have low self esteem: basically I just want to read about earthquakes and legal issues without thinking about so much goddamn anal and anuses.
"The humans dug too greedily and deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of the Chilean copper mine... shadow and flame... and Bacillus Balrogus!"
for example, the woman who is carjacked with her kids in her car who is calling 911/ texting in her pocket surreptitiously
if this moves forward, you will see certain hyperbolic people who will highlight these rare hollywood level heroics and decry fascist nanny state intrusive control freaks... etc... zzz
when obviously, in truth, most driving and texting is unnecessary, harmful, and should be stopped. if you want to text/ talk, pull the fuck over. end of story
so a good compromise would be to tie this lockout to MPH. under say, 5 MPH, texting and talking should be ok. and if you speed up, you spontaneously lose signal (or spontaneously get it back when you slow back down). so the poor humps stuck in slow moving traffic jams are adequately entertained, for example
we are talking about free speech here. us prison populations, the abuses of power you cite, problems with cost/ access to healthcare as someone else noted, etc.: these are all problems the usa has
but the key difference is, in the usa you can actually complain about these things, freely, and without threat of retaliation. in other words if china, or the usa, is to improve, only the usa has the positive attribute that we can actually complain, and therefore move towards some sort of improvement
meanwhile, in china, there was much complaining about the government's response to the terrible earthquake awhile back... and the government's response was to harass and intimidate and otherwise shut all the parents of the dead children up. because their criticism represented a threat to their power. there is no freedom of expression. that really means something
for all the problems of the usa, for all the problems of china, only in the usa can i, or you, stand up and say to our government: "our prison population is too high! for the sake of a harmless weed young people are being turned into criminals to feed a bloated entrenched prison complex system! this country sucks!" go ahead, say that without of fear of punishment. you can, you do, and you will. and i am glad for this
but in china, if you said " there are no construction standards for schools in earthquake zones because all the officials are corrupt and in bed with the construction companies!": you get police harassment, followed by punishment if you did not learn to shut up
now you tell me which society you would rather belong to. both have problems, but only in one of them can you criticize your government. doesn't that genuine, large, qualitative political and social difference mean something to you? it does to me
assuming you are in the united states, i see that you are enjoying your constitutionally protected right to criticize the government. i am glad you are able to do so. i defend your right to criticize the usa, even though i disagree with your analysis
mainly because you seem to be forgetting that if you were in china, and you said these things about china on a continual basis, you would show up on the screens of the nice party folk who review and screen statements made on the internet for political content, and if you didn't learn to shut up, you would eventually get a pleasant knock on your door. this isn't hyperbole. this is truth and reality
even so, you might bluster that this is the same in the usa: that all email is collected and screened, etc. certainly for things like child pornography or genuine violent terrorist activities, but the proof that this doesn't really concern you is that you went ahead and wrote what you said on slashdot, certain that stating your negative beliefs about the usa would not harm you. and this is true: it won't, and your statements shouldn't harm you, and this is good and as it should be. because political speech is not the same subject matter as child pornography or genuinely talking of violent acts you intend to perform... right? i am certain you are someone intelligent enough to understand the difference
but i wonder if you would have the same level of character and backbone to say the things you say, about the chinese government instead, in china. when, if your feelings are real and true as written above, then your feelings would obviously be even more impassioned and inflamed since the rights violations there are obviously more severe. or maybe you would just clam up, and be a good little citizen? is it perhaps there is no real character in your remarks, only a lot of chicken hawk chest thumping, and no real understanding or sense of proportion? a lot of people in this world are able to cry out in high holy indignation quite vehemently, mainly to stroke their own egos, but without the slightest bit of genuine intent and integrity that they will actually fight for what they say is so important to them
all supposition aside, in the end, to me, you're just someone who is ignorant. who doesn't understand the difference between the two political and social environments of china and the usa. you only point to a cognitive failure on your part to really understand exactly what it is you are talking about. and the unfortunate truth of free speech is that you oftentimes find the loudest people in the room are also usually also the dumbest. but this is a small price to pay for true free speech
again, as i said, enjoy your right to criticize the usa. as an american, i welcome and i support your right to do whatever you want, say whatever you want, and criticize the usa and its government all you want, however hperbolic, hysterical and ignorant the basis for your remarks. because people like you bother me a lot less that people who slavishly follow the official party line. many in china do, because they are under real threat of serious punishment if they didn't
that you don't understand this is why you are no credit at all to the rights you think you are fighting for, and really you are only demonstrating you don't even understand those rights
it is true that the usa has decreasing privacy standards
it is also true that china's privacy standards are orders of magnitude below the usa's standards, firmly entrenched in the toilet
so i don't understand a point of view that is more concerned with flawed standards, but much better standards, than they are with a country that is an actual, no-apologies firmly authoritarian "i tell you who your master is and what you can can cannot think" regime
it makes me wonder at your critical thinking skills
when you can't tell the difference between hyperbole and reality, and you wind up more worried about the hyperbolic and fantastic threats to human rights rather than the actual and real threats to human rights, then you just seem to be some sort of propagandized fool to me
the expensive, slow train looks more and more attractive as the way to travel in the usa. too bad we're so smitten with cars like heroin addicts that we have no high speed rail system like every other sensible country
1. radiation exposure and some mall cop staring at my dick. with pictures for permanent internet memories
2. some mall cop groping my dick
i choose 3: fuck flying. taking the airplane is a burdensome horrendous experience that just keeps getting worse and worse. it makes driving 20 hours seem more attractive than flying 4 hours
"the terrorists have won" is a lame trite statement, but it's true. they've permanently altered our society to turn us into scared cattle and they've permanently made airplanes a hellish unattractive transportation method
mars can't hold its atmosphere, or at least an atmosphere usable to humans. this is a permanent insurmountable deficiency
and in no way am i suggesting "reducing" venus' atmosphere to something livable is easy. but very hard (reduce venus' atmosphere) is certainly easier than impossible (build an atmosphere mars can't hold on to)
however, both venus and mars don't have magnetospheres. venus has an "induced" magnetosphere (a heavy duty ionosphere) so you won't get skin cancer, but this does not prevent hydrogen/ water from blowing away. venus' birth of mankind on her surface would have to be induced (rimshot)
but basically, without the magnetosphere, both venus and mars pretty much suck as attractive longterm homes
it is impoverishing to trust too much: you just get robbed
it is also impoverishing to trust too little: you enter into no relationships, and therefore earn no living
this is true for marriages, short term conversations, pick up games of basketball, battlefield scenarios... and interacting with your government. all human interactions in your entire life, from the most ephemeral to the most profound
your words reveal to me less truth about the nature of government, and more truth about the nature of you, and your shortcomings in the trust department, which will only hurt you in the long run. it is just as stupid to trust with difficulty, as it is stupid to trust too easily
being naive and foolish and trusting too easily, is obviously wrong
but being guarded and hesitant and trusting very hard is EQUALLY wrong, to the same degree
the right way is the middle way: not to trust to much, not to trust too little. of course this is a difficult path. it is also the only valid path
being hardened to the point of high levels of distrust is not wisdom or experience. it is simply psychological damage. to be someone who is very difficult to gain trust with, is just as foolish and ignorant and stupid as those who trust too easily
of course the police can abuse you. of course anyone can abuse you. but you need to learn that, just as crippling in this world as an overabundance of trust to people who don't deserve your trust, is the existence of people like you: those with such a crippling poverty of distrust that you won't even expect a simple human baseline of behavior in civil society
the abuses you imagine above are rare. of course you might someday suffer from these kinds of abuses. and of course the ceiling can crash on your head right now. you can't live in a shell, expecting the worst all the time. you need to place some trust in your fellow human beings if only because you suffer the most when you assume the worst possible scenario all the time. most people are good and decent. really
it's not. how is not reporting them to police going to prevent the RIAA from suing them?
the point is, it makes their job of imposing six figure sums on financially poor students look that much more vile, when the police obviously don't consider it a crime, by not pursing it
the police have discretions about pursuing perps. if they catch you parking where you shouldn't or smoking a joint or speeding, for example, they can just waive you off if the "crime" isn't that major. so the college wins: no administrative headache, the student wins: the police will mostly ignore the pirating. the only people who lose are the police, who have to look through a bunch of emails and hit "delete", and the RIAA, who will have a hard time justifying onerous financial impositions on what amounts to a crime that, in real life, is no more major than jaywalking
you don't have to like wikipedia editors, but if, in your own comment, you link to a description of behavior by a vandal which is obviously many times worse than any editor behavior, your argument is rather empty. so it just seems like you have a chip on your shoulder about wikipedia editors. which is fine, you don't have to like them. but at least admit this vandal's behavior is clearly worse than any editor
Slashdot Mirror
go ahead, hate hypocrisy. there's plenty of hypocrisy in the usa's words and actions
but if you think china, as an autocratic and capitalist empire, is going to exhibit any improvement over the behavior of the usa in the world, you are a fool
you, your children, or your grandchildren, will be practically nostalgic for the usa, when they live in the age of chinese dominance
we aren't talking about a democracy friend, we aren't talking about a country with democratic principles. there is no respect for the individual, there is no rule by consensus. it is command and control
if china were to adopt democratic principles, i would be the first to embrace china and celebrate china's rise. but if china doesn't, it's not going to be a pretty world with a nondemocracy being the most powerful entity in it, and you know that to be true
LOL
you don't have to like the usa friend, that's perfectly reasonable and within your rights
but it's just humorous to see you make the complaints you do, when china is guilty of the same crimes, as well as plenty of other countries. that doesn't excuse the usa, but it does put your venom against the usa in the proper light: you are not motivated by principals
do you consider yourself a principled person? good. then apply your principles to anyone who offends those principles
or, continue to hate the usa uniquely. that's ok by me. then just admit you have an anti-american prejudice. which again, is ok, plenty of people do, even a lot of americans
but at least you should admit what you are
because currently, you don't operate on principals, you operate on tribalism and vendettas, which means you are of the same dimwitted nationalist chest thumping that you are complaining about and that creates all of the crimes that bothers you
so it's about revenge? ok
revenge excuses crimes by one party, because they are done in retribution against the crimes of another party? ok
but it doesn't really work that way in real life. for example, china is committing plenty of crimes in africa now, and south america, and against its own people
so then in some future world, some jackwad like you will post on a chinese bulletin board to the powers in beijing as they lose their grasp on power: "you have lived off of others' souls, while maintaining that chinese empire of yours, thanks to the capitalism you built over blood and slavery."
and then someone else commits revenge
etc., etc., etc. endless cycle of revenge
my point is simple: revenge begets revenge, begets revenge, endlessly
so revenge doesn't work
what you want is: justice. and in your words is no justice at all, but only malevolence
and therefore, you, yourself, think just as villanously as the american villany you perceive
want to know how dick cheney thinks? look in the mirror. in your words, is the same venom
dude, i'm not a xenophobe, really
i was saying a lot of things against china, but the only thing i have against china is the autocracy, really. i wanted to make sure no one thought i had nationalistic or racist issues, so i said i'm not a xenophobe, and i really am not
if you are so hypersensitive that just the bare fact of me saying "i'm not antichinese" then that must mean i'm somehow antichinese, you've got some trigger happy judgments there pal. some would call you overly judgmental. others might even call your hair triggered judgmentalism being prejudiced
you're correct, i should have said "western world", or some better term, not just the usa
europe, canada, australia, india, brazil: the threat is the same. when an autocracy is married to capitalism in such a way that they can treat their citizens as slaves: no right to choose their own leaders, free range abuse and no means of recourse, then in this autocratic capitalism can outcompete democratic capitalism. nominally, democratic capitalism is superior to autocratic capitalism because it is more stable with happier citizens. but it is also more expensive to produce things, since where workers have rights they agitate for better treatment
i used to be against protectionism. but now, i think we need protectionism more than ever. globalism only works when it is between nations that play fairly. and by that, i mean treat their citizens with respect. denmark shouldn't have any protectionism with australia which shouldn't have any protectionism with brazil. but all 3 should stop trading with china
currently, in the blind pursuit of greed, democratic capitalism is giving away its means of production to a country which does not share the same values. in the interest of the well-being of the workers of democracies, democracies should not trade with a nation that does not view its citizens as deserving of the reigns of power
of course, no one is going to listen to this: it hurts the bottom line. therefore, it will take many years before enough see the threat looming
there will be a day of reckoning years from now when, after all that pursuit of profit winds up creating a chinese autocratic colossus, the democracies of the world will be playing defense. all of their factories will be in china. all of their corporations will be bought out and headquartered in beijing. china is in this way becoming the ultimate expression of pure capitalistic power: no citizens rights, all pursuit of coin
at which point, the conflict will be taken to the interior of democracies, between capitalist forces controlled by china (buying off politicians, for instance), and the principles of democratic respect for the common man. the problem being, at that point too much power will be in chinese hands, and the fight might be lost. china, the autocracy, will take over the world without firing a single shot, because the corporations who are taking advantage of cheap labor in china now, in the future, after the buyouts, will simply be agents of beijing to enforce the flow of capital into china, by subduing democratic instincts in their former home countries
i'm not a xenophobe, i have nothing against china or chinese people. but i do have a burning fear and hatred of autocracy. if china would go democratic, i would not have a problem with the rise of china in the world. but as an autocracy, i must do all i can to sound the alarm and fight the rise of china, the autocracy (i would not fight china, the democracy, which would the greatest thing to come to pass, if it ever does)
you own the means of production in a limited and short term fashion. pretty soon, your claim and your basis for ownership evaporate
if you own the factory, you actually own the means of production, and therefore you actually are in power
the usa has moved all of its production to china, retaining the intellectual property "keys". these keys will rapidly become useless and unenforceable, and all the purple faced tirades about piracy will be met with a shrug. and the usa will find itself locked out of those factories, and without power
the pursuit of profit has resulted in a very short sighted situation where all the means of production are being moved to an autocracy that does not share our values. it will take a number of years, but this will not end well. and it is all because the captains of industry want fractionally higher stock market returns, and joe six pack wants more cheap plastic crap at walmart. for these empty goals, the common man and the man in power in the usa are selling their country's soul
you've invented an acronym that bothers me more than IANAL
My mind always reads that as "I anal", or in "I'm anal", Which makes sense if you're a lawyer meaning anal in the psychological sense, but it has certain sexual overtones as well that I don't want to think about on a website mostly populated by men.
Now you've invented an acronym for saying you're not a seismologist, IANAS, and my brain processes it as "I anus" or "I'm an anus."
Never mind why you have low self esteem: basically I just want to read about earthquakes and legal issues without thinking about so much goddamn anal and anuses.
if not, it should be Bacillus Balrogus
"The humans dug too greedily and deep. You know what they awoke in the darkness of the Chilean copper mine... shadow and flame... and Bacillus Balrogus!"
for example, the woman who is carjacked with her kids in her car who is calling 911/ texting in her pocket surreptitiously
if this moves forward, you will see certain hyperbolic people who will highlight these rare hollywood level heroics and decry fascist nanny state intrusive control freaks... etc... zzz
when obviously, in truth, most driving and texting is unnecessary, harmful, and should be stopped. if you want to text/ talk, pull the fuck over. end of story
so a good compromise would be to tie this lockout to MPH. under say, 5 MPH, texting and talking should be ok. and if you speed up, you spontaneously lose signal (or spontaneously get it back when you slow back down). so the poor humps stuck in slow moving traffic jams are adequately entertained, for example
that's a different subject matter
we are talking about free speech here. us prison populations, the abuses of power you cite, problems with cost/ access to healthcare as someone else noted, etc.: these are all problems the usa has
but the key difference is, in the usa you can actually complain about these things, freely, and without threat of retaliation. in other words if china, or the usa, is to improve, only the usa has the positive attribute that we can actually complain, and therefore move towards some sort of improvement
meanwhile, in china, there was much complaining about the government's response to the terrible earthquake awhile back... and the government's response was to harass and intimidate and otherwise shut all the parents of the dead children up. because their criticism represented a threat to their power. there is no freedom of expression. that really means something
for all the problems of the usa, for all the problems of china, only in the usa can i, or you, stand up and say to our government: "our prison population is too high! for the sake of a harmless weed young people are being turned into criminals to feed a bloated entrenched prison complex system! this country sucks!" go ahead, say that without of fear of punishment. you can, you do, and you will. and i am glad for this
but in china, if you said " there are no construction standards for schools in earthquake zones because all the officials are corrupt and in bed with the construction companies!": you get police harassment, followed by punishment if you did not learn to shut up
now you tell me which society you would rather belong to. both have problems, but only in one of them can you criticize your government. doesn't that genuine, large, qualitative political and social difference mean something to you? it does to me
assuming you are in the united states, i see that you are enjoying your constitutionally protected right to criticize the government. i am glad you are able to do so. i defend your right to criticize the usa, even though i disagree with your analysis
mainly because you seem to be forgetting that if you were in china, and you said these things about china on a continual basis, you would show up on the screens of the nice party folk who review and screen statements made on the internet for political content, and if you didn't learn to shut up, you would eventually get a pleasant knock on your door. this isn't hyperbole. this is truth and reality
even so, you might bluster that this is the same in the usa: that all email is collected and screened, etc. certainly for things like child pornography or genuine violent terrorist activities, but the proof that this doesn't really concern you is that you went ahead and wrote what you said on slashdot, certain that stating your negative beliefs about the usa would not harm you. and this is true: it won't, and your statements shouldn't harm you, and this is good and as it should be. because political speech is not the same subject matter as child pornography or genuinely talking of violent acts you intend to perform... right? i am certain you are someone intelligent enough to understand the difference
but i wonder if you would have the same level of character and backbone to say the things you say, about the chinese government instead, in china. when, if your feelings are real and true as written above, then your feelings would obviously be even more impassioned and inflamed since the rights violations there are obviously more severe. or maybe you would just clam up, and be a good little citizen? is it perhaps there is no real character in your remarks, only a lot of chicken hawk chest thumping, and no real understanding or sense of proportion? a lot of people in this world are able to cry out in high holy indignation quite vehemently, mainly to stroke their own egos, but without the slightest bit of genuine intent and integrity that they will actually fight for what they say is so important to them
all supposition aside, in the end, to me, you're just someone who is ignorant. who doesn't understand the difference between the two political and social environments of china and the usa. you only point to a cognitive failure on your part to really understand exactly what it is you are talking about. and the unfortunate truth of free speech is that you oftentimes find the loudest people in the room are also usually also the dumbest. but this is a small price to pay for true free speech
again, as i said, enjoy your right to criticize the usa. as an american, i welcome and i support your right to do whatever you want, say whatever you want, and criticize the usa and its government all you want, however hperbolic, hysterical and ignorant the basis for your remarks. because people like you bother me a lot less that people who slavishly follow the official party line. many in china do, because they are under real threat of serious punishment if they didn't
that you don't understand this is why you are no credit at all to the rights you think you are fighting for, and really you are only demonstrating you don't even understand those rights
you know, the snide comments "well, its almost just as bad/ the same/ worse in the usa/ uk/ western nation"
no
it actually isn't
when you confuse hyperbole and reality, you are no longer commenting intelligently, you are merely broadcasting your ignorance
it is true that the usa has decreasing privacy standards
it is also true that china's privacy standards are orders of magnitude below the usa's standards, firmly entrenched in the toilet
so i don't understand a point of view that is more concerned with flawed standards, but much better standards, than they are with a country that is an actual, no-apologies firmly authoritarian "i tell you who your master is and what you can can cannot think" regime
it makes me wonder at your critical thinking skills
when you can't tell the difference between hyperbole and reality, and you wind up more worried about the hyperbolic and fantastic threats to human rights rather than the actual and real threats to human rights, then you just seem to be some sort of propagandized fool to me
ever hear of a boat?
option 5: amtrak!
the expensive, slow train looks more and more attractive as the way to travel in the usa. too bad we're so smitten with cars like heroin addicts that we have no high speed rail system like every other sensible country
1. radiation exposure and some mall cop staring at my dick. with pictures for permanent internet memories
2. some mall cop groping my dick
i choose 3: fuck flying. taking the airplane is a burdensome horrendous experience that just keeps getting worse and worse. it makes driving 20 hours seem more attractive than flying 4 hours
"the terrorists have won" is a lame trite statement, but it's true. they've permanently altered our society to turn us into scared cattle and they've permanently made airplanes a hellish unattractive transportation method
where's the .torrent?
mars can't hold its atmosphere, or at least an atmosphere usable to humans. this is a permanent insurmountable deficiency
and in no way am i suggesting "reducing" venus' atmosphere to something livable is easy. but very hard (reduce venus' atmosphere) is certainly easier than impossible (build an atmosphere mars can't hold on to)
however, both venus and mars don't have magnetospheres. venus has an "induced" magnetosphere (a heavy duty ionosphere) so you won't get skin cancer, but this does not prevent hydrogen/ water from blowing away. venus' birth of mankind on her surface would have to be induced (rimshot)
but basically, without the magnetosphere, both venus and mars pretty much suck as attractive longterm homes
you don't have wisdom
you have psychological damage
it is impoverishing to trust too much: you just get robbed
it is also impoverishing to trust too little: you enter into no relationships, and therefore earn no living
this is true for marriages, short term conversations, pick up games of basketball, battlefield scenarios... and interacting with your government. all human interactions in your entire life, from the most ephemeral to the most profound
your words reveal to me less truth about the nature of government, and more truth about the nature of you, and your shortcomings in the trust department, which will only hurt you in the long run. it is just as stupid to trust with difficulty, as it is stupid to trust too easily
being naive and foolish and trusting too easily, is obviously wrong
but being guarded and hesitant and trusting very hard is EQUALLY wrong, to the same degree
the right way is the middle way: not to trust to much, not to trust too little. of course this is a difficult path. it is also the only valid path
being hardened to the point of high levels of distrust is not wisdom or experience. it is simply psychological damage. to be someone who is very difficult to gain trust with, is just as foolish and ignorant and stupid as those who trust too easily
of course the police can abuse you. of course anyone can abuse you. but you need to learn that, just as crippling in this world as an overabundance of trust to people who don't deserve your trust, is the existence of people like you: those with such a crippling poverty of distrust that you won't even expect a simple human baseline of behavior in civil society
the abuses you imagine above are rare. of course you might someday suffer from these kinds of abuses. and of course the ceiling can crash on your head right now. you can't live in a shell, expecting the worst all the time. you need to place some trust in your fellow human beings if only because you suffer the most when you assume the worst possible scenario all the time. most people are good and decent. really
it's not. how is not reporting them to police going to prevent the RIAA from suing them?
the point is, it makes their job of imposing six figure sums on financially poor students look that much more vile, when the police obviously don't consider it a crime, by not pursing it
the police have discretions about pursuing perps. if they catch you parking where you shouldn't or smoking a joint or speeding, for example, they can just waive you off if the "crime" isn't that major. so the college wins: no administrative headache, the student wins: the police will mostly ignore the pirating. the only people who lose are the police, who have to look through a bunch of emails and hit "delete", and the RIAA, who will have a hard time justifying onerous financial impositions on what amounts to a crime that, in real life, is no more major than jaywalking
you don't have to like wikipedia editors, but if, in your own comment, you link to a description of behavior by a vandal which is obviously many times worse than any editor behavior, your argument is rather empty. so it just seems like you have a chip on your shoulder about wikipedia editors. which is fine, you don't have to like them. but at least admit this vandal's behavior is clearly worse than any editor
What's in the picnic basket?
-Yogi Bear