to believe that honesty only comes from fear is completely contrary to the experience of anyone who has had any normal experience with other human beings beyond the age of 10. to believe politics is some magical subset of human behavior where this is true is a further idiotic fallacy
the simple fact is, you have to be sheltered and socially retarded to write the clueless things you do
let's put it this way: to believe the majority act with nobility is a deluded state of stupidity
to the same degree, to believe noble motivations don't exist is equally deluded and stupid
the truth, as always, lies in the median, and you, my moronic friend, are on the fringe in hopeless cynicism
it is entirely true you can be too optimistic and trusting
it is also true, to the same level of failure, to be pessimistic and pathologically untrustworthy of other men
to believe that fear, and fear alone is what motivates man, whether individually or in groups, is pure fail on your part. it is a stunted broken empty cynicism, devoid of intelligence or experience, and destroys your ability to thrive in the social sphere of life
to think of the ruled as nothing but a mob, all the time. it does act like a mob, in sections, and at times. but to view the worst of group dynamics as the status quo is intellectual failure on your part, a stunted cynical way to view human nature and good governance
have you never known of the concept of integrity in your whole sad life?
and so the people are not about to second guess it, as this has dramatically improved their lives
in the 1970s, we could have an argument about china avoiding capitalism, and you would have said: "who cares, the people still support the government"
but the government, wisely, embraced capitalism, jettisoning communism, leading them to where they are today
the same choices apply to democracy and freedom of expression
eventually, growth slows or declines, its inevitable: no economy grows forever. when that happens, the MAJORITY will grumble, and they will run headlong into their own government (no grumbling allowed!) then what? is the picture you paint of a mostly placated populace still relevant in your depictions?
now, the government, in its wisdom, could embrace freedom of expression and democracy, at some point, before the capitalist ride to prosperity peaks. and they thereby install pressure relief valves in society, and thus china is truly modern, and stable, and i would embrace such a china
but they also could wed themselves to continued absolute control of all expression and decide everything by elite class
and chinese society will begin to fall apart, and i will continue my disapproval
it actively seeks to represent the middle ground. in this way it gains power. fear is never part of the process. its the difference between ruling by attractive force, and ruling by repulsive force
yes, as you say: it's not love, your government doesn't love you. but to even contemplate this absurdity says a lot about your thought processes. at best, you are offering a strawman. at worst you only understand simpleminded ideas of what government is. a democracy, rule by consensus, is not based on any kind of fear. really
that you believe only force, coercion and fear is the way all governments work in this world is some massive failure of perception on your part, and explains a lot of truly mindlessly cynical observations out there that i see people make about government
try to understand there's a little more nuance in your world. right now, your ability to understand what government is is stunted
do you treat the people in your life well because... you FEAR them?!
that's not how the world works, nor basic human nature
either you're momentarily horribly wrong due to transient serious brain failure, or you're psychologically screwed up, to ever write anything like that
governments work when they rule by consensus. but when they need coercion to rule, they are weak, and their days are numbered. when, not if, the chinese economy takes a downturn (no economy grows forever), the people will inevitably grumble. but if they can't even grumble, it's not "harmonious", we shall begin to see an unraveling of faith in the government, like we see in tehran
why does the chinese government fear the words of its own people?
it lays bare the fact that their agenda is not the agenda of their own people
about the cranky losers who constantly trumpet the fact they don't have a television, whenever the subject comes up
however, i am now that cranky loser, for facebook: every time facebook comes up as an issue, i will trumpet the fact i don't have an account, and never will, and feel smugly superior for that fact
it's nothing but a bonfire of vanities. you're just not that interesting, none of us are, sorry
free your time and free yourself from endless navel gazing and obviously, get some privacy: lose facerbook, permanently. declare your freedom from shallowness and corporate exploitation
if you have real friends, they won't need this stupid contrivance to maintain their friendship with you. the rest are just acquaintances, not really friends, and you work far too hard to maintain some ridiculous fake mask for their sake. they don't really matter to the quality of your life, unless you're shallow, in which case you don't have that much quality of life to begin with
the solid factual research, that you supposedly cite when in truth you are woefully out of touch, colors my experience as quite common. sure, this diet is not for everyone and there may be difficulties (although the inuit seem to be doing fine for centuries), but it is quite obvious that the way you represent current understanding of low carb diets is patently false
apologize and then shut up
my "anecdotes" are closer to the truth than whatever the hell is going on in your mind
if i shoot you in the head, an observer can certainly fall into the trap you've described in imagining WHY i've shot you in the head. however, who cares WHY i shot you in the head: there's a hole in your head, regardless. and therefore i can be judged, for shooting you in the head, as committing a crime, no matter WHY i did itt
likewise, WHY this asshole engages in cybercrime may be a complex and nuanced subject matter. and its important to explore that. however, the bottom line is, he engaged in cybercrime. that is all that is needed to know to pass judgment on him: he's an asshole
my observation about personal accountability and morality only depends upon someone trangressing against someone else. your observation about fundamental attribution error deals with WHY someone transgresses, which is an important subject matter, but does not in any way change the fact that someone chose to transgress against someone else, and therefore has committed a crime, and therefore deserves to be condemned and punished, regardless of WHY they did it
about a month ago, while going through the motions of updating java one day (clicking on all those security warnings, running the little interface), i thought: to hack a system, why not just copy this stupid little interface and have the user gleefully click through all of the little security warnings?
and now my fleeting paranoia is reality: you can't trust the updaters anymore
which makes this news from two days ago all the more prescient:
furthermore, i despise the fact that just because i have quicktime and adobe and java installed, i have to always have these useless potentially bogus processes constantly running in the background doing nothing but waiting for their once monthly updates
it makes much better sense to have ALL software updated through one repository which, obviously, has to be microsoft
now microsoft is responsible for a secure update process, you don't have to worry about 9 different third party update mechanisms and have them constantly running, and finally, the big fat shiny nail in the coffin: you don't have to worry about this malware posing as an updater
a negative being: now you're pretty much sending microsoft a manifest of all of your installed software every time you get an update, but i see no way around that without this new hack entering the picture
if he's born here, he's an american. end of fucking story. his parents were mexican? they were cuban? they were polish? they were indian? what's the fucking difference?
yes, i know, to SOME people the difference matters. and for those of you for whom identifying whether or not he's mexican or cuban is important, you're a racist asshole, EVEN IF you are the same ethnic background
people are prideful about things they shouldn't be proudful of
the only valid source of pride in this world is that you are an ethical HUMAN BEING
but if you are proud of being an {INSERT RACIAL/ NATIONALISTIC/ RELIGIOUS CHAUVINIST IDENTIFIER} you begin the process of talking about "us" versus "them", and, in your blind silly pride, actually wind up being the source of pretty much all the problems we have in this world
its getting better, very slowly but surely. someday, in the distant future, there will be less wars and less strife and all because people just think about each other as human beings, nothing more, nothing less. it will take a lot of effort to get there, but we are actually moving in that direction, oh ever so slowly
so what's the fucking point of saying he's CUBAN-american? cuban-americans are more prone to cybercrime? what the hell is the significance of saying he's CUBAN-american. oh, a "real" american would never engage in cybercrime? what's that? an irish-american? an italian-american? when an irish-american robs a bank, do we say describe the crime, the sentencing and the criminal as "An Irish-American who was born in Philadelphia". why is that significant information? it's not, it's a racist smear
oh, it all makes sense now- he's a CUBAN-american: this is important information to relay in the story summary when describing the criminal and the crime
you're relying on outdated cbo numbers. the latest numbers right before the bill was signed did not include the public option, and it still saved $
#2: but btw, you're right: the public option will save $$$, adn should be implemented, and it will. single point of purchase is where price controls can come into play, and the savings will be massive, none of these corporate assholes jacking your rates and denying you benefits while doctors ring up 10 unnecessary tests just so they can get paid. its insanity. thankfully, we're on track to finally fix this fucking bullshit broken system where the poor are fine, the rich are fine, and the middle class get shafted
Slashdot Mirror
to believe that honesty only comes from fear is completely contrary to the experience of anyone who has had any normal experience with other human beings beyond the age of 10. to believe politics is some magical subset of human behavior where this is true is a further idiotic fallacy
the simple fact is, you have to be sheltered and socially retarded to write the clueless things you do
let's put it this way: to believe the majority act with nobility is a deluded state of stupidity
to the same degree, to believe noble motivations don't exist is equally deluded and stupid
the truth, as always, lies in the median, and you, my moronic friend, are on the fringe in hopeless cynicism
who believe is fear is the only motivation
i am saying that plenty of other emotions, both negative and positive, motivates individuals, groups, organizations and their leaders
to believe otherwise, is, indeed, unintelligent cynicism, stunted and inexperienced in life or history
100% solid truth
it is entirely true you can be too optimistic and trusting
it is also true, to the same level of failure, to be pessimistic and pathologically untrustworthy of other men
to believe that fear, and fear alone is what motivates man, whether individually or in groups, is pure fail on your part. it is a stunted broken empty cynicism, devoid of intelligence or experience, and destroys your ability to thrive in the social sphere of life
its not realism, its full on retard
to think of the ruled as nothing but a mob, all the time. it does act like a mob, in sections, and at times. but to view the worst of group dynamics as the status quo is intellectual failure on your part, a stunted cynical way to view human nature and good governance
have you never known of the concept of integrity in your whole sad life?
wow
have you never know what it means to have integrity in your entire life?
what a sad cynical stunted view of the world you have
and then every other word you say boils down to "the only thing that motivates government decision making is fear"
so you're answer is currently incoherent
answer my question: is fear the ONLY THING that motivates government decision making
yes or no
the idea that the only thing that motivates government decision making is fear
do you agree with that idea or not?
are human beings. why would they have only a small facet of human psychology as their motivation?
do you go around thinking the only reason people interact with you cooperatively is due to fear of what you will do if they don't cooperate?
you have some sort of psychological problem. human nature is not this stunted. believe it or not, there are other motivations in this world
at best, you're paranoid. at worst, you're psychotic
saying "its a republic" and thinking this nullifies that fact is like saying "its a chicken, so its not a bird"
its a democracy that rules with the consent of the popular will, of which i am a part of
if you don't believe or understand this simple obvious fact, you're some sort of horribly sheltered and propagandized moron
and so the people are not about to second guess it, as this has dramatically improved their lives
in the 1970s, we could have an argument about china avoiding capitalism, and you would have said: "who cares, the people still support the government"
but the government, wisely, embraced capitalism, jettisoning communism, leading them to where they are today
the same choices apply to democracy and freedom of expression
eventually, growth slows or declines, its inevitable: no economy grows forever. when that happens, the MAJORITY will grumble, and they will run headlong into their own government (no grumbling allowed!) then what? is the picture you paint of a mostly placated populace still relevant in your depictions?
now, the government, in its wisdom, could embrace freedom of expression and democracy, at some point, before the capitalist ride to prosperity peaks. and they thereby install pressure relief valves in society, and thus china is truly modern, and stable, and i would embrace such a china
but they also could wed themselves to continued absolute control of all expression and decide everything by elite class
and chinese society will begin to fall apart, and i will continue my disapproval
if you live in a democracy
there's nothing to fear
it actively seeks to represent the middle ground. in this way it gains power. fear is never part of the process. its the difference between ruling by attractive force, and ruling by repulsive force
yes, as you say: it's not love, your government doesn't love you. but to even contemplate this absurdity says a lot about your thought processes. at best, you are offering a strawman. at worst you only understand simpleminded ideas of what government is. a democracy, rule by consensus, is not based on any kind of fear. really
that you believe only force, coercion and fear is the way all governments work in this world is some massive failure of perception on your part, and explains a lot of truly mindlessly cynical observations out there that i see people make about government
try to understand there's a little more nuance in your world. right now, your ability to understand what government is is stunted
do you treat the people in your life well because... you FEAR them?!
that's not how the world works, nor basic human nature
either you're momentarily horribly wrong due to transient serious brain failure, or you're psychologically screwed up, to ever write anything like that
governments work when they rule by consensus. but when they need coercion to rule, they are weak, and their days are numbered. when, not if, the chinese economy takes a downturn (no economy grows forever), the people will inevitably grumble. but if they can't even grumble, it's not "harmonious", we shall begin to see an unraveling of faith in the government, like we see in tehran
why does the chinese government fear the words of its own people?
it lays bare the fact that their agenda is not the agenda of their own people
all i can say is...
damn, why didn't i get this job!
about the cranky losers who constantly trumpet the fact they don't have a television, whenever the subject comes up
however, i am now that cranky loser, for facebook: every time facebook comes up as an issue, i will trumpet the fact i don't have an account, and never will, and feel smugly superior for that fact
it's nothing but a bonfire of vanities. you're just not that interesting, none of us are, sorry
free your time and free yourself from endless navel gazing and obviously, get some privacy: lose facerbook, permanently. declare your freedom from shallowness and corporate exploitation
if you have real friends, they won't need this stupid contrivance to maintain their friendship with you. the rest are just acquaintances, not really friends, and you work far too hard to maintain some ridiculous fake mask for their sake. they don't really matter to the quality of your life, unless you're shallow, in which case you don't have that much quality of life to begin with
lose facebook. you're life will improve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_research_related_to_low-carbohydrate_diets
the solid factual research, that you supposedly cite when in truth you are woefully out of touch, colors my experience as quite common. sure, this diet is not for everyone and there may be difficulties (although the inuit seem to be doing fine for centuries), but it is quite obvious that the way you represent current understanding of low carb diets is patently false
apologize and then shut up
my "anecdotes" are closer to the truth than whatever the hell is going on in your mind
there's a difference between a pop up in a browser frame and a modal dialog box from an application
and, get this, you can actually see the difference
and, i hope i'm not getting too far ahead of you here, it matters in terms of what kind of attack vector you are dealing with
have i totally blown your mind yet? ;-P
not WHY
if i shoot you in the head, an observer can certainly fall into the trap you've described in imagining WHY i've shot you in the head. however, who cares WHY i shot you in the head: there's a hole in your head, regardless. and therefore i can be judged, for shooting you in the head, as committing a crime, no matter WHY i did itt
likewise, WHY this asshole engages in cybercrime may be a complex and nuanced subject matter. and its important to explore that. however, the bottom line is, he engaged in cybercrime. that is all that is needed to know to pass judgment on him: he's an asshole
my observation about personal accountability and morality only depends upon someone trangressing against someone else. your observation about fundamental attribution error deals with WHY someone transgresses, which is an important subject matter, but does not in any way change the fact that someone chose to transgress against someone else, and therefore has committed a crime, and therefore deserves to be condemned and punished, regardless of WHY they did it
about a month ago, while going through the motions of updating java one day (clicking on all those security warnings, running the little interface), i thought: to hack a system, why not just copy this stupid little interface and have the user gleefully click through all of the little security warnings?
and now my fleeting paranoia is reality: you can't trust the updaters anymore
which makes this news from two days ago all the more prescient:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/03/24/189248
"Microsoft To Distribute Third-Party Patches"
furthermore, i despise the fact that just because i have quicktime and adobe and java installed, i have to always have these useless potentially bogus processes constantly running in the background doing nothing but waiting for their once monthly updates
it makes much better sense to have ALL software updated through one repository which, obviously, has to be microsoft
now microsoft is responsible for a secure update process, you don't have to worry about 9 different third party update mechanisms and have them constantly running, and finally, the big fat shiny nail in the coffin: you don't have to worry about this malware posing as an updater
a negative being: now you're pretty much sending microsoft a manifest of all of your installed software every time you get an update, but i see no way around that without this new hack entering the picture
who cares either way?
if he's born here, he's an american. end of fucking story. his parents were mexican? they were cuban? they were polish? they were indian? what's the fucking difference?
yes, i know, to SOME people the difference matters. and for those of you for whom identifying whether or not he's mexican or cuban is important, you're a racist asshole, EVEN IF you are the same ethnic background
the issue is blind pride
people are prideful about things they shouldn't be proudful of
the only valid source of pride in this world is that you are an ethical HUMAN BEING
but if you are proud of being an {INSERT RACIAL/ NATIONALISTIC/ RELIGIOUS CHAUVINIST IDENTIFIER} you begin the process of talking about "us" versus "them", and, in your blind silly pride, actually wind up being the source of pretty much all the problems we have in this world
its getting better, very slowly but surely. someday, in the distant future, there will be less wars and less strife and all because people just think about each other as human beings, nothing more, nothing less. it will take a lot of effort to get there, but we are actually moving in that direction, oh ever so slowly
you're born in new york fucking city and you're fucking complaining about dropping the fucking f-bomb?
fuck!
"a Cuban-American who was born in Miami"
meaning: he's an american. he's born here, right?
so what's the fucking point of saying he's CUBAN-american? cuban-americans are more prone to cybercrime? what the hell is the significance of saying he's CUBAN-american. oh, a "real" american would never engage in cybercrime? what's that? an irish-american? an italian-american? when an irish-american robs a bank, do we say describe the crime, the sentencing and the criminal as "An Irish-American who was born in Philadelphia". why is that significant information? it's not, it's a racist smear
oh, it all makes sense now- he's a CUBAN-american: this is important information to relay in the story summary when describing the criminal and the crime
racist fucking bullshit
you're relying on outdated cbo numbers. the latest numbers right before the bill was signed did not include the public option, and it still saved $
#2:
but btw, you're right: the public option will save $$$, adn should be implemented, and it will. single point of purchase is where price controls can come into play, and the savings will be massive, none of these corporate assholes jacking your rates and denying you benefits while doctors ring up 10 unnecessary tests just so they can get paid. its insanity. thankfully, we're on track to finally fix this fucking bullshit broken system where the poor are fine, the rich are fine, and the middle class get shafted