Why do people only ever talk about the sterilization approach to eugenics? What about the "get pretty people drunk and alone in the dark" approach? That's eugenics too, but it's sexy instead of being nasty.
CNN ( a supposed respected news organization ) is reporting on how jim carrey is getting his ass chewed out because he commented on another less interesting tigre woods scandal. Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?
Gotta fill out time in-between telling you who threw the ball the most yesterday and who ran the most.
Bread and games are what mainstream news are about, unfortunately.
Twitter isn't really based on encouraging insightful.
I use it as a democratic fan club. I follow celebrities I like (mythbuster guys, trek alumni, that kind of thing), web comic artists, people who are in the biz I am or who have jobs I'm working to get, and I sometimes reply, sometimes spout off random things.
But mostly, I use it like slashdot, but I get to choose the editors and the commenters. People post links, I follow them.
It's very simple, no conspiracy required. The situation is as follows:
[...] 4. Mainstream media is largely owned by large IP holders, and will not only avoid stories about the ACTA, but will create a massive campaign to smear any protest that becomes public.
That's it. There's no conspiracy. Just self-interest all around.
# Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage # Conspiracy (crime), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement # Conspiracy (political), the overthrow of a government
conspire Look up conspire at Dictionary.com
c.1300, from O.Fr. conspirer, from L. conspirare "to agree, unite, plot," lit. "to breathe together,"
Seriously. Do you consider ear piercing to be mutilation? or is it not because, given enough time, the hole will grow together? If science invented a way to grow together larger ear holes, then would ear stretching stop being mutilation? If science invented a way to regrow or replace foreskin, would that stop being mutilation?
What about balding? If a man who is balding cuts his hair, and thus can not regrow it, is that mutilation? what about laser hair removal?
Or what about chemo treatment for cancer -- is that mutilation in cases when the hair will never grow back?
How do you feel about having a cancer removed from the body, with the specific hope that it won't grow back? what about having a mole removed, which isn't cancerous, "just in case" it might someday become cancerous? What about liposuction? What about Lazik eye surgery?
I'm not joking, and I know this is off topic, but I've never met anybody like you personally to be able to talk to in depth about this kind of issue, and I'm piqued. Don't insult me and call me names, engage me and show me where you are coming from.
Piercing, scarring, permanent inking, tiny laser versions of same, are all mutilations. I've had a few organs removed, I have scars, and I'm totally OK with medically motivated surgical interventions. I don't like plastic boobs except when used in their primary purpose: replacing what had to be removed for medical reasons. Reconstructive surgery is fine by me, but treating body-image issues through surgery is only acceptable because surgery is at least a hundred years ahead of psychology.
You can do what you want to your body, but I don't think it's ok to make that choice for someone else (as always, except for solid medical motivations).
As for what I think of your critical thinking abilities: Fingernails? Really? You might as well throw in "washing off dead skin cells" as long as you're being facetious. That kind of absurdity is not helping people to take you seriously.
Some people equate circumcision with "mutilation", which is
Factually correct.
Foot binding, neck elongation, excision, circumcision, stretching out your earlobes, those are all mutilations. And when all your peers have been mutilated in the same way, you're very happy to fit in.
I'm sure as customers we'll all benefit from this litigation. Mad props to the lawyers!
Of course! Those people who make good games need to kept in check by the people who really have our best interest at heart: The people who want to milk a franchise as fast as possible! Those are the real heroes... them, and their lawyers, obviously.
So, yes, it is possible to view child pornography and not hurt anyone. However, in aggregate, the viewing of child pornography creates a demand for new images, and the filling of this demand results in child abuse.
We should hire the MPAA to represent child molesters, that way whenever someone downloads kiddy porn it will cause the abusers to stop doing it!
Also, the child molesters will bring in a bit of class and respectability to the MPAA. It's a win-win.
In some places women even get reconstructive plastic surgery done or just bits snipped off to fit that body image.
And then they have bits snipped off their baby boys' privates, because it "looks better" too. Some people just think the best thing they can do to sex organs is to take a knife to 'em.
If it stops a 9mm shell, it'll stop the little barbed prongs that a taser shoots. But they might catch in the clothing anyway, so you might still get shocked. Unless this stuff is conductive enough to short it out, or insulating enough to protect you.
No, it doesn't work that way. A "bulletproof" vest is relatively easy to get through with a sharp blade - most bullet resistant materials will use lots of strong fibres to tangle the bullet up in on it's way through, whereas a sharp knife (or a pointed barb that's not spinning) will penetrate relatively easily.
Ok, but in the future, just say "The slow blade penetrates the shield."
I disagree. The image is computer interpreted. To imply that it's computer generated is to imply that there is no physical analog of the object the image represents.
If you look at a CG Artist's portfolio you'll see computer generated images of stuff he had on his desk (cell phones, etc). In fact, the best looking CG uses photographs of the object and it's environment for realistic textures and lighting.
Careful about "imply". "Imply" will lead you astray.
as long as we have wars, we will have senseless killing of civilians.
Which is why you should give peace a chance.
Say, someone tells you Saddam Hussein has an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction deployable in 45 minutes and capable of reaching major European cities? Give peace a chance. Maybe he just wishes he had those things.
Iranians are weaseling their way to nuclear power? Give peace a chance.
Why? Because the other choice is murders at an industrial scale.
I really feel bad for the journalists. But, you knew the risk when you started walking in a war zone with the enemy of a power. A convoy was coming through the area, the chopper's job is to remove all threats. At least one of them was armed. Sorry.
Yeah, stupid kids, thinking they can live in a country the US doesn't like. Serves 'em right, huh? That'll teach 'em that the US can kill whoever they want with impunity. Next time, get born somewhere else.
That video is disturbing. I just did not have the stomach to watch it all.
The trouble too is that we "preach" democracy but when a democratic process puts those we "hate" in power, we (read the US government), then treat the democratically elected administration as parties not to be dealt with in any way. Hamas anyone?
"Not to be dealt with"? How about "overthrown and replaced with a servile monarchy or military dictatorship"?
The 1953 Iranian coup d’état, on August 19, 1953 (and called the 28 Mordad coup d'état in Iran), was the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the United States Central Intelligence Agency; [1] The crushing of Iran's first democratic government launched 25 years of dictatorship under Mohammad-Rez Shh Pahlavi, who relied heavily on U.S. weapons to hold on to power until he was overthrown in February 1979. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat
This is the best documented event, but it's not the last. See also: All of south america. And don't think this is strictly a USA activity, Britain was heavily involved in this Iranian incident, in other instances France was involved (Argentina). It's the new world order: International despotism with a friendly democratic front.
Huge mistakes like this should be used to make sure that they don't happen again. Top brass lying and changing the story around just makes the US look dishonest and 'evil'
Things like this are routine. What's extraordinary is having proof because the cover up is also routine.
I see civilians being shot, I hear officials on comms laughing about the truck driving in there to attempt to save those shot running over a corpse and I see us being told that Iraqi insurgents were responsible. How the fuck is this open to interpretation?
Assumption: Americans are The Good Guys.
Observation: Bad Guy acts done by Americans.
Need: Rationalizations that will explain the observation while maintaining the assumption.
If someone thinks that the forces occupying Iraq are "us" (as is "we are in Iraq", including himself by association in the "who's in Iraq"), that someone doesn't want to think "we are the bad guys", he'll need a way to interpret these events so his feelings about himself stay positive.
Slashdot Mirror
Because historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well.
since you ask. kthxbye.
Why do people only ever talk about the sterilization approach to eugenics? What about the "get pretty people drunk and alone in the dark" approach? That's eugenics too, but it's sexy instead of being nasty.
Won't somebody please think of the sweaty aryans?
CNN ( a supposed respected news organization ) is reporting on how jim carrey is getting his ass chewed out because he commented on another less interesting tigre woods scandal. Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?
Gotta fill out time in-between telling you who threw the ball the most yesterday and who ran the most.
Bread and games are what mainstream news are about, unfortunately.
Twitter isn't really based on encouraging insightful.
I use it as a democratic fan club. I follow celebrities I like (mythbuster guys, trek alumni, that kind of thing), web comic artists, people who are in the biz I am or who have jobs I'm working to get, and I sometimes reply, sometimes spout off random things.
But mostly, I use it like slashdot, but I get to choose the editors and the commenters. People post links, I follow them.
Well stop shipping your cargo through the waters off the coast of Somalia!
The USA wants some language in ACTA. But they don't want to tip their hands to certain parties outside of the process
Parties like "the voting public" and "peoples of the world".
when the president breaks campaign promises, shouldn't Republican, at least a few of them, be calling him out on it publicly?
Like "where are all those death panels you promised"? Because they can only criticize the reality they believe in.
3D shutter lenses (sometimes used for modern 3D films) will cause headaches/nausia in some people because of the flickering.
I heard it was because you have to stare at Sam Worthington's face the whole time: http://saikurisuto.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-to-watch-avatar-in-3d.html
It's very simple, no conspiracy required. The situation is as follows:
[...]
4. Mainstream media is largely owned by large IP holders, and will not only avoid stories about the ACTA, but will create a massive campaign to smear any protest that becomes public.
That's it. There's no conspiracy. Just self-interest all around.
Yeah, that #4 right there? THAT IS A CONSPIRACY!
# Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage
# Conspiracy (crime), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
# Conspiracy (political), the overthrow of a government
conspire Look up conspire at Dictionary.com
c.1300, from O.Fr. conspirer, from L. conspirare "to agree, unite, plot," lit. "to breathe together,"
Seriously. Do you consider ear piercing to be mutilation? or is it not because, given enough time, the hole will grow together? If science invented a way to grow together larger ear holes, then would ear stretching stop being mutilation? If science invented a way to regrow or replace foreskin, would that stop being mutilation?
What about balding? If a man who is balding cuts his hair, and thus can not regrow it, is that mutilation? what about laser hair removal?
Or what about chemo treatment for cancer -- is that mutilation in cases when the hair will never grow back?
How do you feel about having a cancer removed from the body, with the specific hope that it won't grow back? what about having a mole removed, which isn't cancerous, "just in case" it might someday become cancerous? What about liposuction? What about Lazik eye surgery?
I'm not joking, and I know this is off topic, but I've never met anybody like you personally to be able to talk to in depth about this kind of issue, and I'm piqued. Don't insult me and call me names, engage me and show me where you are coming from.
Piercing, scarring, permanent inking, tiny laser versions of same, are all mutilations. I've had a few organs removed, I have scars, and I'm totally OK with medically motivated surgical interventions. I don't like plastic boobs except when used in their primary purpose: replacing what had to be removed for medical reasons. Reconstructive surgery is fine by me, but treating body-image issues through surgery is only acceptable because surgery is at least a hundred years ahead of psychology.
You can do what you want to your body, but I don't think it's ok to make that choice for someone else (as always, except for solid medical motivations).
As for what I think of your critical thinking abilities: Fingernails? Really? You might as well throw in "washing off dead skin cells" as long as you're being facetious. That kind of absurdity is not helping people to take you seriously.
Foot binding, neck elongation, excision, circumcision, stretching out your earlobes, those are all mutilations.
Oh, okay now I understand, you equate mutilation with any sort of bodily change. You didn't mention ear piercings
Does the bold help?
As far as toenails and hair: If it regrows, it's not mutilation, [insert insult disparaging your low intelligence].
Some people equate circumcision with "mutilation", which is
Factually correct.
Foot binding, neck elongation, excision, circumcision, stretching out your earlobes, those are all mutilations. And when all your peers have been mutilated in the same way, you're very happy to fit in.
I'm sure as customers we'll all benefit from this litigation. Mad props to the lawyers!
Of course! Those people who make good games need to kept in check by the people who really have our best interest at heart: The people who want to milk a franchise as fast as possible! Those are the real heroes... them, and their lawyers, obviously.
Only in the UK would a stick drawing of lisa simpson watching marge fuck homer land you in jail!
There was a case on slashdot of a guy in Australia who got jail for Simpsons porn. Have a look outside the UK once in a while.
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/01/28/0112246/Man-in-Court-Over-Simpsons-Porn
So, yes, it is possible to view child pornography and not hurt anyone. However, in aggregate, the viewing of child pornography creates a demand for new images, and the filling of this demand results in child abuse.
We should hire the MPAA to represent child molesters, that way whenever someone downloads kiddy porn it will cause the abusers to stop doing it!
Also, the child molesters will bring in a bit of class and respectability to the MPAA. It's a win-win.
In some places women even get reconstructive plastic surgery done or just bits snipped off to fit that body image.
And then they have bits snipped off their baby boys' privates, because it "looks better" too. Some people just think the best thing they can do to sex organs is to take a knife to 'em.
If it stops a 9mm shell, it'll stop the little barbed prongs that a taser shoots. But they might catch in the clothing anyway, so you might still get shocked. Unless this stuff is conductive enough to short it out, or insulating enough to protect you.
No, it doesn't work that way. A "bulletproof" vest is relatively easy to get through with a sharp blade - most bullet resistant materials will use lots of strong fibres to tangle the bullet up in on it's way through, whereas a sharp knife (or a pointed barb that's not spinning) will penetrate relatively easily.
Ok, but in the future, just say "The slow blade penetrates the shield."
What does that teach them?
The value of their work.
That said I know I will get flamed for saying that
Stop 'baiting.
but I think it instills an attitude of don't anything unless you get paid, loses touch with what education is
What education is? Factory-job preparedness training? Repeated lessons in submitting to authority? Day-prisons for teenagers?
I'm more worried that they'll get paid for grades and that learning things is not the best way to get good grades (obeying teacher is).
I disagree. The image is computer interpreted. To imply that it's computer generated is to imply that there is no physical analog of the object the image represents.
If you look at a CG Artist's portfolio you'll see computer generated images of stuff he had on his desk (cell phones, etc). In fact, the best looking CG uses photographs of the object and it's environment for realistic textures and lighting.
Careful about "imply". "Imply" will lead you astray.
as long as we have wars, we will have senseless killing of civilians.
Which is why you should give peace a chance.
Say, someone tells you Saddam Hussein has an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction deployable in 45 minutes and capable of reaching major European cities? Give peace a chance. Maybe he just wishes he had those things.
Iranians are weaseling their way to nuclear power? Give peace a chance.
Why? Because the other choice is murders at an industrial scale.
Also, I meant why isn't the MSM covering the leak on wikilinks, not the incident itself.
Because the MSM have been willing participants in the propaganda machine?
Paid participants: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2000/01/13/drugs/print.html
There is a group of people with weapons- not just AK47s but a guy has a full blown RPG with him. They have RPGs and
They had cameras. The weapons were imagined, these were peaceful civilians, slaughtered.
are not American forces- logic says they are the bad guys.
You're not using logic, you're relying on emotionally potent oversimplifications that were drilled into you by years of indoctrination.
I really feel bad for the journalists. But, you knew the risk when you started walking in a war zone with the enemy of a power. A convoy was coming through the area, the chopper's job is to remove all threats. At least one of them was armed. Sorry.
Yeah, stupid kids, thinking they can live in a country the US doesn't like. Serves 'em right, huh? That'll teach 'em that the US can kill whoever they want with impunity. Next time, get born somewhere else.
That video is disturbing. I just did not have the stomach to watch it all.
The trouble too is that we "preach" democracy but when a democratic process puts those we "hate" in power, we (read the US government), then treat the democratically elected administration as parties not to be dealt with in any way. Hamas anyone?
"Not to be dealt with"? How about "overthrown and replaced with a servile monarchy or military dictatorship"?
The 1953 Iranian coup d’état, on August 19, 1953 (and called the 28 Mordad coup d'état in Iran), was the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the United States Central Intelligence Agency; [1] The crushing of Iran's first democratic government launched 25 years of dictatorship under Mohammad-Rez Shh Pahlavi, who relied heavily on U.S. weapons to hold on to power until he was overthrown in February 1979. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat
This is the best documented event, but it's not the last. See also: All of south america. And don't think this is strictly a USA activity, Britain was heavily involved in this Iranian incident, in other instances France was involved (Argentina).
It's the new world order: International despotism with a friendly democratic front.
Huge mistakes like this should be used to make sure that they don't happen again. Top brass lying and changing the story around just makes the US look dishonest and 'evil'
Things like this are routine. What's extraordinary is having proof because the cover up is also routine.
I see civilians being shot, I hear officials on comms laughing about the truck driving in there to attempt to save those shot running over a corpse and I see us being told that Iraqi insurgents were responsible. How the fuck is this open to interpretation?
Assumption: Americans are The Good Guys.
Observation: Bad Guy acts done by Americans.
Need: Rationalizations that will explain the observation while maintaining the assumption.
If someone thinks that the forces occupying Iraq are "us" (as is "we are in Iraq", including himself by association in the "who's in Iraq"), that someone doesn't want to think "we are the bad guys", he'll need a way to interpret these events so his feelings about himself stay positive.