the most insidious vicious freedom destroying authoritarian government possible, would dose the populace with heroin, as the ultimate exertion of absolute control
there exists nothing that is capable of destroying free will better than hard drugs
bars in the mind, an interrupt switch in your very consciousness, is far greater control against your free will than any physical restraint possible
you want to destroy freedom? meth, heroin, coke... nothing destroys freedom better
that some cotton candy heads might actually *choose* to destroy their freedom is only a testament to ignorance, stubborn deluded cluelessness, desperate pain without proper social help, and loopy rationalizations
there is no greater fight at preserving and extending freedom than the basic maintenance effort of civilization to minimize the drug trade
drugs destroy lives and freedom at a root far deeper than any social hierarchy or political ideology: chemistry over mind
Firstly, it's not magical... Will power or not, some get addicted, most do not.
see i stopped reading there. you're right, it's not magic, it's the basic science of pharmacology
what you said is akin to saying gravity makes some people fall down, but not most. or only a few take an effective dose of potassium chloride and die, the rest live. or many can take an effective dose of lsd and feel no effects
it doesn't work that way
we're not talking about sensation, mood, feeling. we're talking about biology, chemistry, science. there is no escape or bending the power heroin has over your basic circuits of biological need. on heroin, you can forego human contact, sex... food. everything. heroin roots deeper than all of the basic biological drives. and your body, having identified something that answers it's drives far stronger than your normal drives, seeks that, turns to that, a force stronger than anything your mind can hold against it (and then your mind, capable of rationalizing anything, regurgitates crap like you just wrote)
the chemistry of opiates interferes with basic biochemical pathways in the brain far deeper and stronger than any conscious control
everyone, absolutely *everyone* gets addicted to heroin, it's just a matter of time. it's simple chemistry
you should stop talking about a subject you don't understand, or stop with your paper thin bullshit junkie rationalizations
there is no destroyer of freedom, in the history of our species, than drug addiction
the most sadistic fascist authoritarian torturer in his wildest imagination could not devise a greater freedom destroyer than putting bars in your mind. a constantinterrupt switch, where instead of thinking about art or philosophy or science... gotta get my fix... gotta get my fix... gotta get my fix. permanent degradation
nevermind the logical paradox of it all: "you can't deny me my freedom... to destroy my freedom" wha?
to PREVENT you from removing your freedom is the PRESERVATION of your freedom
it really is like the question surrounding suicide. if your mind is sound and your body is unsound, yeah, suicide is ok. but if your body is sound and your mind is unsound, suicide is a sign of sickness to be treated. and drug addiction is nothing more than slow motion suicide
you can prevent people from using highly addictive drugs and preserve their freedom. preventing drug addiction is fighting for freedom. because the drug is the greater threat to it
the idea you need a drug to be creative is a tired old chestnut that requires no refutation by anyone serious. at worst, there are talentless hacks who take drugs because they think it makes them brilliant or for the subculture mystique. but now they are just drug addicted talentless hacks
some take it to be more productive. of course, they're just borrowing time from later, when the drug fucks their lives up so much they're far less productive for a much longer time, or, far worse, dead. gee, it's great they snorted lines and were productive for an extra week. too bad they're far less productive when they crash for months, or worse, lose decades of their life. gee, what a great productivity boost. think about how much more these artists would have contributed more of had they actually fucking lived instead of killed by drugs. and if you don't believe me, ask keith richards and why he quit (below)
if you take heroin because you think it makes your art better, you're interfering with your productivity later when you're still alive, if you're still alive. you decrease your output overall. short term gain, much larger long term loss. whatever edge you think the drugs take off there are many better ways to take off the edge without destroying your fucking life. but don't take my word for it: stop lying to yourself and those of us who actually know better and know all the ins and outs of the bullshit rationalizations, and listen to the truth...
Parker died on March 12, 1955, in the suite of his friend and patron Baroness Pannonica de Koenigswarter at the Stanhope Hotel in New York City, while watching The Dorsey Brothers' Stage Show on television. The official causes of death were lobar pneumonia and a bleeding ulcer, but Parker also had an advanced case of cirrhosis and had suffered a heart attack. The coroner who performed his autopsy mistakenly estimated Parker's 34-year-old body to be between 50 and 60 years of age.[16]
Coltrane died from liver cancer at Huntington Hospital on Long Island on July 17, 1967, at the age of 40. His funeral was held four days later at St. Peter's Lutheran Church in New York City. The service was opened by the Albert Ayler Quartet and closed by the Ornette Coleman Quartet. Coltrane is buried at Pinelawn Cemetery in Farmingdale, New York. The biographer Lewis Porter has suggested that the cause of Coltrane's illness was hepatitis, although he also attributed the disease to Coltrane's heroin use.[21]
During the last years of Miles Davis's life, there were rumors that he had AIDS, something that he and his manager Peter Shukat vehemently denied.[5][61] According to Quincy Troupe by that time Davis was taking azidothymidine (AZT), a type of antiretroviral drug used for the treatment of HIV/AIDS.[21][62]
In Richards’s new memoir, Life, one of the most interesting revelations about recovery involves the role of music, his work and passion, in the rocker’s decision to give up heroin and cocaine. For a time, drugs helped fuel his work — many of the Stones’ greatest songs were written during the peak of Richards’s drug use. But eventually, his heroin habit turned on him, threatening his ability to make music at all, which prompted him to quit. (More on Time.com: Addiction Files: Recovering From Drug Addiction, Without Abstinence)
Certainly, Richards had countless reasons to quit drugs — he’d suffered the death of
heroin is highly addictive. it's stronger than willpower. it takes over your life. you can't work or maintain relationships. it destroys lives
"i know a guy who uses heroin all the time and makes six figures..." yeah, and i know pink panda that eats moonrocks. basic biochemistry is not denied when you are talking about a drug like heroin. it overwhelms your brain chemistry and overpowers your willpower. you *will* become an addict and your life *will* be destroyed. heroin is stronger than you. no one, absolutely no one, is stronger than heroin
"if Philip Seymour Hoffman had access to legal heroin he would be alive today..." you build up a tolerance. you need more and more to maintain your high. eventually, your tolerance threshold, and the threshold where the dose kills you via respiratory depression, begins to overlap. so there is no way to continue your addiction without killing yourself. you must take less than your need demands, or you will die. if you choose life, you must choose a lower dose, so you will have withdrawal. heroin withdrawal is a torturous hell perhaps like no other torture mankind has devised. death might seem better
"it's my life, i can destroy it if i want to..." except you aren't an island. when you become a useless addict, the rest of society has to clothe and feed your useless ass. i'd rather prevent you from becoming useless in the first place. society is not in the business of letting people die, and never will be. the disrespect to your own life by using heroin might rule your world, but it doesn't rule society. if you can get ten pounds of pure heroin and move to the center of greenland and use until you're dead and beyond the reach of all society's help, go ahead. but if you're going to use heroin and become an addict in the civilized world, you just forced us to make your problem our problem. $$$
"addicts should get healthcare not jail..." i agree 100%. programs to get people into withdrawal and back onto a stable life without heroin is what society needs to do, not lock up nonviolent addicts. and then what? well, they can't do heroin anymore. which means *control*. which is what society already does by cracking down on drug trade. and here we are, at the beginning of this topic
i love portugal. please note: heroin is still illegal in portugal and those who *sell* heroin still go to jail. in other words, the war on drugs still continues in portugal, it's just that portugal uses better *tactics* in the war on drugs than the USA does: healthcare instead of jail for nonviolent addicts
the war on drugs always existed, and always will. ever since the tribe notice groog just wants to lay around drinking fermented fruit juice all day instead of carrying his weight foraging for mushrooms or going on the hunt, society has noticed drugs are a problem. people have problems. they need help. society should offer help. using drugs is just a symptom you need help in your life, not an actual help. drugs are used to blot out the pain of a painful life for some. the problem is, substituting the temporary pain of a failed relationship or being fired from a job, with a permanent life hobbling addiction, does not help, and never will. still, as long as people live in a society where free will is respected, some people with problems will take their free will and use it to commit slow motion suicide with drugs, making themselves society's problem
so the war on drugs (which includes the notion of helping addicts, but will never include free trade in drugs as hardcore as heroin) always existed and always will exist
we do live in a world where we are liberated and free to trade
except for items which are deemed illegal for a given reason
some of those reasons are stupid. so we change the laws. for example: marijuana is becoming legal. isn't that amazing? the population actually has a voice and can vote and change their laws. hmmm... that's not very dystopian nor kafkaesque
heroin and meth and kiddie porn and RPGs never will be legal. go ahead, put it to vote. i think marijuana should be legal. most agree with me. i don't think i want my neighbor getting grenades in the mail. most will agree with me
maybe you're a horrible repressed minority denied your god given freedom to hand grenades in the mail?
or maybe you're a hysterical drama queen who thinks all of society is hell just because you can't get hand grenades in the mail?
"think of the children" is often used as a show of how hysterical people can be panicked into giving up freedoms. well, it is equally braindead hysterical to think you're entire reality is a hellish dystopian fasicst authoritarian state of no freedoms... just because you can't get kiddie porn or meth in the mail?
i'm going to go way out on a limb here, see if you can bear with me for a moment, with a really radical mind blowing concept: we actually don't live in a fascist state. just because you can't get plutonium or bazookas in the mail, doesn't mean your country is basically the same as north korea. i know, really wacky far out concept dude. whoa
do you think society has no right to restrict material which causes harm?
it does
and it always will
forever
because some substances/ items actually cause harm and have no fucking reason to be in civil society
ever
the concept of freedom?
completely untouched by this simple truth
we, society, LIKE restrictions on, for example, kiddie porn. and we support our government, which we elect, to enforce those restrictions. and we always will. because we don't want children harmed and... most important point here... drum roll please... harming children infringes on their rights and freedoms. WHOA DUDE, FAR OUT
if some substance, like marijuana, should obviously not be restricted, because that's fucking stupid, we actually change the fucking laws. and we did. and we will on any other laws about restrictions which makes no fucking sense
this is where you get really mad at me and compare me to an authoritarian freedom crushing "statist" goon... just because i don't want people freely trading in kiddie porn or heroin. which would make you a brainless teenaged drama queen. let's hope you're not
but much like charlie hebdo or hustler, i'm glad it exists
it shows the society that tolerates it has moral superiority. i'm deadly serious
the thoughts that go on in media like this exist everywhere in the world
but by tolerating it, rather than repressing it, we show that we are confident, secure, and open minded
elsewhere in the world, where people often talk a lot about their "morality" in comparison to the "decadent" west, they have no problem using violence to repress simple human nonsense that is without real consequence. violence? in response to stupid immature shit? that's not morality at all. that's insecurity, weakness, lack of faith
4chan/b/ is a pile of useless crap. there is no reason to ever visit it unless you are an immature douchebag
but if any of it actually makes you feel insecure, or makes you angry, you have a problem. you are the immoral weak person with immoral thoughts. if it drives you to violence, YOU are what is wrong with the world
human nature has many good and bad aspects. the point is rise above your baser instincts. not go to war with them. like any troll, to fight filth simply feeds it, and announce to the world that it is your equal or it is your master
of course, if it bothers you so much you have to take it offline, with harassing calls, doxing, swatting, etc.: yeah, you should probably be in jail
if you can't tell the difference between shit talking on the internet and real life stalking and harassment, you have a serious defect in your social development
correlation is the first step in establishing causation
there has never been a single scientific discovery ever that didn't start with a "hey, that's interesting" correlation
so i don't understand how "correlation does not equal causation," a useful phrase meant to remind us to keep an open mind, has evolved into a kneejerk reinforcement to close your mind, "whoa, whoa, i'm not changing my preconceived notions bub when prevented with new evidence"
that's what the phrase has become: a way to wave away data that people aren't comfortable with
"correlation does not equal causation," "correlation does not equal causation," "correlation does not equal causation..." you see it parroted under any article that might challenges someone's ideology or beliefs, all the time
the phrase has become toxic and worse than useless
do you honestly believe that if government wasn't there the big guys would fade away? with weak government, the power vacuum is filled even more by plutocrats. they *want* a weak government. without government you think monopolies don't or won't exist? less government means less *regulation*, they gobble up more, you get less choice buddy. and you get less legal recourse from being shafted
what you want, if you follow through on the coherent thought, is less corruption, not a weaker government that is even yet more beholden to money. not possible? study the laws on corruption in the nordic countries, you know, those evil socialist horrors that are actually richer, happier, and more upwardly mobile meritocracies than the usa pretends it is, but is rapidly losing with a shrinking middle class and corrupt congresswhores beholden to the financial powers that less government unleashes even more
the fact that someone uneducated will think uneducated things based on noting a compound's everyday use simply means that uneducated people need to educate themselves
in fact, even if we censored such notable common uses as you ask us to, uneducated people will still think stupid, dangerous, and fearful things. so what you ask us to do doesn't even provide the protection you think it does
2. government can also overstep and involve itself in areas where it is actually detrimental
the simple point is, like most issues, the *balanced* middle position is the correct one, the extremes are loud and dumb
but for calling you out on your stupidity, i am of course now a "statist" in your eyes
you now identify me as your polar opposite, a lover of government (whom i hold in equal contempt as you), because you're so fucking dumb you can't even understand the nuanced middle position even exists. or that it would oppose your propagandized simpleton's extreme. you don't understand nuance in ideology. you don't even fucking understand nuance
subtlety, complexity. nope: it's all hamfisted propaganda slogans and low wattage regurgitation of dimwitted black and white talking points
except complexity, nuance, subtlety, are the only way ideology is of any use to us. simpleminded low iq binary extremes are actually the *problem* on topics like this. a large, loud contingent of pathetic socially retarded "minds" like yours squat on the topic and vomit their shrill stupid nonsense and ruin any actual intelligent discussion
of course, none of this will shut you up. you think it's just baseless insults i'm throwing at you. when of course what i am saying here is about as objective a description of garden variety morons like yourself as you will ever encounter. again, calling you a moron is not a baseless insult. it is an objective description. you are, factually, as derived from a straightforward interpretation of what you have written, the archetypal image of a fucking moron
the loudest voices always haul the largest quantity of stupid shit. you're propelled forward by your own lack of wit, you're immune to actual logic and reason, because you don't even have the mental capacity to grasp the basics of the subject matter you inject your empty skull into
you're agitated to speak up and speak out because it all makes sense to *you*. when it only makes sense to you because you've constructed a duplo block representation of the topic in your head, the only quantity of thought your dim bulb can contain, when actual understanding on the topic requires architectural schematics
the shrill useless noise of fucktard low iq extremists. tragedy of the commons
1. shut the fuck up 2. educate yourself 3. then develop an actual opinion
in truth, i doubt you have the ability to do any of this. you're a socially autistic loser. my response to you will probably propel you forward to speak out more, asocial isolated douchebags like yourself feed off negativity
post scandalous images of the prophet on their forums
anyways, internet technology is a product of the secular institutions of the west. i'm not sure why or how they reconcile the use of modern technology with their medieval abusive "beliefs." of course, they don't, they're violent morons incapable of critical thought
Slashdot Mirror
the most insidious vicious freedom destroying authoritarian government possible, would dose the populace with heroin, as the ultimate exertion of absolute control
there exists nothing that is capable of destroying free will better than hard drugs
bars in the mind, an interrupt switch in your very consciousness, is far greater control against your free will than any physical restraint possible
and look:
authoritarian control via hard drug:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
the fascist origins:
http://www.tofugu.com/2012/04/...
war and imperialism achieved through hard drug:
http://www.victorianweb.org/hi...
you want to destroy freedom? meth, heroin, coke... nothing destroys freedom better
that some cotton candy heads might actually *choose* to destroy their freedom is only a testament to ignorance, stubborn deluded cluelessness, desperate pain without proper social help, and loopy rationalizations
there is no greater fight at preserving and extending freedom than the basic maintenance effort of civilization to minimize the drug trade
drugs destroy lives and freedom at a root far deeper than any social hierarchy or political ideology: chemistry over mind
see i stopped reading there. you're right, it's not magic, it's the basic science of pharmacology
what you said is akin to saying gravity makes some people fall down, but not most. or only a few take an effective dose of potassium chloride and die, the rest live. or many can take an effective dose of lsd and feel no effects
it doesn't work that way
we're not talking about sensation, mood, feeling. we're talking about biology, chemistry, science. there is no escape or bending the power heroin has over your basic circuits of biological need. on heroin, you can forego human contact, sex... food. everything. heroin roots deeper than all of the basic biological drives. and your body, having identified something that answers it's drives far stronger than your normal drives, seeks that, turns to that, a force stronger than anything your mind can hold against it (and then your mind, capable of rationalizing anything, regurgitates crap like you just wrote)
the chemistry of opiates interferes with basic biochemical pathways in the brain far deeper and stronger than any conscious control
everyone, absolutely *everyone* gets addicted to heroin, it's just a matter of time. it's simple chemistry
you should stop talking about a subject you don't understand, or stop with your paper thin bullshit junkie rationalizations
there is no destroyer of freedom, in the history of our species, than drug addiction
the most sadistic fascist authoritarian torturer in his wildest imagination could not devise a greater freedom destroyer than putting bars in your mind. a constantinterrupt switch, where instead of thinking about art or philosophy or science... gotta get my fix... gotta get my fix... gotta get my fix. permanent degradation
nevermind the logical paradox of it all: "you can't deny me my freedom... to destroy my freedom" wha?
to PREVENT you from removing your freedom is the PRESERVATION of your freedom
it really is like the question surrounding suicide. if your mind is sound and your body is unsound, yeah, suicide is ok. but if your body is sound and your mind is unsound, suicide is a sign of sickness to be treated. and drug addiction is nothing more than slow motion suicide
you can prevent people from using highly addictive drugs and preserve their freedom. preventing drug addiction is fighting for freedom. because the drug is the greater threat to it
the idea you need a drug to be creative is a tired old chestnut that requires no refutation by anyone serious. at worst, there are talentless hacks who take drugs because they think it makes them brilliant or for the subculture mystique. but now they are just drug addicted talentless hacks
some take it to be more productive. of course, they're just borrowing time from later, when the drug fucks their lives up so much they're far less productive for a much longer time, or, far worse, dead. gee, it's great they snorted lines and were productive for an extra week. too bad they're far less productive when they crash for months, or worse, lose decades of their life. gee, what a great productivity boost. think about how much more these artists would have contributed more of had they actually fucking lived instead of killed by drugs. and if you don't believe me, ask keith richards and why he quit (below)
if you take heroin because you think it makes your art better, you're interfering with your productivity later when you're still alive, if you're still alive. you decrease your output overall. short term gain, much larger long term loss. whatever edge you think the drugs take off there are many better ways to take off the edge without destroying your fucking life. but don't take my word for it: stop lying to yourself and those of us who actually know better and know all the ins and outs of the bullshit rationalizations, and listen to the truth...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
http://healthland.time.com/201...
heroin is highly addictive. it's stronger than willpower. it takes over your life. you can't work or maintain relationships. it destroys lives
"i know a guy who uses heroin all the time and makes six figures..." yeah, and i know pink panda that eats moonrocks. basic biochemistry is not denied when you are talking about a drug like heroin. it overwhelms your brain chemistry and overpowers your willpower. you *will* become an addict and your life *will* be destroyed. heroin is stronger than you. no one, absolutely no one, is stronger than heroin
"if Philip Seymour Hoffman had access to legal heroin he would be alive today..." you build up a tolerance. you need more and more to maintain your high. eventually, your tolerance threshold, and the threshold where the dose kills you via respiratory depression, begins to overlap. so there is no way to continue your addiction without killing yourself. you must take less than your need demands, or you will die. if you choose life, you must choose a lower dose, so you will have withdrawal. heroin withdrawal is a torturous hell perhaps like no other torture mankind has devised. death might seem better
"it's my life, i can destroy it if i want to..." except you aren't an island. when you become a useless addict, the rest of society has to clothe and feed your useless ass. i'd rather prevent you from becoming useless in the first place. society is not in the business of letting people die, and never will be. the disrespect to your own life by using heroin might rule your world, but it doesn't rule society. if you can get ten pounds of pure heroin and move to the center of greenland and use until you're dead and beyond the reach of all society's help, go ahead. but if you're going to use heroin and become an addict in the civilized world, you just forced us to make your problem our problem. $$$
"addicts should get healthcare not jail..." i agree 100%. programs to get people into withdrawal and back onto a stable life without heroin is what society needs to do, not lock up nonviolent addicts. and then what? well, they can't do heroin anymore. which means *control*. which is what society already does by cracking down on drug trade. and here we are, at the beginning of this topic
i love portugal. please note: heroin is still illegal in portugal and those who *sell* heroin still go to jail. in other words, the war on drugs still continues in portugal, it's just that portugal uses better *tactics* in the war on drugs than the USA does: healthcare instead of jail for nonviolent addicts
the war on drugs always existed, and always will. ever since the tribe notice groog just wants to lay around drinking fermented fruit juice all day instead of carrying his weight foraging for mushrooms or going on the hunt, society has noticed drugs are a problem. people have problems. they need help. society should offer help. using drugs is just a symptom you need help in your life, not an actual help. drugs are used to blot out the pain of a painful life for some. the problem is, substituting the temporary pain of a failed relationship or being fired from a job, with a permanent life hobbling addiction, does not help, and never will. still, as long as people live in a society where free will is respected, some people with problems will take their free will and use it to commit slow motion suicide with drugs, making themselves society's problem
so the war on drugs (which includes the notion of helping addicts, but will never include free trade in drugs as hardcore as heroin) always existed and always will exist
it's just a maintenance function of civilization
any law about anything is exactly the same as soul crushing slavery!
don't tread on muh freedumbs!
we do live in a world where we are liberated and free to trade
except for items which are deemed illegal for a given reason
some of those reasons are stupid. so we change the laws. for example: marijuana is becoming legal. isn't that amazing? the population actually has a voice and can vote and change their laws. hmmm... that's not very dystopian nor kafkaesque
heroin and meth and kiddie porn and RPGs never will be legal. go ahead, put it to vote. i think marijuana should be legal. most agree with me. i don't think i want my neighbor getting grenades in the mail. most will agree with me
maybe you're a horrible repressed minority denied your god given freedom to hand grenades in the mail?
or maybe you're a hysterical drama queen who thinks all of society is hell just because you can't get hand grenades in the mail?
"think of the children" is often used as a show of how hysterical people can be panicked into giving up freedoms. well, it is equally braindead hysterical to think you're entire reality is a hellish dystopian fasicst authoritarian state of no freedoms... just because you can't get kiddie porn or meth in the mail?
i'm going to go way out on a limb here, see if you can bear with me for a moment, with a really radical mind blowing concept: we actually don't live in a fascist state. just because you can't get plutonium or bazookas in the mail, doesn't mean your country is basically the same as north korea. i know, really wacky far out concept dude. whoa
do you think society has no right to restrict material which causes harm?
it does
and it always will
forever
because some substances/ items actually cause harm and have no fucking reason to be in civil society
ever
the concept of freedom?
completely untouched by this simple truth
we, society, LIKE restrictions on, for example, kiddie porn. and we support our government, which we elect, to enforce those restrictions. and we always will. because we don't want children harmed and... most important point here... drum roll please... harming children infringes on their rights and freedoms. WHOA DUDE, FAR OUT
if some substance, like marijuana, should obviously not be restricted, because that's fucking stupid, we actually change the fucking laws. and we did. and we will on any other laws about restrictions which makes no fucking sense
this is where you get really mad at me and compare me to an authoritarian freedom crushing "statist" goon... just because i don't want people freely trading in kiddie porn or heroin. which would make you a brainless teenaged drama queen. let's hope you're not
4chan is a cesspool of filth
but much like charlie hebdo or hustler, i'm glad it exists
it shows the society that tolerates it has moral superiority. i'm deadly serious
the thoughts that go on in media like this exist everywhere in the world
but by tolerating it, rather than repressing it, we show that we are confident, secure, and open minded
elsewhere in the world, where people often talk a lot about their "morality" in comparison to the "decadent" west, they have no problem using violence to repress simple human nonsense that is without real consequence. violence? in response to stupid immature shit? that's not morality at all. that's insecurity, weakness, lack of faith
4chan /b/ is a pile of useless crap. there is no reason to ever visit it unless you are an immature douchebag
but if any of it actually makes you feel insecure, or makes you angry, you have a problem. you are the immoral weak person with immoral thoughts. if it drives you to violence, YOU are what is wrong with the world
human nature has many good and bad aspects. the point is rise above your baser instincts. not go to war with them. like any troll, to fight filth simply feeds it, and announce to the world that it is your equal or it is your master
don't give a fuck
useless heat on the internet is just that
of course, if it bothers you so much you have to take it offline, with harassing calls, doxing, swatting, etc.: yeah, you should probably be in jail
if you can't tell the difference between shit talking on the internet and real life stalking and harassment, you have a serious defect in your social development
or, or... does correlation only correlate with causation? /s
correlation is the first step in establishing causation
there has never been a single scientific discovery ever that didn't start with a "hey, that's interesting" correlation
so i don't understand how "correlation does not equal causation," a useful phrase meant to remind us to keep an open mind, has evolved into a kneejerk reinforcement to close your mind, "whoa, whoa, i'm not changing my preconceived notions bub when prevented with new evidence"
that's what the phrase has become: a way to wave away data that people aren't comfortable with
"correlation does not equal causation," "correlation does not equal causation," "correlation does not equal causation..." you see it parroted under any article that might challenges someone's ideology or beliefs, all the time
the phrase has become toxic and worse than useless
http://www.verisi.com/resource...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ch...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04...
educate yourself
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
then form an opinion
do you honestly believe that if government wasn't there the big guys would fade away? with weak government, the power vacuum is filled even more by plutocrats. they *want* a weak government. without government you think monopolies don't or won't exist? less government means less *regulation*, they gobble up more, you get less choice buddy. and you get less legal recourse from being shafted
what you want, if you follow through on the coherent thought, is less corruption, not a weaker government that is even yet more beholden to money. not possible? study the laws on corruption in the nordic countries, you know, those evil socialist horrors that are actually richer, happier, and more upwardly mobile meritocracies than the usa pretends it is, but is rapidly losing with a shrinking middle class and corrupt congresswhores beholden to the financial powers that less government unleashes even more
good luck kid escaping the bullshit mythology
"gubmint bad! monopoly i mean capitalism good!"
*drool* snort
the fact that someone uneducated will think uneducated things based on noting a compound's everyday use simply means that uneducated people need to educate themselves
in fact, even if we censored such notable common uses as you ask us to, uneducated people will still think stupid, dangerous, and fearful things. so what you ask us to do doesn't even provide the protection you think it does
and how will that standard be published and disseminated?
2D printers sigh with relief, they are still relevant
well you can stand on the roof
i used to do that
i discovered chrome has a "bookmark all tabs..." option if you right click on any open tab
pick a location for the folder (i have a top level folder full of 9 numbered folders, so it's chronological)
done
so after 20-30 open tabs, i bookmark all, flush all open tabs, and move on with a much saner life
you should as well
1. government has a value and its place
2. government can also overstep and involve itself in areas where it is actually detrimental
the simple point is, like most issues, the *balanced* middle position is the correct one, the extremes are loud and dumb
but for calling you out on your stupidity, i am of course now a "statist" in your eyes
you now identify me as your polar opposite, a lover of government (whom i hold in equal contempt as you), because you're so fucking dumb you can't even understand the nuanced middle position even exists. or that it would oppose your propagandized simpleton's extreme. you don't understand nuance in ideology. you don't even fucking understand nuance
subtlety, complexity. nope: it's all hamfisted propaganda slogans and low wattage regurgitation of dimwitted black and white talking points
except complexity, nuance, subtlety, are the only way ideology is of any use to us. simpleminded low iq binary extremes are actually the *problem* on topics like this. a large, loud contingent of pathetic socially retarded "minds" like yours squat on the topic and vomit their shrill stupid nonsense and ruin any actual intelligent discussion
of course, none of this will shut you up. you think it's just baseless insults i'm throwing at you. when of course what i am saying here is about as objective a description of garden variety morons like yourself as you will ever encounter. again, calling you a moron is not a baseless insult. it is an objective description. you are, factually, as derived from a straightforward interpretation of what you have written, the archetypal image of a fucking moron
the loudest voices always haul the largest quantity of stupid shit. you're propelled forward by your own lack of wit, you're immune to actual logic and reason, because you don't even have the mental capacity to grasp the basics of the subject matter you inject your empty skull into
you're agitated to speak up and speak out because it all makes sense to *you*. when it only makes sense to you because you've constructed a duplo block representation of the topic in your head, the only quantity of thought your dim bulb can contain, when actual understanding on the topic requires architectural schematics
the shrill useless noise of fucktard low iq extremists. tragedy of the commons
1. shut the fuck up
2. educate yourself
3. then develop an actual opinion
in truth, i doubt you have the ability to do any of this. you're a socially autistic loser. my response to you will probably propel you forward to speak out more, asocial isolated douchebags like yourself feed off negativity
good luck, twatstain, you'll need it in life
i'm sorry for not showing the respect due to murderous religious extremists
post scandalous images of the prophet on their forums
anyways, internet technology is a product of the secular institutions of the west. i'm not sure why or how they reconcile the use of modern technology with their medieval abusive "beliefs." of course, they don't, they're violent morons incapable of critical thought
if someone proves that with their freedoms they abuse others, they have forfeited their right to freedom
if someone robs people, you lock them up, no one is robbed by that person anymore
if someone rapes people, you lock them up, no is raped by that person anymore
if someone DDoSes services, SWATs people, and threatens to kill, you lock them up, that person isn't doing that anymore
it would be nice to help these people, but it's more important to help the rest of us live our lives
unbothered by shitbags with serious transgressive amoral problems
*sadistic* assholes hellbent on deranged ideas of *retribution* have proven to society they do not deserve freedoms
society doesn't have infinite resources
priority job number one: keep asocial douchebags away from abusing society
distant job number two: help them with what limited resources we have, if we even can help them
likewise
http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
so tell us, what is the appropriate punishment, in your mind
then add in the death threats and SWATting
and then tell us again what exactly you are fucking complaining about
ignoring the death threats and fake SWAT calls... what gives the douchebag the right to deny a little holiday joy to thousands of kids?
why do you think that's no big deal?
you honestly believe lulz by a handful of asocial shitbags is somehow equivalent to thousands of kids enjoying their presents?