perversely, the healthier your immunse system, the more likely you are to die from a novel h1n1 pandemic, as your immune systems drowns your own lungs in overreaction. the weaker your immune system, the more likely you are to survive
but please, be my guest, don't get a shot. improve the gene pool by removing the fucking morons from it
a flu shot is a no brainer dumb as nails obvious thing that everyone should get
if 98% get the shot, and 1,000 die from the shot and only 100 die from the flu, then the shot is a roaring success, considering the amount who would die if no one got the shot
you can see that world governments aren't composed of mostly well meaning but bumbling fools with bad ideas, but alien overlords hellbent on sneakily taking away your rights just for the hell of it
equally awesome is how you alone see through the charade, while everyone else is fooled
As we know, There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know There are known unknowns. That is to say We know there are some things We do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, The ones we don't know We don't know.
that trust is a balance. you can be too distrustful, you can be too trusting, and its hard to get the right mix
and so i protest that you extrapolated too much from my words to make your point. however i agree with your point and its an important one, so i'm not going to protest too much
is that a personality failure on my part? ok, but i don't know how else to react to stupidity than call it stupid. and you're stupid
like this:
"Before the 19th century, people did not think of themselves as 'English' or 'French."
i mean how do i respond to this? i mean, the statement is obviously fucking retarded. but i can't say that? i have to be nice and put on a plastic smile and supportively hold your ignorant hand and calmly explain to you the fucking obvious?
i'm sorry, i don't know how to do that. all i know how to do is say the truth: you're a fucking moron. why? for saying fucking moronic things like this
mod me into oblivion world, call me uncouth, insensitive, whatever
how or why should i respect obvious stupidity?
i don't know how to do it
i have no respect for you, and i consider you ignorant. based on a well-established string now of obviously ignorant statements and beliefs
chemistry, physics, biochemistry, computer science, mathematics, etc.
you need to slave almost your whole life, be at the top of your mental game, have tons of education under your belt, and you need extremely expensive instruments (well, not math)
but to make an important contribution to astronomy, you just need to look up with a cheap introductory level hobbyist telescope available at walmart, and some passion
trusting the chinese government at their word is equally foolish. there are no deep nefarious plots and twisty hidden meanings in this piece of censorware most probably. but at the same time, the chinese government is certainly no paragon of virtue that we should trust is motivated by exactly what they say
not that western nations are any more trustworthy. its just that there is this idiotic notion i often encounter that says "western critics are complaining the chinese have hidden purposes, so since i don't trust western mouthpieces, i'll believe the chinese at their word that they are completely virtuous and innocent in their motivations"
you know, like iran is enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. "that's what they said, that's what i believe. because i won't be a naive idiot for the west. i choose to be a naive idiot for the west's enemies"
hey, here's a radical idea: how about you trust no one and be a naive idiot for no one? that is: distrust the west, distrust china, and distrust iran, all at the same time
the most nationalistic amongst any population are the poor. in any time period. in any culture
if you won't go for educational wikipedia links, then please just travel more. do you even get out of the suburbs? what "poor" are serving as your baseline? western white urban 20 something hipsters? pffffffft!
again, like i said, you can believe whatever the hell you want to, but when you make statements that directly contradict well-established fact, i feel compelled to reply to you. that's my weakness i guess. i guess i should just cynically learn to accept that some people will believe stupid shit to support their passions even in the face of the most obvious of contradicting facts
one would hope that beliefs would flow from facts, but it makes sense in some ways that the most passionate ideologues have beliefs which directly contradict reality. why watch and study the world when you can close your eyes and start shouting?
i reacted to your mischaracterization of the rich being the source of nationalism, since that idea is so completely out of whack with historical fact
if anyone needs to examine their reasons for thinking something, it is you
but of course, you take my attacks on your statements as attacks on your core beliefs and your ability to be passionate about them
you can still believe as you do, you can still be passionate about your beliefs. but you need to STRENGTHEN your passions and your beliefs by correcting them where they are obviously laughably wrong
i am merely flattering myself, thinking i could convince a random soul that the world is more complicated than they think it is
please, go back to your simple beliefs about nationalism and the aristocracy, forget little old me attempting to suggest it is more complicated than you think
simple minds need simple ideas to motivate their passions, and to suggest that it would kill your passions to suppose things are more complicated, is of course tomfoolery on my part, not yours. that a deeper knowledge of history and your beliefs and where you fit in the larger scheme of things might not be something the simple workhorse of the revolution wants, or even needs
it was indeed foolish of me to think i could pick a random bit of flotsam and jetsam of history, the simpleminded idealist, and suggest to them more complicated concepts. i should have just left the pieces fall as they do, as they always have, over and over again, throughout history, and hewed to my own self-stated path of staying out of the fray
indeed, to engage you otherwise, exactly as you suggest, is truly hypocritical of me
so: ignore me, i apologize, go back to your regularly scheduled programming
the rich feed nationalism! the rich feed nationalism! four legs good! two legs bad! four legs good! two legs bad!
in 1918, the same thing happened: the flu appeared in the spring, outside its usual pattern of appearing in the fall, and then percolated all summer, just below the radar, expanding stealthily but inevitable everywhere
then (in the northern hemisphere, it would explode in the cold months of the spring in the southern hemisphere) the flu exploded in the fall, and killed millions that winter. this is inevitable with flu because the flu virus actually survives in cold air for a longer period of time
so the summer months deaden its spread (really, just slow down its spread) so that it spreads stealthily but inevitably, while the winter months allow it to flourish and explode, seemingly everywhere at the same time (because the summer months allowed to actually go everywhere, just in small little clusters everywhere)
its also important to note that flu in 1918 killed at a very low rate, like under 1% of its victims. whatever strain dominates this winter, will be the real issue. will it have a 0.0003% mortality rate? or a 0.3% mortality rate? we're talking about the difference of tens of millions of lives in that difference, and no one knows what that mortality rate will be, since its such tiny little variations and random chance of one mutation dominating or another at work here
so beware false alarmism, and beware false complacency. this virus is a genuine unknown quantity. it really could kill a lot this winter, it could really completely fizzle out. both anyone freaking out, or completely blase and lackadaisacal about the whole thing, are fooling themselves
an unknown is an unknown is an unknown. neither false complacency or false alarmism is an appropriate response to that
of ideology, of faithful believers, villains of hate, and cynics who choose not to engage in the retarded battle, seeing it all as pointless (me)
certainly, the naive fool is an eternal force in world history. there is nothing new in you under the sun, and someone like you will always be around. the cynical corrupt asshole is another one, which you peg me as. but i personally consider myself more like the goat in animal farm, muriel:
Muriel, although not one of the most outstanding characters in George Orwell's Animal Farm, has a great deal of symbolism behind her. A typical worker, Muriel completes her tasks without complaining, nevertheless, seldom works more than she has to. , Boxer, the hard-working carthorse, symbolizes the proletariat, overworked, underpaid and always kept under strict control. Even though George Orwell does not mention Muriel very much in Animal Farm, this goat adds a lot of profundity to the storyline, since Muriel's symbolism is very insightful. Unfortunately, Muriel, being only a small portion of the population, has no motivation to make the rest of the animals realize that they are in worse conditions than when they were when humans ran the farm. She simply accomplishes her errands without protesting. This character is a simple-looking, calm, white goat that can be considered as an "average farm animal," never standing out above the rest, yet, never lagging behind. She is a simple looking white goat that reads the commandments to Clover whenever she requests her to do so. This knowledgeable goat represents a small minority of the working class who are educated enough to find out things on their own and decide for themselves.
in other words, i see the passionate fools like yourself, and i see the villainy of the leaders, but i see its a giant cycle of history, constantly renweing itself. and so i have decided to simply retire from this ridiculous drama, and enjoy mylife, and ride the tide whatever it may be, knowing it is all retarded and foolish
you, of course, would be boxer, eternal fool for the value of revolution, as if it will really change anything:
Boxer: The name Boxer is cleverly used by Orwell as a metaphor for the Boxer Rebellion in China in the early twentieth century. It was this rebellion which signaled the beginning of communism in red China. This communism, much like the distorted Stalin view of socialism, is still present today in the oppressive social government in China. Boxer and Clover are used by Orwell to represent the proletariat, or unskilled labor class in Russian society. This lower class is naturally drawn to Stalin (Napoleon) because it seems as though they will benefit most from his new system. Since Boxer and the other low animals are not accustomed to the "good life," they can't really compare Napoleon's government to the life they had before under the czars (Jones). Also, since usually the lowest class has the lowest intelligence, it is not difficult to persuade them into thinking they are getting a good deal.
The proletariat is also quite good at convincing each other that communism is a good idea. Orwell supports this contention when he narrates, "Their most faithful disciples were the two carthorses, Boxer and Clover. Those two had great difficulty in thinking anything out for themselves, but having once accepted the pigs as their teachers, they absorbed everything that they were told, and passed it on to the other animals by simple arguments."
Later, the importance of the proletariat is shown when Boxer suddenly falls and there is suddenly a drastic decrease in work productivity. But still he is taken for granted by the pigs, who send him away in a glue truck. Truly Boxer is the biggest poster-child for gullibility.
and so you should study a little psychology yourself: that the motivations of everyone on the intarwebs, nevermind civil society, would be the same facile and ridiculous goody two shoes "to serve and to help" is a whopping fallacy of an assumption on your part
mostly i'm just being self-serving: picking on an idiot for fun
which in a way, makes me an idiot myself
so see? i do know something of pscyhology: i'm the self-aware smug asshole;-)
freeing intellectual discovery, the natural bounty of mankind, from the retarded laws of retarded countries and the corporate thugs who own that country and try to keep things secret
Slashdot Mirror
if only because, online, we have to hear more voices like yours. you know, those with an obvious axe to grind
swimming around in a living elephant's circulatory system, then i'll be impressed
but as they say in alabama: "a frog in shit ain't nothing but a frog in shit", or something to that effect
digital rights and freedoms logically flow from that
that don't involve becoming a shut in
you are reacting to a radical position that no one is proposing except you
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
perversely, the healthier your immunse system, the more likely you are to die from a novel h1n1 pandemic, as your immune systems drowns your own lungs in overreaction. the weaker your immune system, the more likely you are to survive
but please, be my guest, don't get a shot. improve the gene pool by removing the fucking morons from it
a flu shot is a no brainer dumb as nails obvious thing that everyone should get
it seems the meteorite has made him grow to 4-5 times the size of cars next to him
i saw this in a 1950s science documentary involving a woman who grew 50 feet tall and deranged from this sort of tragic accident
than seeing a hot chick, taking in her attractiveness
and then she brings a cigarette to her mouth
instant killjoy
that's fatalistic
there are many things you can do about H1N1 to protect yourself
i begin to fantasize about it
i'm an addict
that people not get the shot?
if 98% get the shot, and 1,000 die from the shot and only 100 die from the flu, then the shot is a roaring success, considering the amount who would die if no one got the shot
right? or is logic not your strong suit?
then yes
you can see that world governments aren't composed of mostly well meaning but bumbling fools with bad ideas, but alien overlords hellbent on sneakily taking away your rights just for the hell of it
equally awesome is how you alone see through the charade, while everyone else is fooled
zzz
"The Unknown"
An Amateur poem by Donald Rumsfeld
Feb. 12, 2002
As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.
http://www.slate.com/id/2081042/
how the rationalization process works, to shore up the blind spots, and maintain the beliefs in spite of reality
that's about all i got out of this thread
"Before the 19th century, people did not think of themselves as 'English' or 'French."
(snicker)
that trust is a balance. you can be too distrustful, you can be too trusting, and its hard to get the right mix
and so i protest that you extrapolated too much from my words to make your point. however i agree with your point and its an important one, so i'm not going to protest too much
i'll call you a moron
is that a personality failure on my part? ok, but i don't know how else to react to stupidity than call it stupid. and you're stupid
like this:
"Before the 19th century, people did not think of themselves as 'English' or 'French."
i mean how do i respond to this? i mean, the statement is obviously fucking retarded. but i can't say that? i have to be nice and put on a plastic smile and supportively hold your ignorant hand and calmly explain to you the fucking obvious?
i'm sorry, i don't know how to do that. all i know how to do is say the truth: you're a fucking moron. why? for saying fucking moronic things like this
mod me into oblivion world, call me uncouth, insensitive, whatever
how or why should i respect obvious stupidity?
i don't know how to do it
i have no respect for you, and i consider you ignorant. based on a well-established string now of obviously ignorant statements and beliefs
what can i do?
chemistry, physics, biochemistry, computer science, mathematics, etc.
you need to slave almost your whole life, be at the top of your mental game, have tons of education under your belt, and you need extremely expensive instruments (well, not math)
but to make an important contribution to astronomy, you just need to look up with a cheap introductory level hobbyist telescope available at walmart, and some passion
that's amazing
trusting the chinese government at their word is equally foolish. there are no deep nefarious plots and twisty hidden meanings in this piece of censorware most probably. but at the same time, the chinese government is certainly no paragon of virtue that we should trust is motivated by exactly what they say
not that western nations are any more trustworthy. its just that there is this idiotic notion i often encounter that says "western critics are complaining the chinese have hidden purposes, so since i don't trust western mouthpieces, i'll believe the chinese at their word that they are completely virtuous and innocent in their motivations"
you know, like iran is enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. "that's what they said, that's what i believe. because i won't be a naive idiot for the west. i choose to be a naive idiot for the west's enemies"
hey, here's a radical idea: how about you trust no one and be a naive idiot for no one? that is: distrust the west, distrust china, and distrust iran, all at the same time
thunderclap
the most nationalistic amongst any population are the poor. in any time period. in any culture
if you won't go for educational wikipedia links, then please just travel more. do you even get out of the suburbs? what "poor" are serving as your baseline? western white urban 20 something hipsters? pffffffft!
again, like i said, you can believe whatever the hell you want to, but when you make statements that directly contradict well-established fact, i feel compelled to reply to you. that's my weakness i guess. i guess i should just cynically learn to accept that some people will believe stupid shit to support their passions even in the face of the most obvious of contradicting facts
one would hope that beliefs would flow from facts, but it makes sense in some ways that the most passionate ideologues have beliefs which directly contradict reality. why watch and study the world when you can close your eyes and start shouting?
but it often is
i reacted to your mischaracterization of the rich being the source of nationalism, since that idea is so completely out of whack with historical fact
if anyone needs to examine their reasons for thinking something, it is you
but of course, you take my attacks on your statements as attacks on your core beliefs and your ability to be passionate about them
you can still believe as you do, you can still be passionate about your beliefs. but you need to STRENGTHEN your passions and your beliefs by correcting them where they are obviously laughably wrong
or: i'm just a tool of dick cheney
you decide
zzz
you are 100% correct
i am merely flattering myself, thinking i could convince a random soul that the world is more complicated than they think it is
please, go back to your simple beliefs about nationalism and the aristocracy, forget little old me attempting to suggest it is more complicated than you think
simple minds need simple ideas to motivate their passions, and to suggest that it would kill your passions to suppose things are more complicated, is of course tomfoolery on my part, not yours. that a deeper knowledge of history and your beliefs and where you fit in the larger scheme of things might not be something the simple workhorse of the revolution wants, or even needs
it was indeed foolish of me to think i could pick a random bit of flotsam and jetsam of history, the simpleminded idealist, and suggest to them more complicated concepts. i should have just left the pieces fall as they do, as they always have, over and over again, throughout history, and hewed to my own self-stated path of staying out of the fray
indeed, to engage you otherwise, exactly as you suggest, is truly hypocritical of me
so: ignore me, i apologize, go back to your regularly scheduled programming
the rich feed nationalism!
the rich feed nationalism!
four legs good! two legs bad!
four legs good! two legs bad!
just not particularly lethal
in 1918, the same thing happened: the flu appeared in the spring, outside its usual pattern of appearing in the fall, and then percolated all summer, just below the radar, expanding stealthily but inevitable everywhere
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol12no01/05-0979.htm
then (in the northern hemisphere, it would explode in the cold months of the spring in the southern hemisphere) the flu exploded in the fall, and killed millions that winter. this is inevitable with flu because the flu virus actually survives in cold air for a longer period of time
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/health/05flu.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print&oref=login
so the summer months deaden its spread (really, just slow down its spread) so that it spreads stealthily but inevitably, while the winter months allow it to flourish and explode, seemingly everywhere at the same time (because the summer months allowed to actually go everywhere, just in small little clusters everywhere)
its also important to note that flu in 1918 killed at a very low rate, like under 1% of its victims. whatever strain dominates this winter, will be the real issue. will it have a 0.0003% mortality rate? or a 0.3% mortality rate? we're talking about the difference of tens of millions of lives in that difference, and no one knows what that mortality rate will be, since its such tiny little variations and random chance of one mutation dominating or another at work here
so beware false alarmism, and beware false complacency. this virus is a genuine unknown quantity. it really could kill a lot this winter, it could really completely fizzle out. both anyone freaking out, or completely blase and lackadaisacal about the whole thing, are fooling themselves
an unknown is an unknown is an unknown. neither false complacency or false alarmism is an appropriate response to that
of ideology, of faithful believers, villains of hate, and cynics who choose not to engage in the retarded battle, seeing it all as pointless (me)
certainly, the naive fool is an eternal force in world history. there is nothing new in you under the sun, and someone like you will always be around. the cynical corrupt asshole is another one, which you peg me as. but i personally consider myself more like the goat in animal farm, muriel:
http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/71126.html
in other words, i see the passionate fools like yourself, and i see the villainy of the leaders, but i see its a giant cycle of history, constantly renweing itself. and so i have decided to simply retire from this ridiculous drama, and enjoy mylife, and ride the tide whatever it may be, knowing it is all retarded and foolish
you, of course, would be boxer, eternal fool for the value of revolution, as if it will really change anything:
you assume my motivation is actually to help him
and so you should study a little psychology yourself: that the motivations of everyone on the intarwebs, nevermind civil society, would be the same facile and ridiculous goody two shoes "to serve and to help" is a whopping fallacy of an assumption on your part
mostly i'm just being self-serving: picking on an idiot for fun
which in a way, makes me an idiot myself
so see? i do know something of pscyhology: i'm the self-aware smug asshole ;-)
xoxoxoxoxoxoxox
the pirates ;-)
freeing intellectual discovery, the natural bounty of mankind, from the retarded laws of retarded countries and the corporate thugs who own that country and try to keep things secret