when i point out your blind nationalistic pride, it helps not to actually be a full bodied stereotype of that in response. i spoke of stupid american crimes, as an american. now its your turn. but i suppose sunlight shines from canadian anuses, eh? too perfect for to comprehend? (snicker)
if you have any more chest thumping to do, go for it dude. so any canadian reading this thread can feel immensely ashamed of you;-)
the assholes in the american government operate on the assumption that if they waterboard someone, they are still better than the terrorists they are fighting. but when you engage in the same tactics as your enemy, you have become your enemy. what makes people think they are better than someone else, even when they do the same thing, is nationalistic or tribal or religious bigotry and blind pride
the proper response, as an american, to something like waterboarding, is to reject it as evil outright, not blame it on somebody else. if i said to you: "yeah but we waterboard because of what the terrorists did!" thats a cop out, right?
so, for you, the proper response to this fascist canadian proposal is to reject it, not blame someone else. because here you are, venting about america's evil, under a story that points out a canadian evil. take responsibility for what comes from your country: if canada is better than the usa for any reason, it is because of what canadians do, not for just being canadian. but you seem to have such a big chip on your shoulder about how evil the usa is, that when someone points out something canada does wrong, you're quick to foam at the mouth about the usa
how does that work?
well, lets put it this way: if you ever wanted to know how the assholes in washington dc think, who approve of waterboarding, then just look into yourself, because you have the same seed of blind nationalist pride in you that they do
so cleanse yourself of your blind ethnocentric pride... it doesn't reflect very well on canada, eh?
if i understand my history correct, the the 'not-withstanding clause' you refer to was ripped off from the concept of American Federalism
as for:
"I'd have to say that this sort of law would be much more likely in a place like the USA, where the government has already revoked so many of the rights of the citizens in the name of national security."
please refer to:
"I'm [american], and every time something controversial is proposed, the [canadian] media jumps all over it and says '[America] is going to [insert crazy idea here]'."
but i have to admit, that's a pretty neat trick: you took news of a fascist canadian proposal and turned it into an opportunity to bash the usa. well played!
"Intelligent, Competent, and Caring People" are too busy whining about how someone else should fix their problems rather than doing anything about the problems themselves. BUt I like that touch: calling them "Intelligent, Competent, and Caring People", when we know what they really are. You have a way with people. Perhaps you should consider running for office.
while a billion colors is obviously ridiculous, there are people who can see 100x more colors than an average person
scientists have recently identified a very small, very rare population of women who see in 4 colors, to a total of 100 million colors
most humans see in 3 colors, about 1 million colors: red, green, and blue. a tetrachromat has an extra cone type between red and green, around orange. it's only women because the mutation requires two x chromosomes to work
read all about it, they describe a women who can look into a river and make out silting and depth levels a normal human can't, x-men mutant indeed!:
if you want to read, you get a paperback. indestructible. no battery. cheap. easy. infinitely superior to ebooks for the purpose of casual reading
if you want any sort of text manipulation, you get a laptop. infinitely superior to ebooks for the purpose of anything electronic
but but! i need a small form factor blah blah blah...
then you use your cell phone
end of story
ebooks always were a failure, and always will be a failure. they are a product in search of niche audience that is already fulfilled
to me, ebooks seem to be pushed by a book industry fervently in search of their own iPod or portable dvd player type transformative media rubicon. the ebook ain't it
but don't worry book industry wonks, it is coming: electronic paper. it will replace the book and the laptop and the cell phone. something you fold up in your pocket and unravel like a map or a magazine or a newspaper depending on the function
and could care less about everything that came after
i still play it today sometimes, because its low time commitment
i don't want all immersive environments and storylines that eat up hours of my day. i have a life. i want to waste 5-10 minutes pointing a shotgun at imps, then get back to what i have to do
maybe if they placed modern graphics rendering on top of the old 2D control system, i would take a look
no, i'm not insane: 2D controls dumbs down the game in the RIGHT way: pure enjoyment, pure... id
so you are saying its a kindwouldacoulda scenario, but still, we should all be filled with deathly fear about it, and use that irrational fear to inform our ability to percieve our modern world
no
how about this: how about we enjoy 1984 as a dystopian vision, and then utterly discard it when we talk about REALITY
not very orwellian, this cameraphone in every hand on the street, is it? so how does that fact jive with orwell's vision of the future?
it doesn't!
BECAUSE IT WAS JUST A FAIRY TALE, NOT DEAD ACCURATE FORTUNE TELLING
so will some of you PLEASE lose your deathgrip on the dead, innaccurate foretelling of 1984 already?
people have the stereotypical orwellian view of big brother so firmly entrenched in their head, they completely miss out on the fact that what orwell wrote was a useful bit of science fiction, not prescient reality. and that reality, while hewing to some of the larger themes of what orwell wrote, is in fact fundamentally different and falls into a completely different reality:
little brother
that is, cameras everywhere, everywhere in the hands of people on the street, witnesses, not agents of an autocratic government. technology is something that is never the complete monopoly and dominance of the government. so i have two words for you:
rodney king
please, people, 1984 is a dead parable about our future. please stop using orwell and 1984 in how you form a vision of our future or our present. it simply isn't valid, isn't accurate, and isn't valuable in forming a useful understanding of your government and your reality. reality is a lot more complex, and fundamentally different than orwell's old fiction
i suppose we're going to split up into morlock and eloi too? to suppose so is the same kind of idiocy to extrapolate such presumed accuracy from a fairy tail like 1984. orwell wrote a nice story folks, not the damn magna carta. please understand that
1984=dead fiction. not the prescient future
really
get over big brother, i'm so sick of that dead, inaccurate vision
now you babble on about how they aren't the big organizations
to borrow a phrase from you: "This is quite a different argument from your original."
just grow the fuck up already. take your heart, which is in the right place, and try to grow a fucking brain on top of it. because right now, your current set of operating assumptions about how the world you live in works is pure teenage crap
therefore, the solution to the abuses you (rightfully) see involves working through organizations, tweaking them, not working against them, destroying them
because you can never destroy them
do you understand that?
furthermore, no organization can be 100% ethical. all you can do is CONSTANTLY work with them to make them as ethical as possible
"I presented an argument that basically stated that organizations are inherently amoral and if they are amoral, they cannot be a force to enculcate morality - as you suggest."
let me be clear: organizations will never be 100% ethical. but with hard, constant work, by people with your heart, but a better mind, they can function at 70-90%
as for "I presented an argument that basically stated that organizations are inherently amoral" is such low iq teenaged nihilistic emo bullshit, it is beneath my ability to stomach the hand holding intellectual charity work to show you that you are wrong. you're wrong, you simply are. that i am not defending that statement is not because i don't have a defense for that statement, btu that i don't have the desire to engage in the intellectual chairty work required for you to understand the fucking obvious
the people who are not getting listened to are not doing their jobs if they are not getting listened to. besides, we are talking about technological exploits, specifically unique exploits no one else seems to have gamed so effectively, not general anti-hacking professionals talking about anti-hacking strategies in general. so you're changnign the subject
>
dude, you're changing the subject. i said look at the example of frank abagnale. what is interesting about that SPECIFIC example? frank abagnale made specific powerful technological innovations.
"The crooks who I've dealt with have mostly been good at social engineering"
FAIL. i'm not talking about those crooks. stay on target please
i am talking ONLY about hackers who do the same thing as frank abagnale. if something they do involves only social engineering, you are 100% right to say they are no different than 500,000 other blokes and jail... and you are also talking about people i am not talking about!
so you haven't countered my point, you've merely misunderstood the subject matter
Getting society to listen to the people who are pointing out the holes, often for years before the crooks decided to use them, is a better way to solve that problem
now it is my turn to change the subject: it is kind of a meta-level joke to comment on crooks with social skills... and then complain that no one listens to people pointing out the holes. do you get the joke?
a valuable social skill in life in ANY job is getting people to listen to you. you don't wave a magic wand and get people to listen to you, you don't issue a governmental edict and people listen to you. you phrase what you have to say in such a compelling way that people want to listen to you
so it sounds like you could use some help from those common blokes in jail, nevermind the technologically astute ones;-)
allow me to short circuit your entire thesis with the following dumb as bricks obvious observations:
1. it is an absolutely inherent aspect of human nature to form organizations. you will never stop human beings from doing this, short of fundamentally altering human nature itself (thats scifi, btw, not reality). if you destroyed every government, religion, or other organization on the planet, new governments, religions and other organizations would spontaneously form to fill the vacuum. its completely unavoidable: you are dealing with a social, hierarchical primate
2. a human organization is, by nature of specialization, orders of magnitude more powerful than the sum of its parts, and additionally, many many orders of magnitude more powerful than the individual. no group of individuals (nevermind the ironic ddefinition "group of individuals") can possibly surmount that power. is it right? is it wrong? is it ethical? is it corrupt? doesn't matter. it exists, and it is powerful
in short: get used to what you hate. 1. its not going away. 2. its more powerful than the individual. work THROUGH organizations, reform them. destroying them is like cutting yyour arm off because you have a hangnail: stupid, and you don't understand the proper approach to the problem
some day im going to die. i dont like this fact, but i accept it and incorporate it into my worldview as an insurmoutable truth
organzations will always exist and will always be stronger than the individual. you can deny that obvious reality, or you can incorporate this insurmountable truth into your worldview, and therefore more effectively fight the abuses you hate, abuses you hate for good reason
i respect your heart. you are outraged at the crimes you see commited by government and organizations. and rightly so, and i share your outrage. however, although you have heart, you don't have the mind to go along with it, and so you are useless
marry your passion with a better understanding of the reality of what you are fighting, and thereby be actually effective in fighting it
perhaps you could organize a group of individuals to fight the crimes you see (i hope you get the joke)
and my comment was laced with insults directed at you, while you made a polite request laced with compliments
i am entirely aware of all of that
one wonders why you think that matters
"If anything, you have only served to reduce yourself to the level of the so called 'feeble minds' you complain about by resulting to childish defensive name calling."
a feeble mind is a brittle, inflexible mind. asperger's type people. anal retentive. minds set in their ways, compulsively fixated on form, such as grammar, completely empty in the realm of function, the content of one's thoughts. these are minds that are often scrupulously correct on the small feeble pointless questions of grammar, but utterly empty in the realm of interesting mental content
it is of course possible to have good grammar, and interesting content. but i just simply don't care. it is more interesting for me to wage war with those fixated on the value of aesthetics over actual content. this war has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the agenda at hand, but it has evertyhing to do with my own personal agenda. which i hold in greater regard than the common agenda
so to the character failure of childishness you accuse me of, i add the following: arrogance. but either of these character failures on my part, the arrogance and the childish defensive name calling, is completely unlike the character failure of having a small shallow brittle mind
so i entirely own up to my character failures. i accept your charges against me, i validate them. and i have absolutely no interest in correcting them. i am however, fixated on pissing off feeble minds obsessed with shallow form over actual deeper content of one's thoughts
in short, thanks for the compliments. and in return, i say: good day asswipe;-)
it's my style, and i like it. i find it pisses off the kind of people who i want to piss off, who i'd rather not associate with in the first place
those who don't seem bothered by it usually also don't have a stick up their ass, their minds are more supple. brittle minds need the rigid formatting conformation to prop themselves up. the lack of formatting drives them nuts, simply because their minds are so feeble, not for any valid reason i should actually recognize and accomodate
so i've come to depend upon my lack of capitalization as a useful filter in chasing away minds i don't want to interact with anyway
I'm entirely capable of using the shift key at any time. I simply choose not to, consciously. And I never will use the shift key. Sorry.
go ahead and mod every comment of mine from here on out as "troll", i don't fucking care
this is who i am, i'm not changing for anyone, for any reason. deal with it or fuck off
i can't conceive that you would actually think like that
"Example: How many teenagers would know the experience of killing someone if they weren't engaged in doing so for the military?"
uh, PLENTY, moron
ever hear of a gang?
do you live on this planet?
if you are just trolling me, i have chomped hard
please tell me you don't actually believe what you say:
"No organization is ethical or moral, because these are qualities of human beings - qualities that more frequently get subverted by government than they are by "petty vandalism" or "self-indulgence". "
it is malformed individuals who most frequently subvert moral and ethical behavior, not governmental organizations. really, fruitcake, that's the truth
in fact, within the context of a human organization, there is the further observation that any subversive activity is not actually being done in the name of that organization. on other wordsa, individual within that organization are just gaming the system for selfish goals, not working in the name of the system
such that criminal governmental workers aren't really acting in the name of the government, they are acting in the name of themselves, and can be expelled and punished and the governmental organization can continue with its stated mission
unfortunately, deluded fools such as yourself will then believe these criminal, expelled governmental representatives are the actual real face of the organization. when obviously they are not
in other words, you can hold a governmental entity accountable to clean up its mistakes. such that even though any human organization falls short of perfect performance, a human organizaiton that TRIES to be ethical, and is ethical most of the time, is far better than convincing yourself (falsely) that there are no ethics or morality at work in any governmental organization
this is just wrong of you. not theoretically wrong, but just observationally wrong. you don't seem to be able to adequately perceive the obvious reality of governmental work as it actually is. you must be operating under a heavy load of fud and propaganda to believe as you do
and i'm showing how it is possible to salvage his "contribution". he did engage in smarmy vandalism of the process you know. that means he does deserve to be punished in one form of another. but not so severely of course, and not without recourse to salvage his skills for the good of society, rather than teenaged pranks
he was caught, rehabilitated, and then he earned his money honestly
yes, if he didn't pursue a life of crime, he wouldn't have a penny today. but that's only half the story
equally true: if he wasn't caught and rehabilitated, he would be living dishonestly off of his ill-gotten gains in a pension house in rio de janiero, or, more likely, be rotting in prison in france or somewhere else
Slashdot Mirror
when i point out your blind nationalistic pride, it helps not to actually be a full bodied stereotype of that in response. i spoke of stupid american crimes, as an american. now its your turn. but i suppose sunlight shines from canadian anuses, eh? too perfect for to comprehend? (snicker)
;-)
if you have any more chest thumping to do, go for it dude. so any canadian reading this thread can feel immensely ashamed of you
the assholes in the american government operate on the assumption that if they waterboard someone, they are still better than the terrorists they are fighting. but when you engage in the same tactics as your enemy, you have become your enemy. what makes people think they are better than someone else, even when they do the same thing, is nationalistic or tribal or religious bigotry and blind pride
the proper response, as an american, to something like waterboarding, is to reject it as evil outright, not blame it on somebody else. if i said to you: "yeah but we waterboard because of what the terrorists did!" thats a cop out, right?
so, for you, the proper response to this fascist canadian proposal is to reject it, not blame someone else. because here you are, venting about america's evil, under a story that points out a canadian evil. take responsibility for what comes from your country: if canada is better than the usa for any reason, it is because of what canadians do, not for just being canadian. but you seem to have such a big chip on your shoulder about how evil the usa is, that when someone points out something canada does wrong, you're quick to foam at the mouth about the usa
how does that work?
well, lets put it this way: if you ever wanted to know how the assholes in washington dc think, who approve of waterboarding, then just look into yourself, because you have the same seed of blind nationalist pride in you that they do
so cleanse yourself of your blind ethnocentric pride... it doesn't reflect very well on canada, eh?
if i understand my history correct, the the 'not-withstanding clause' you refer to was ripped off from the concept of American Federalism
as for:
"I'd have to say that this sort of law would be much more likely in a place like the USA, where the government has already revoked so many of the rights of the citizens in the name of national security."
please refer to:
"I'm [american], and every time something controversial is proposed, the [canadian] media jumps all over it and says '[America] is going to [insert crazy idea here]'."
but i have to admit, that's a pretty neat trick: you took news of a fascist canadian proposal and turned it into an opportunity to bash the usa. well played!
Dear Fools,
"Intelligent, Competent, and Caring People" are too busy whining about how someone else should fix their problems rather than doing anything about the problems themselves. BUt I like that touch: calling them "Intelligent, Competent, and Caring People", when we know what they really are. You have a way with people. Perhaps you should consider running for office.
Cheers
in ankle bracelets on truants, cameras around london, etc.
those are just stunts, it is propaganda and hysteria to overinflate the significance of those developments
but this massive dpi stuff, this is big brother for real
but its not as sexy a lightning rod visceral symbolic issue like ankle bracelets on truants. so it won't experience the same outcry
while a billion colors is obviously ridiculous, there are people who can see 100x more colors than an average person
scientists have recently identified a very small, very rare population of women who see in 4 colors, to a total of 100 million colors
most humans see in 3 colors, about 1 million colors: red, green, and blue. a tetrachromat has an extra cone type between red and green, around orange. it's only women because the mutation requires two x chromosomes to work
read all about it, they describe a women who can look into a river and make out silting and depth levels a normal human can't, x-men mutant indeed!:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06256/721190-114.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy
is not an anagram for 'Senator Palpatine'
however, it is an anagram for 'A Hemp Hew Impotent' and 'Heathen Em Pimp Two'
http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=Matthew+Oppenheim&t=1000
draw your own conclusions
if you want to read, you get a paperback. indestructible. no battery. cheap. easy. infinitely superior to ebooks for the purpose of casual reading
if you want any sort of text manipulation, you get a laptop. infinitely superior to ebooks for the purpose of anything electronic
but but! i need a small form factor blah blah blah...
then you use your cell phone
end of story
ebooks always were a failure, and always will be a failure. they are a product in search of niche audience that is already fulfilled
to me, ebooks seem to be pushed by a book industry fervently in search of their own iPod or portable dvd player type transformative media rubicon. the ebook ain't it
but don't worry book industry wonks, it is coming: electronic paper. it will replace the book and the laptop and the cell phone. something you fold up in your pocket and unravel like a map or a magazine or a newspaper depending on the function
nice! ;-)
thanks for the tip
and could care less about everything that came after
i still play it today sometimes, because its low time commitment
i don't want all immersive environments and storylines that eat up hours of my day. i have a life. i want to waste 5-10 minutes pointing a shotgun at imps, then get back to what i have to do
maybe if they placed modern graphics rendering on top of the old 2D control system, i would take a look
no, i'm not insane: 2D controls dumbs down the game in the RIGHT way: pure enjoyment, pure... id
so you are saying its a kindwouldacoulda scenario, but still, we should all be filled with deathly fear about it, and use that irrational fear to inform our ability to percieve our modern world
no
how about this: how about we enjoy 1984 as a dystopian vision, and then utterly discard it when we talk about REALITY
how's that sound to you?
in the cellphones and hands of every day citizens
(smacks forehead)
not very orwellian, this cameraphone in every hand on the street, is it? so how does that fact jive with orwell's vision of the future?
it doesn't!
BECAUSE IT WAS JUST A FAIRY TALE, NOT DEAD ACCURATE FORTUNE TELLING
so will some of you PLEASE lose your deathgrip on the dead, innaccurate foretelling of 1984 already?
people have the stereotypical orwellian view of big brother so firmly entrenched in their head, they completely miss out on the fact that what orwell wrote was a useful bit of science fiction, not prescient reality. and that reality, while hewing to some of the larger themes of what orwell wrote, is in fact fundamentally different and falls into a completely different reality:
little brother
that is, cameras everywhere, everywhere in the hands of people on the street, witnesses, not agents of an autocratic government. technology is something that is never the complete monopoly and dominance of the government. so i have two words for you:
rodney king
please, people, 1984 is a dead parable about our future. please stop using orwell and 1984 in how you form a vision of our future or our present. it simply isn't valid, isn't accurate, and isn't valuable in forming a useful understanding of your government and your reality. reality is a lot more complex, and fundamentally different than orwell's old fiction
i suppose we're going to split up into morlock and eloi too? to suppose so is the same kind of idiocy to extrapolate such presumed accuracy from a fairy tail like 1984. orwell wrote a nice story folks, not the damn magna carta. please understand that
1984=dead fiction. not the prescient future
really
get over big brother, i'm so sick of that dead, inaccurate vision
but you are most definitely a teenager ideologically
i think i am pissing you off
i know this dance. now you respond less on logic and reason, and more on the spirit of stubborn resistance. not an interesting conversation
i've made my points. accept them, shut the fuck up, move on little kid
xoxoxoxox
that organizations like msf can do good
now you babble on about how they aren't the big organizations
to borrow a phrase from you: "This is quite a different argument from your original."
just grow the fuck up already. take your heart, which is in the right place, and try to grow a fucking brain on top of it. because right now, your current set of operating assumptions about how the world you live in works is pure teenage crap
you'll get it someday
good luck kid
organizations exist
;-)
always have, always will
therefore, the solution to the abuses you (rightfully) see involves working through organizations, tweaking them, not working against them, destroying them
because you can never destroy them
do you understand that?
furthermore, no organization can be 100% ethical. all you can do is CONSTANTLY work with them to make them as ethical as possible
"I presented an argument that basically stated that organizations are inherently amoral and if they are amoral, they cannot be a force to enculcate morality - as you suggest."
let me be clear: organizations will never be 100% ethical. but with hard, constant work, by people with your heart, but a better mind, they can function at 70-90%
as for "I presented an argument that basically stated that organizations are inherently amoral" is such low iq teenaged nihilistic emo bullshit, it is beneath my ability to stomach the hand holding intellectual charity work to show you that you are wrong. you're wrong, you simply are. that i am not defending that statement is not because i don't have a defense for that statement, btu that i don't have the desire to engage in the intellectual chairty work required for you to understand the fucking obvious
but i'll throw you a bone:
http://www.msf.org/
so, figure it out yourself
or remain a useless emo retard
xoxoxoxoxoxoxox
>
;-)
the people who are not getting listened to are not doing their jobs if they are not getting listened to. besides, we are talking about technological exploits, specifically unique exploits no one else seems to have gamed so effectively, not general anti-hacking professionals talking about anti-hacking strategies in general. so you're changnign the subject
>
dude, you're changing the subject. i said look at the example of frank abagnale. what is interesting about that SPECIFIC example? frank abagnale made specific powerful technological innovations.
"The crooks who I've dealt with have mostly been good at social engineering"
FAIL. i'm not talking about those crooks. stay on target please
i am talking ONLY about hackers who do the same thing as frank abagnale. if something they do involves only social engineering, you are 100% right to say they are no different than 500,000 other blokes and jail... and you are also talking about people i am not talking about!
so you haven't countered my point, you've merely misunderstood the subject matter
Getting society to listen to the people who are pointing out the holes, often for years before the crooks decided to use them, is a better way to solve that problem
now it is my turn to change the subject: it is kind of a meta-level joke to comment on crooks with social skills... and then complain that no one listens to people pointing out the holes. do you get the joke?
a valuable social skill in life in ANY job is getting people to listen to you. you don't wave a magic wand and get people to listen to you, you don't issue a governmental edict and people listen to you. you phrase what you have to say in such a compelling way that people want to listen to you
so it sounds like you could use some help from those common blokes in jail, nevermind the technologically astute ones
because i think it makes me special
;-) i am redoubled in my efforts ;-)
i do it because of the kind of people i piss off by doing it
i don't think i am special or unique or notable
but i do think i annoy you (and i obviously do, by your post), and that is the source of pleasure which drives my behavior
because the kind of people i annoy by doing it, are the kind of brittle asshole i hate
so thanks for feeding me
xoxoxoxoxox
allow me to short circuit your entire thesis with the following dumb as bricks obvious observations:
;-)
1. it is an absolutely inherent aspect of human nature to form organizations. you will never stop human beings from doing this, short of fundamentally altering human nature itself (thats scifi, btw, not reality). if you destroyed every government, religion, or other organization on the planet, new governments, religions and other organizations would spontaneously form to fill the vacuum. its completely unavoidable: you are dealing with a social, hierarchical primate
2. a human organization is, by nature of specialization, orders of magnitude more powerful than the sum of its parts, and additionally, many many orders of magnitude more powerful than the individual. no group of individuals (nevermind the ironic ddefinition "group of individuals") can possibly surmount that power. is it right? is it wrong? is it ethical? is it corrupt? doesn't matter. it exists, and it is powerful
in short: get used to what you hate. 1. its not going away. 2. its more powerful than the individual. work THROUGH organizations, reform them. destroying them is like cutting yyour arm off because you have a hangnail: stupid, and you don't understand the proper approach to the problem
some day im going to die. i dont like this fact, but i accept it and incorporate it into my worldview as an insurmoutable truth
organzations will always exist and will always be stronger than the individual. you can deny that obvious reality, or you can incorporate this insurmountable truth into your worldview, and therefore more effectively fight the abuses you hate, abuses you hate for good reason
i respect your heart. you are outraged at the crimes you see commited by government and organizations. and rightly so, and i share your outrage. however, although you have heart, you don't have the mind to go along with it, and so you are useless
marry your passion with a better understanding of the reality of what you are fighting, and thereby be actually effective in fighting it
perhaps you could organize a group of individuals to fight the crimes you see (i hope you get the joke)
oh, i forgot the name calling: good day, moron
xoxoxoxox
and my comment was laced with insults directed at you, while you made a polite request laced with compliments
;-)
i am entirely aware of all of that
one wonders why you think that matters
"If anything, you have only served to reduce yourself to the level of the so called 'feeble minds' you complain about by resulting to childish defensive name calling."
a feeble mind is a brittle, inflexible mind. asperger's type people. anal retentive. minds set in their ways, compulsively fixated on form, such as grammar, completely empty in the realm of function, the content of one's thoughts. these are minds that are often scrupulously correct on the small feeble pointless questions of grammar, but utterly empty in the realm of interesting mental content
it is of course possible to have good grammar, and interesting content. but i just simply don't care. it is more interesting for me to wage war with those fixated on the value of aesthetics over actual content. this war has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the agenda at hand, but it has evertyhing to do with my own personal agenda. which i hold in greater regard than the common agenda
so to the character failure of childishness you accuse me of, i add the following: arrogance. but either of these character failures on my part, the arrogance and the childish defensive name calling, is completely unlike the character failure of having a small shallow brittle mind
so i entirely own up to my character failures. i accept your charges against me, i validate them. and i have absolutely no interest in correcting them. i am however, fixated on pissing off feeble minds obsessed with shallow form over actual deeper content of one's thoughts
in short, thanks for the compliments. and in return, i say: good day asswipe
xoxoxoxoxox
it's my style, and i like it. i find it pisses off the kind of people who i want to piss off, who i'd rather not associate with in the first place
those who don't seem bothered by it usually also don't have a stick up their ass, their minds are more supple. brittle minds need the rigid formatting conformation to prop themselves up. the lack of formatting drives them nuts, simply because their minds are so feeble, not for any valid reason i should actually recognize and accomodate
so i've come to depend upon my lack of capitalization as a useful filter in chasing away minds i don't want to interact with anyway
I'm entirely capable of using the shift key at any time. I simply choose not to, consciously. And I never will use the shift key. Sorry.
go ahead and mod every comment of mine from here on out as "troll", i don't fucking care
this is who i am, i'm not changing for anyone, for any reason. deal with it or fuck off
or are you some sort of elaborate troll?
i can't conceive that you would actually think like that
"Example: How many teenagers would know the experience of killing someone if they weren't engaged in doing so for the military?"
uh, PLENTY, moron
ever hear of a gang?
do you live on this planet?
if you are just trolling me, i have chomped hard
please tell me you don't actually believe what you say:
"No organization is ethical or moral, because these are qualities of human beings - qualities that more frequently get subverted by government than they are by "petty vandalism" or "self-indulgence". "
it is malformed individuals who most frequently subvert moral and ethical behavior, not governmental organizations. really, fruitcake, that's the truth
in fact, within the context of a human organization, there is the further observation that any subversive activity is not actually being done in the name of that organization. on other wordsa, individual within that organization are just gaming the system for selfish goals, not working in the name of the system
such that criminal governmental workers aren't really acting in the name of the government, they are acting in the name of themselves, and can be expelled and punished and the governmental organization can continue with its stated mission
unfortunately, deluded fools such as yourself will then believe these criminal, expelled governmental representatives are the actual real face of the organization. when obviously they are not
in other words, you can hold a governmental entity accountable to clean up its mistakes. such that even though any human organization falls short of perfect performance, a human organizaiton that TRIES to be ethical, and is ethical most of the time, is far better than convincing yourself (falsely) that there are no ethics or morality at work in any governmental organization
this is just wrong of you. not theoretically wrong, but just observationally wrong. you don't seem to be able to adequately perceive the obvious reality of governmental work as it actually is. you must be operating under a heavy load of fud and propaganda to believe as you do
and i'm showing how it is possible to salvage his "contribution". he did engage in smarmy vandalism of the process you know. that means he does deserve to be punished in one form of another. but not so severely of course, and not without recourse to salvage his skills for the good of society, rather than teenaged pranks
he was caught, rehabilitated, and then he earned his money honestly
yes, if he didn't pursue a life of crime, he wouldn't have a penny today. but that's only half the story
equally true: if he wasn't caught and rehabilitated, he would be living dishonestly off of his ill-gotten gains in a pension house in rio de janiero, or, more likely, be rotting in prison in france or somewhere else
http://improbable.com/