"i distrust government, but i wholeheartedly trust multinational corporations, even one who traffics in information, specifically my personal information, and has publicly stated it wants to track people's every query"
you'll excuse me, but your distrust of government and trust of google is fucking hypocritical and stupid
but i expect them to be logically consistent and coherent
yu can't spout one opinion one monet, and then the opposite opinion the next, and not expect to be called out for it
that's what is happening with the government photographing you, or google. why is one mistrusted? why is the other trusted so much? makes no friggin sense
i agree with you, that the fbi or google is ok to take pictures on a street corner
but the usual slashbot would cry high holy terror if the fbi were doing it, and swoon if google would do it
i don't care if google or the fbi take your pictures on a streetcorner. i care that the difference in reactions on slashdot is so retarded. so little trust here, so much trust there
were sitting on a streetcorner, photographing everyone walking by, the outcry here on slashdot would be huge
i don't really care if you think the fbi would be right doing that, i don't really care if you think the fbi would be wrong doing that
what i care about is thinking the fbi is right/ wrong to do that, and thinking elsewise of google
a massive company like that? who knows practically what everyone in the country is searching for?
i'm not being paranoid, i'm illustrating the kind of distrust that flows to the government, and the massive amount of trust that goes to google. why? i'm asking for uniformity of logic and reason on the issue. what i care about is why the fuck does slashdot go ballistic when the government does something that invades your privacy, but fawns over google when they do the SAME THING
it's cliquishness: google is our darling company. no, slashdot, google was a darling upstart search engine in 2002
it's 2007. "do no evil" is a load of crock, as google's activities in china illustrate
i just can't understand why people trust and love google so much. it's out of place
where sandwiched in between kneejerk, paranoid ranting articles about encroaching invasions on your privacy, are fawning articles about google doing the SAME DAMN THING
4chan was based on 2chan code, and has most of it's conventions (saging, etc.). as massive and wacky as 4chan is, it is but a weak impression of the size and cultural awareness and wackiness 2chan is in japan
a number of asocial events: suicides, plots to attack the public, and the ubiquitous hate speech against other races/ nationalities/ religions is exactly what i am talking about in terms of catharsis online that would otherwise be expressed in real life in my granddad post
4chan has nothing on 2chan, but, if the japanese are in fact ahead of us in this phenomenon, then 4chan is going to grow and grow and become a bigger part of the american conscience. the ultimate trashcan dungheap of our asocial selves
strangely enough, 2chan was started in arkansas
anyways, it was some asshole announcing his intent to murder someone on 2chan, and then actually doing it, that first luanched 2chan into national provenance in japan. likewise, 4chan got some press after some asshole there annnouced he was going to bomb the superbowl, about a year ago i think
however, japan is a far more polite culture than the usa, and since we all share the same basic human psychobiology, i would be cetain that an anonymous board in which to vent stupidly our asocial selves would be more appealing in japan than in the usa. because in the usa we're more likely to call an asshole an asshole to someone's face rather than politiely keeping it to oneself. so maybe 2chan will be permanently larger than 4chan in terms of national cultural awareness, simply because american culture allows for more outlets for asocial expression than japanese culture
the typical debate about pornography or violent videogames is: do they promote rape/ real-life violence? or lessen it? i am solidly in the camp that over-the-top media lessens real-world violence
we are not born vessels of purity that are corrupted by society. go hang around any group of 3 year olds for 5 minutes. we are born feces slinging temper tantrums that are tamed by society. you cannot "catch" violent or asocial behavior, it is in all of us, innately, and we are socialized to express our negative selves in acceptable ways by society. trolling/flaming is merely another acceptable harmless way to provide catharsis we all need, a harmless release of negative asocial behavior on computer screens rather than on real people on real life
likewise, i believe trolling/flaming serves a similar taking out of the mental trash type function. that rude asocial and negative behavior will lessen in real life as people are allowed to go home, login, scream at some random anonymous people online, then go out, and be quite pleasant, rather the next road rage perpetrator
i'm totally serious. the utopianists imagined newsgroups and message boards as some idealistic philosopher's lounge where great minds would come to great thoughts and collaboration. of course, it is the exact opposite. and yet it is more useful to society for being that. just because the internet is not the grand social function the utopianists imagined it to be, doesn't mean it hasn't taken on a grand social function nonetheless
a bunch of wankers patting each other on the back about how smart they are is a lot less important a social function than some form of catharthis for society for the most unstable and hotheaded amongst us, so they don't express themselves negatively in public, where it really matters. asocial activity just doesn't matter on the web
of course, there are instances where online negativity flares up into real world violence, such as the recent suicide of the girl who was bullied by a neighbor on myspace posing as a teenage boyfriend. but using this as an argument against the positive real-life social value of trolling/ flaming is falling into the same erroneous way of thinking that says the videogame doom created dylan klebold and columbine
no. the truth is, dylan klebold was a psycho waiting to be set off. even if doom somehow was involved in his intents, they weren't formatively involved in what he did. if videogames never existed, something else would have set him off. same with the online bullying that pushed the girl over the edge into suicide. same with some guy who used porn, and then raped a woman
i mean it's not like violent behavior is something new to our world. in fact, in societies that are tolerant of pornography, and have high penetration rates of computer media (videogames, discussion boards) violent and asocial crime is on the decline
so the next time you see a troll or a flame, smile. that's one less road rage or harassment incident you have to hear about in real life
i firmly believe this, and that online trolling and flaming is VALUABLE and important and should be appreciated for the social service it provides
#1: thank you author, for providing a public service by going after these lowlifes
#2: somebody get Judge Judith Eiler's email address. make sure she's on lots of "personal e-mail" lists. if these seems unfair to the judge, hey, she's the one who ruled this crap isn't spam, it's personal
and come to think of it, she's right, it is personal. i take it personally the moron doesn't know obvious spam when it's in front of her face in a court of law. thereby emboldening the assholes who fill our inboxes with this crap every day, every minute, every hour, every second. the only cure is to give her an education in what she is woefully ignorant of. open the firehoses, fill her inbox with "personal e-mails"
the family of the teenager that killed herself kept it quiet for a long time, and, against the advice of their lawyer, decided to go public with it. and they went public with it only when the local decided not to press charges
the press and the blogs went apeshit. and rightfully so: this vile perp was not going to be charged with anything
now, because of all of this heat, the da is reviewing their decision not to press charges
so if people don't want street justice, mob justice, and all of this extrajudicial outrage, then courts of law must register justice
the error was not pressing charges on the woman who perpetrated this vile crime. if charges were pressed against her, none of this online hoopla would have ever happened
with all the heat, they say now they are going to review the case
and there is no fuzziness about guilt here, the perpetrator is known and fixed
given that, the victim's parents decided to go public, against the advice of their lawyers, for exactly this effect: wide public knowledge and shaming of the perpetrator, and to warn people about what kind of mainpulations can go on
what's cringewothy about any of that? you talk about ethics and morals, when what was ethically and morally wrong was the perp getting away with this heinous crime, and no punishment in sight... until the blogosphere went nuts. so it was a good thing that the internet went nuts over the story, not cringeworthy
and there is fuzziness about guilt here, the perpetrator is known and fixed
the local da was not going to press charges
with all the heat, they say now they are going to review the case
given that, the victim's parents decided to go public, against the advice of their lawyers, for exactly this effect: wide public knowledge and shaming of the perpetrator, and to warn people about what kind of mainpulations can go on
capitalism should be tweaked with some socialism: universal healthcare, for instance
and democracy should have some checks and balances on unfettered popular rule too: a republic, as you insist, or otherwise, in a pure democracy, the rights of racial or religious minorities can be trampled on, or, perhaps, the democracy can vote itself out of existence (voting a very popular leader to be dictator for life, for example). such pure unbridled democracy is not possible in a republic, and that's a good thing
a populace decided to vote to ban all religious minorities
oe how about a populace that votes a very popular ruler in as dictator for life
both are extremely bad, and both could happen from pure democracy
no, democracy, like capitalism, must be tweaked to fit into the real world
a republic, for example, has checks and balances so that the a popular leader cnanot become a dictator or fundamental rights are not restricted, due to popular fickle whims
all you did is enunciate standard real world checks and balances on the ideas
no one expects pure capitalism or pure democracy to ever be able to exist
i'm taking umbrage with radical fundamental departures from the core concepts: communism instead of capitalism, for example, or theocracy versus democracy
not capitalism, tweaked, or democracy, tweaked
the core ideas are always tweaked in one way or another to fit in the real world
do you have a superior system than capitalism in mind?
people are fond of pointing out democracy's many failures too
but the real overriding realization with democracy and capitalism is that however much you think they suck, and they do suck in many ways, they are still better than any other system we can think of and have tried
so please, criticize capitalism. but unless you can enunciate a superior alternative, your criticism means absolutely nothing
The inventor Nikola Tesla spent the last ten years of his life in near-seclusion in Suite 3327 (where he also died), largely devoting his time to feeding pigeons while occasionally meeting dignitaries.
iTunes is just a stopgap measure between the old world and the new
in the new world, all music content will be free. artists will support themselves with tip jars and advertisements and touring. and THERE WILL BE NO MIDDLE MAN. because the internet has simply replaced them
iTunes, bertelsman, polygram: dust in the wind. the dutch east india company. extinct. defunct, irrelevant and unnecessary
and these developments have nothing at all to do with all the tired old legal arguments. it will just happen, because it's simple economic forces at work
the final implications of the new technology called the internet is the extinction of all music publishers
Slashdot Mirror
"i distrust government, but i wholeheartedly trust multinational corporations, even one who traffics in information, specifically my personal information, and has publicly stated it wants to track people's every query"
you'll excuse me, but your distrust of government and trust of google is fucking hypocritical and stupid
but i expect them to be logically consistent and coherent
yu can't spout one opinion one monet, and then the opposite opinion the next, and not expect to be called out for it
that's what is happening with the government photographing you, or google. why is one mistrusted? why is the other trusted so much? makes no friggin sense
and i don't have a problem with google doing it either
i have a problem with the usual slashbot who would cry high holy terror if the fbi did it, and swoon if google did it
i agree with you, that the fbi or google is ok to take pictures on a street corner
but the usual slashbot would cry high holy terror if the fbi were doing it, and swoon if google would do it
i don't care if google or the fbi take your pictures on a streetcorner. i care that the difference in reactions on slashdot is so retarded. so little trust here, so much trust there
where's the wankers who cry corporatocracy, that the government is owned completely by corporations not citizens, when i need them
were sitting on a streetcorner, photographing everyone walking by, the outcry here on slashdot would be huge
i don't really care if you think the fbi would be right doing that, i don't really care if you think the fbi would be wrong doing that
what i care about is thinking the fbi is right/ wrong to do that, and thinking elsewise of google
a massive company like that? who knows practically what everyone in the country is searching for?
i'm not being paranoid, i'm illustrating the kind of distrust that flows to the government, and the massive amount of trust that goes to google. why? i'm asking for uniformity of logic and reason on the issue. what i care about is why the fuck does slashdot go ballistic when the government does something that invades your privacy, but fawns over google when they do the SAME THING
it's cliquishness: google is our darling company. no, slashdot, google was a darling upstart search engine in 2002
it's 2007. "do no evil" is a load of crock, as google's activities in china illustrate
i just can't understand why people trust and love google so much. it's out of place
where sandwiched in between kneejerk, paranoid ranting articles about encroaching invasions on your privacy, are fawning articles about google doing the SAME DAMN THING
pure blindness and hypocrisy at work on slashdot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2channel
4chan was based on 2chan code, and has most of it's conventions (saging, etc.). as massive and wacky as 4chan is, it is but a weak impression of the size and cultural awareness and wackiness 2chan is in japan
a number of asocial events: suicides, plots to attack the public, and the ubiquitous hate speech against other races/ nationalities/ religions is exactly what i am talking about in terms of catharsis online that would otherwise be expressed in real life in my granddad post
4chan has nothing on 2chan, but, if the japanese are in fact ahead of us in this phenomenon, then 4chan is going to grow and grow and become a bigger part of the american conscience. the ultimate trashcan dungheap of our asocial selves
strangely enough, 2chan was started in arkansas
anyways, it was some asshole announcing his intent to murder someone on 2chan, and then actually doing it, that first luanched 2chan into national provenance in japan. likewise, 4chan got some press after some asshole there annnouced he was going to bomb the superbowl, about a year ago i think
however, japan is a far more polite culture than the usa, and since we all share the same basic human psychobiology, i would be cetain that an anonymous board in which to vent stupidly our asocial selves would be more appealing in japan than in the usa. because in the usa we're more likely to call an asshole an asshole to someone's face rather than politiely keeping it to oneself. so maybe 2chan will be permanently larger than 4chan in terms of national cultural awareness, simply because american culture allows for more outlets for asocial expression than japanese culture
the typical debate about pornography or violent videogames is: do they promote rape/ real-life violence? or lessen it? i am solidly in the camp that over-the-top media lessens real-world violence
we are not born vessels of purity that are corrupted by society. go hang around any group of 3 year olds for 5 minutes. we are born feces slinging temper tantrums that are tamed by society. you cannot "catch" violent or asocial behavior, it is in all of us, innately, and we are socialized to express our negative selves in acceptable ways by society. trolling/flaming is merely another acceptable harmless way to provide catharsis we all need, a harmless release of negative asocial behavior on computer screens rather than on real people on real life
likewise, i believe trolling/flaming serves a similar taking out of the mental trash type function. that rude asocial and negative behavior will lessen in real life as people are allowed to go home, login, scream at some random anonymous people online, then go out, and be quite pleasant, rather the next road rage perpetrator
i'm totally serious. the utopianists imagined newsgroups and message boards as some idealistic philosopher's lounge where great minds would come to great thoughts and collaboration. of course, it is the exact opposite. and yet it is more useful to society for being that. just because the internet is not the grand social function the utopianists imagined it to be, doesn't mean it hasn't taken on a grand social function nonetheless
a bunch of wankers patting each other on the back about how smart they are is a lot less important a social function than some form of catharthis for society for the most unstable and hotheaded amongst us, so they don't express themselves negatively in public, where it really matters. asocial activity just doesn't matter on the web
of course, there are instances where online negativity flares up into real world violence, such as the recent suicide of the girl who was bullied by a neighbor on myspace posing as a teenage boyfriend. but using this as an argument against the positive real-life social value of trolling/ flaming is falling into the same erroneous way of thinking that says the videogame doom created dylan klebold and columbine
no. the truth is, dylan klebold was a psycho waiting to be set off. even if doom somehow was involved in his intents, they weren't formatively involved in what he did. if videogames never existed, something else would have set him off. same with the online bullying that pushed the girl over the edge into suicide. same with some guy who used porn, and then raped a woman
i mean it's not like violent behavior is something new to our world. in fact, in societies that are tolerant of pornography, and have high penetration rates of computer media (videogames, discussion boards) violent and asocial crime is on the decline
so the next time you see a troll or a flame, smile. that's one less road rage or harassment incident you have to hear about in real life
i firmly believe this, and that online trolling and flaming is VALUABLE and important and should be appreciated for the social service it provides
if they had just done a cursory literature search on the phenomenon, they would have realized that previous experiments on the phenomenon has produced disasterous results for the researchers, and jennifer aniston
#1: thank you author, for providing a public service by going after these lowlifes
#2: somebody get Judge Judith Eiler's email address. make sure she's on lots of "personal e-mail" lists. if these seems unfair to the judge, hey, she's the one who ruled this crap isn't spam, it's personal
and come to think of it, she's right, it is personal. i take it personally the moron doesn't know obvious spam when it's in front of her face in a court of law. thereby emboldening the assholes who fill our inboxes with this crap every day, every minute, every hour, every second. the only cure is to give her an education in what she is woefully ignorant of. open the firehoses, fill her inbox with "personal e-mails"
the family of the teenager that killed herself kept it quiet for a long time, and, against the advice of their lawyer, decided to go public with it. and they went public with it only when the local decided not to press charges
the press and the blogs went apeshit. and rightfully so: this vile perp was not going to be charged with anything
now, because of all of this heat, the da is reviewing their decision not to press charges
so if people don't want street justice, mob justice, and all of this extrajudicial outrage, then courts of law must register justice
the error was not pressing charges on the woman who perpetrated this vile crime. if charges were pressed against her, none of this online hoopla would have ever happened
the local da was not going to press charges
with all the heat, they say now they are going to review the case
and there is no fuzziness about guilt here, the perpetrator is known and fixed
given that, the victim's parents decided to go public, against the advice of their lawyers, for exactly this effect: wide public knowledge and shaming of the perpetrator, and to warn people about what kind of mainpulations can go on
what's cringewothy about any of that? you talk about ethics and morals, when what was ethically and morally wrong was the perp getting away with this heinous crime, and no punishment in sight... until the blogosphere went nuts. so it was a good thing that the internet went nuts over the story, not cringeworthy
and there is fuzziness about guilt here, the perpetrator is known and fixed
the local da was not going to press charges
with all the heat, they say now they are going to review the case
given that, the victim's parents decided to go public, against the advice of their lawyers, for exactly this effect: wide public knowledge and shaming of the perpetrator, and to warn people about what kind of mainpulations can go on
the notions of democracy and capitalism are more complicated and nuanced than the propagandistic ways in which you describe them
capitalism should be tweaked with some socialism: universal healthcare, for instance
and democracy should have some checks and balances on unfettered popular rule too: a republic, as you insist, or otherwise, in a pure democracy, the rights of racial or religious minorities can be trampled on, or, perhaps, the democracy can vote itself out of existence (voting a very popular leader to be dictator for life, for example). such pure unbridled democracy is not possible in a republic, and that's a good thing
a populace decided to vote to ban all religious minorities
oe how about a populace that votes a very popular ruler in as dictator for life
both are extremely bad, and both could happen from pure democracy
no, democracy, like capitalism, must be tweaked to fit into the real world
a republic, for example, has checks and balances so that the a popular leader cnanot become a dictator or fundamental rights are not restricted, due to popular fickle whims
all you did is enunciate standard real world checks and balances on the ideas
no one expects pure capitalism or pure democracy to ever be able to exist
i'm taking umbrage with radical fundamental departures from the core concepts: communism instead of capitalism, for example, or theocracy versus democracy
not capitalism, tweaked, or democracy, tweaked
the core ideas are always tweaked in one way or another to fit in the real world
enunciate a better system, or shut up
no one needs someone to tell them something sucks, that everyone knows sucks
crticism without a superior alternative is useless
no one needs anyone to tell them that shit smells like shit
do you have a superior system than capitalism in mind?
people are fond of pointing out democracy's many failures too
but the real overriding realization with democracy and capitalism is that however much you think they suck, and they do suck in many ways, they are still better than any other system we can think of and have tried
so please, criticize capitalism. but unless you can enunciate a superior alternative, your criticism means absolutely nothing
the new yorker hotel is on 34th and 8th. the final dc site near the midtown library is on 40th and 5th
unfortunately, business acumen and scientific genius do not necessarily go hand in hand
sad
iTunes is just a stopgap measure between the old world and the new
in the new world, all music content will be free. artists will support themselves with tip jars and advertisements and touring. and THERE WILL BE NO MIDDLE MAN. because the internet has simply replaced them
iTunes, bertelsman, polygram: dust in the wind. the dutch east india company. extinct. defunct, irrelevant and unnecessary
and these developments have nothing at all to do with all the tired old legal arguments. it will just happen, because it's simple economic forces at work
the final implications of the new technology called the internet is the extinction of all music publishers
what are the gas prices on mars?
which gps unit works best on mars?
how does he change the windshield fluid?
ok, i'll shut up now...
but the message was encrypted, and the key was in his head