if i told you that a corporation was funneling chinese money into us elections, i'd like to see you quote your bogus Side A above again
you'd have a conniption fit, and you wouldn't even begin to feign the ignorance you currently do that corporate money poses no threat, no risk, and no challenge to what the founders intended
my point is not that funneling foreign money into us elections is all i am worried about, my point is to dismantle the purposely naive lie you write above as if the simpleton's way you describe the issue is the only decisive thought that matters
corporations supplant individual rights in the actions and words of your elected officials: do you deny that? do you say that is what the founders intended? if no, then fight alongside with me and stop feigning the bullshit you just wrote. corporations threaten your individual rights. you either understand that reality or you are a moron, an asshole, or both
in short, be intellectually honest or shut the fuck up
a corporation is a financial interest. it is composed of individuals, yes, with their own views, yes. but when they act in the employ of a corporation, in the interest of the corporation, which exists independently of any one individual, then the financial interest of the corporation is what is at issue and which has now been granted unfair influence over the composition of your government, supplanting your individual rights with that of the "rights" of a legal entity, which exists only for the accumulation of wealth. to your eventual detriment and the detriment of your rights
that is what the case is about. have YOU observed what the case in question is actually about?
maybe if you did, you would think the opposite of calming down is what is called for by this outrage
that a pile of money, a corporation, is what the founding fathers meant when they guaranteed rights to actual living breathing individuals, then you have made your point. until then, you, and other deluded fools who think like you do, are merely severely confusing the subject matter, to the detriment of the civic health of our country
to the extent that financial interests supplant the interests of real individuals, is the extent that the intentions of the founding fathers is warped, and eventually destroyed. wake the fuck up
when there are no greater activist judges than conservatives
hey scotus: thanks for your january 2010 ruling, allowing corporate spending in election cycles, just in time for the november 2010 election cycle. that's really "constitutionally conservative" of you. way to champion democratic notions over crass financial manipulation assholes. with that vote scotus, and especially that conservative knuckle dragger scalia, earned my eternal burning hatred for being huge hypocrites on constituional principles, being morally bankrupt, and being politically compromised
these pronouncements DO have value: its good domestic and international pr
just as there are warhead morons who believe the usa actually just tied its hands, there are peacenik morons who believe the usa just promised to... tie its hands
politics is a lot about putting on a show for the stupid
it's another thing to propose a workable alternative
so, for example: yes, universal healthcare makes complete sense
of course universal healthcare has downsides. but if you wish to complain about those downsides, enunciate a lucid alternative. however, every alternative, including the nonsense system we had before the recent healthcare overhaul, had far worse downsides
so if you can't enunciate a working alternative to something like universal healthcare, accept it and embrace it. otherwise, what is the point of your complaints? accept that some things are best run by the government, even with all of the negatives that implies (simply because your alternatives have far worse negatives), and therefore live in reality
what i want to know is why do we have people running around with rabid fundamentalist opposition to the idea of big government, rather than lucid, intelligent opposition to the idea of big government? until i see someone against the idea of big government enunciate a coherent logical argument, rather than all i see: a religious act of faith that "big government=bad", then i am completely unswayed, unimpressed, and totally turned off by the anti-government crowd as a bunch of ignorants and hypocrites
its degeneration into low iq racism and ignorance is sad, but it is what it is
rusty should close that ghetto down
hell, i'll offer rusty $$$ someday to buy the site from him, just so i can have the pleasure of personally pulling the plug on that pool of filth
the site once had its charms, but its worthy of nothing but condemnation now. the (l)users who still continue to haunt that place are truly degenerates:/b/tards, without the wit, if you can imagine such a thing
the downside is financial exposure. so incorporate your work in such a way that it can't hit your personal finances. the upside is massive exposure. you will achieve some level of fame: the guy who finally gave the robots.txt convention a legal status quo. this will help you professionally, as well as make your life story
2. whine to google
you are completely right that google shouldn't have to get permission every time it wants to crawl the site. therefore GET GOOGLE TO DEFEND YOU
also, i think it would be fitting if the japanese dude and one of the chicks were the first to enter to space sex club, being japan is the world capital of weird sex
this link perhaps explains the cod's behavior: herring use sound (farting) to "talk" to each other (coordinate schooling after dark). so that would perhaps explain the attraction to the sonar. i don't know how related cod are to herring, but even if not related, there is perhaps convergent evolution going on here (schooling fish in the north atlantic coordinating with sound)
apparently some fish literally talk out of their asses
The ludic fallacy is a term coined by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his 2007 book The Black Swan. 'Ludic' is from the Latin ludus, meaning 'play'. It is summarized as "the misuse of games to model real-life situations".[1] Taleb characterizes the fallacy as mistaking the map (model) for the reality (see map-territory relation), an inductive side-effect of human cognition. It is a central argument in the book and a rebuttal of the predictive mathematical models used to predict the future - as well as an attack on the idea of applying naïve and simplified statistical models in complex domains. According to Taleb, statistics only work in some domains like casinos in which the odds are visible and defined. Nassim's argument centres on the idea that predictive models are based on platonified forms, gravitating towards mathematical purity and failing to take some key ideas into account: It is impossible to be in possession of all the information. Very small unknown variations in the data could have a huge impact (though, Taleb does differentiate his idea from that of the highly mathematized representations in Chaos's theories Butterfly effect).). Theories/models based on empirical data are flawed, as events that have not taken place before cannot be accounted for.
so, to summarize, you regurgitate part of my point back at me, as if you are refuting me
Kid, I've browsed from one side of this Internet to the other.
thanks for the patronization, dad. but apparently you haven't been around enough to even coherently understand and refute what i'm fucking saying in the first place. if i may be so patronizing as you, i think you need to see more sides of the internet, kid
you, 1914: "of course war could break out and encompass all of europe someday, but very few things could precipitate it, so don't worry about it"
you, 2006: "mr. greenspan has great confidence in the subprime mortgage market, so i don't see why we have to worry about some mythical increase in delinquent mortgages"
you worry about someone finding nukes on the sea floor, or you simply lack foresight, analytical abilities, and prudence. not that you are alone in these deficiencies. enjoy your ignorant bliss
just because something is difficult or improbable, doesn't mean it won't get done. in fact, it is improbable events, with major implications, that pretty much define the whole game. from politics, to economics, to military campaigns, to history itself:
The Black Swan Theory is used by Nassim Nicholas Taleb to explain the existence and occurrence of high-impact, hard-to-predict, and rare events that are beyond the realm of normal expectations. Unlike the philosophical "black swan problem", the "Black Swan Theory" (capitalized) refers only to unexpected events of large magnitude and consequence and their dominant role in history. Such events are considered extreme outliers.
the point is this: don't worry about every improbable event, but DO worry about improbable events that radically change the game. some improbable events have extremely huge consequences. know them. make contingencies around them. good military intelligence is all about their analysis
our entire historical narrative is pretty much a litany of black swans. from the assassination of the archduke of austria to the collapse of lehman brothers: we talk about these historical events as inevitable. but thats all argument after the fact, hindsight, that's easy. however, shortly before lehman's collapse, or franz ferdinand's little trip to sarajevo, no one was seriously predicting anything remotely like what was about to happen, and yet these events changed absolutely everything
so you worry about the black swans. you worry about nukes sitting on the seabed that "nobody" will find
the black swans control your fate, my fate, the fate of the entire world
right, because no one would bother looking for them
you lack imagination. plenty of other people don't lack imagination, and plenty of them mean you harm. so make up for your imagination gap, or you will someday suffer for it
some families, when asked, are perfectly willing to let personal details about the death of a loved one be used to prevent future such tragedies
in fact, as a tribute to the life of a loved one, its entirely moral, appropriate, and a way to turn a tragedy into a positive contribution to society
like organ donation: something good coming out of something bad. except instead of your personal organs being donated by your family, your family is donating your personal information
the error is in thinking the police are some special class of human beings, somehow more pure than regular folk, or somehow less pure than regular folk
people are constantly viewing classes of people: politicians, policemen, foreigners, as some sort of alien species, and then deduce all sorts of alternately hilarious/ outrageous statements about politicians/ policemen/ foreigners, like your statement
statements that, at their root, owe their profound stupidity by arguing from the point of view that this class of people is somehow immune to simple basic failings in simple human nature
folks: as soon as you talk about "us" versus "them", you lose. you lose the ability to say anything useful or intelligent. politicians, businessmen, lawyers, police: they sit on a toilet just like you, they have strange warts with hair sticking out just like you, there is, in fact, nothing special about them apart from you. so stop arguing with the idiotic assumption that they are above rules or bound to special rules when you try to say something about "them"
completely unpatriotic. in fact, as this tax situation shows, they are basically anti-patriotic: their actions actively undermine the country
corporaitons work against individual rights, liberties, privacy, and freedoms
they threaten to hollow out the country into a corporatocracy, they actively turn your representatives into shills for corporate interests, not interests of the citizens
we have been hearing these howls on the left for decades
Slashdot Mirror
if i told you that a corporation was funneling chinese money into us elections, i'd like to see you quote your bogus Side A above again
you'd have a conniption fit, and you wouldn't even begin to feign the ignorance you currently do that corporate money poses no threat, no risk, and no challenge to what the founders intended
my point is not that funneling foreign money into us elections is all i am worried about, my point is to dismantle the purposely naive lie you write above as if the simpleton's way you describe the issue is the only decisive thought that matters
corporations supplant individual rights in the actions and words of your elected officials: do you deny that? do you say that is what the founders intended? if no, then fight alongside with me and stop feigning the bullshit you just wrote. corporations threaten your individual rights. you either understand that reality or you are a moron, an asshole, or both
in short, be intellectually honest or shut the fuck up
is not a group of individuals
a corporation is a financial interest. it is composed of individuals, yes, with their own views, yes. but when they act in the employ of a corporation, in the interest of the corporation, which exists independently of any one individual, then the financial interest of the corporation is what is at issue and which has now been granted unfair influence over the composition of your government, supplanting your individual rights with that of the "rights" of a legal entity, which exists only for the accumulation of wealth. to your eventual detriment and the detriment of your rights
that is what the case is about. have YOU observed what the case in question is actually about?
maybe if you did, you would think the opposite of calming down is what is called for by this outrage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Comm'n
that a pile of money, a corporation, is what the founding fathers meant when they guaranteed rights to actual living breathing individuals, then you have made your point. until then, you, and other deluded fools who think like you do, are merely severely confusing the subject matter, to the detriment of the civic health of our country
to the extent that financial interests supplant the interests of real individuals, is the extent that the intentions of the founding fathers is warped, and eventually destroyed. wake the fuck up
gymnasium
auditorium
pandemonium
when there are no greater activist judges than conservatives
hey scotus: thanks for your january 2010 ruling, allowing corporate spending in election cycles, just in time for the november 2010 election cycle. that's really "constitutionally conservative" of you. way to champion democratic notions over crass financial manipulation assholes. with that vote scotus, and especially that conservative knuckle dragger scalia, earned my eternal burning hatred for being huge hypocrites on constituional principles, being morally bankrupt, and being politically compromised
these pronouncements DO have value: its good domestic and international pr
just as there are warhead morons who believe the usa actually just tied its hands, there are peacenik morons who believe the usa just promised to... tie its hands
politics is a lot about putting on a show for the stupid
country {x} does insane thing {y}. the usa has some law on the books about not retaliating to the satisfaction of random internet troll {z}
compute the value of internet troll {z}'s opinion as intelligence of {z} approached zero
it's another thing to propose a workable alternative
so, for example: yes, universal healthcare makes complete sense
of course universal healthcare has downsides. but if you wish to complain about those downsides, enunciate a lucid alternative. however, every alternative, including the nonsense system we had before the recent healthcare overhaul, had far worse downsides
so if you can't enunciate a working alternative to something like universal healthcare, accept it and embrace it. otherwise, what is the point of your complaints? accept that some things are best run by the government, even with all of the negatives that implies (simply because your alternatives have far worse negatives), and therefore live in reality
what i want to know is why do we have people running around with rabid fundamentalist opposition to the idea of big government, rather than lucid, intelligent opposition to the idea of big government? until i see someone against the idea of big government enunciate a coherent logical argument, rather than all i see: a religious act of faith that "big government=bad", then i am completely unswayed, unimpressed, and totally turned off by the anti-government crowd as a bunch of ignorants and hypocrites
its degeneration into low iq racism and ignorance is sad, but it is what it is
rusty should close that ghetto down
hell, i'll offer rusty $$$ someday to buy the site from him, just so i can have the pleasure of personally pulling the plug on that pool of filth
the site once had its charms, but its worthy of nothing but condemnation now. the (l)users who still continue to haunt that place are truly degenerates: /b/tards, without the wit, if you can imagine such a thing
mod +6
this is what the guy should do:
1. engage the lawsuit
the downside is financial exposure. so incorporate your work in such a way that it can't hit your personal finances. the upside is massive exposure. you will achieve some level of fame: the guy who finally gave the robots.txt convention a legal status quo. this will help you professionally, as well as make your life story
2. whine to google
you are completely right that google shouldn't have to get permission every time it wants to crawl the site. therefore GET GOOGLE TO DEFEND YOU
so if the solar flare wipes out life on earth, our future is secured, in space, with a japanese dude and his harem
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/129536/Female-astronauts-set-off-on-space-mission/
also, i think it would be fitting if the japanese dude and one of the chicks were the first to enter to space sex club, being japan is the world capital of weird sex
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4343-fish-farting-may-not-just-be-hot-air.html
this link perhaps explains the cod's behavior: herring use sound (farting) to "talk" to each other (coordinate schooling after dark). so that would perhaps explain the attraction to the sonar. i don't know how related cod are to herring, but even if not related, there is perhaps convergent evolution going on here (schooling fish in the north atlantic coordinating with sound)
apparently some fish literally talk out of their asses
they talk out of their asses. literally
here is a .wav of a herring fart talking, and a story about it:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4343-fish-farting-may-not-just-be-hot-air.html
2020 is 10 years in the future
and you say "hindsight is always 2020"
pffft. what an idiot
gee, that's funny, since that's part of my point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludic_fallacy
so, to summarize, you regurgitate part of my point back at me, as if you are refuting me
Kid, I've browsed from one side of this Internet to the other.
thanks for the patronization, dad. but apparently you haven't been around enough to even coherently understand and refute what i'm fucking saying in the first place. if i may be so patronizing as you, i think you need to see more sides of the internet, kid
you, 1914: "of course war could break out and encompass all of europe someday, but very few things could precipitate it, so don't worry about it"
you, 2006: "mr. greenspan has great confidence in the subprime mortgage market, so i don't see why we have to worry about some mythical increase in delinquent mortgages"
you worry about someone finding nukes on the sea floor, or you simply lack foresight, analytical abilities, and prudence. not that you are alone in these deficiencies. enjoy your ignorant bliss
you have no imagination
just because something is difficult or improbable, doesn't mean it won't get done. in fact, it is improbable events, with major implications, that pretty much define the whole game. from politics, to economics, to military campaigns, to history itself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory
the point is this: don't worry about every improbable event, but DO worry about improbable events that radically change the game. some improbable events have extremely huge consequences. know them. make contingencies around them. good military intelligence is all about their analysis
our entire historical narrative is pretty much a litany of black swans. from the assassination of the archduke of austria to the collapse of lehman brothers: we talk about these historical events as inevitable. but thats all argument after the fact, hindsight, that's easy. however, shortly before lehman's collapse, or franz ferdinand's little trip to sarajevo, no one was seriously predicting anything remotely like what was about to happen, and yet these events changed absolutely everything
so you worry about the black swans. you worry about nukes sitting on the seabed that "nobody" will find
the black swans control your fate, my fate, the fate of the entire world
right, because no one would bother looking for them
you lack imagination. plenty of other people don't lack imagination, and plenty of them mean you harm. so make up for your imagination gap, or you will someday suffer for it
with step 5's two question marks, parent post was trying to say "if step 5 is null, then replace it with something"
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms173224.aspx
fixed that for you
some families, when asked, are perfectly willing to let personal details about the death of a loved one be used to prevent future such tragedies
in fact, as a tribute to the life of a loved one, its entirely moral, appropriate, and a way to turn a tragedy into a positive contribution to society
like organ donation: something good coming out of something bad. except instead of your personal organs being donated by your family, your family is donating your personal information
human beings, in general, suck
the error is in thinking the police are some special class of human beings, somehow more pure than regular folk, or somehow less pure than regular folk
people are constantly viewing classes of people: politicians, policemen, foreigners, as some sort of alien species, and then deduce all sorts of alternately hilarious/ outrageous statements about politicians/ policemen/ foreigners, like your statement
statements that, at their root, owe their profound stupidity by arguing from the point of view that this class of people is somehow immune to simple basic failings in simple human nature
folks: as soon as you talk about "us" versus "them", you lose. you lose the ability to say anything useful or intelligent. politicians, businessmen, lawyers, police: they sit on a toilet just like you, they have strange warts with hair sticking out just like you, there is, in fact, nothing special about them apart from you. so stop arguing with the idiotic assumption that they are above rules or bound to special rules when you try to say something about "them"
why don't we hear it from the right?
corporations are:
completely unpatriotic. in fact, as this tax situation shows, they are basically anti-patriotic: their actions actively undermine the country
corporaitons work against individual rights, liberties, privacy, and freedoms
they threaten to hollow out the country into a corporatocracy, they actively turn your representatives into shills for corporate interests, not interests of the citizens
we have been hearing these howls on the left for decades
but how come we don't hear it from the right?
finish them off with a 500!
its april fools
you're making believe you're a needlessly angry and negative person over some minor pointless detail anyone with a life doesn't care about
that's a good april fools trick!
thank god its april fools, and such people don't exist in the comment section outside of today, right?!