Because 'start' is a command being called from within an infinite loop, that opens up a command line window and doesn't care if an instance of cmd.exe is already running.
I'm seriously struggling to figure out if that was sarcasm or if society has degraded to the
point where people can no longer sense hypocrisy in their own voices.
Here, let me introduce you to The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies which I think should be mandatory reading before engaging in online discussion. This document outlines various methods that could be used to derail statements made by the GP when he said:
So the banks that govern our fiat currencies have "moral responsibilities" do they? Actually, no, they don't at all. This is precisely why cryptocurrency was invented.
My guess is the term 'fiat currrency' is what triggered the AC troll or bot to attempt to shift the subject. Seems like it worked.
So 'taxed properly' involves an even larger bureaucracy and overhead, with related expenses such as the tracking devices. Should all businesses that accept cash-on-delivery be subject to this level of scrutiny?
Seems to me all modes of transport that aren't subject to traffic cameras and license plate readers is being excluded. Apparently an "active GPS device" with the package just wasn't enough for the surveillance state to be satisfied. Right there in the 500 page regulations document a stated objective is the development of a complete "track and trace system" for the distribution chain.
"CA wants complete surveillance for the MJ market" seems like the real headline and not the clickbait-esq "ban on weed drones".
I am not worried about anyone trying to sell me stuff I don't want.
If the targeted ads reveal sensitive information about you, such as being pregnant, or even having a bad case of hemorrhoids, then there is cause to be concerned.
I am not worried about my employer, insurance company or spouse finding out my browsing history, opinions or habits.
So you don't care about possibly being passed up for advancement because who you voiced political support for. You're not concerned about the insurance cartel's placing you in a high-risk category or preemptively canceling your policy because you may develop a sudden and intense interest in certain types of diseases.
I am mildly worried that my government will use my online behaviour against me.
No offense intended, but perhaps you lack imagination. poor humor on facebook can brand you a felon.
I am very worried that companies will use my behaviour to tint or change my world view by more precisely manipulating and tailoring my news feeds, search hits, education resources etc in order to achieve political or economic interests.
I am terrified by the thought that this manipulation will inevitably be performed by ever smarter algorithms which have extremely egoistic target functions.
There is every reason to expect this. Witness the destruction of Youtube as a free speech platform, the manipulation of search results for the purpose of 'inclusiveness', and Facebook's prior 'experiments' in manipulating users with selective news articles.
Up next are turing-test capable bots that will be used to drive consensus. The efficiency in which new mantras infest the various echo chambers makes me wonder the extent in which this is already utilized.
Liang was part of a long-term conspiracy that perpetrated a "stunning fraud on the American consumer," Cox said, as the defendant's family looked on in the courtroom. "This is a very serious and troubling crime against our economic system."
There is a very special club for those who are allowed to do that, and you're not in it, buddy.
I've spent a lot of time over the past year meeting with news organizations to talk about how we can work better together. As more people get more of their news from places like Facebook, we have a responsibility to create an informed community and help build common understanding. --Mark Zuckerberg
I think I need to go take Google's depression survey now, after considering the kind of 'informed community' that could only be created with the people that would let Facebook create an information filter bubble for them.
They would require far less water and land than raising animals. After all, you aren't supporting a brain, mobility, or reproductive systems. You're only growing the meat.
Meat that has been finely butchered also has much of the fat already trimmed from it. If the meat that is being produced is already in a trimmed state for best flavor, then there is less food waste. This could include inedible waste, such as bone.
However, Drinkypoo (as ironic as the name seems to me right now) may be considering the waste produced from the metabolism of the animal cells being cultivated. Invariably, food goes in, shit comes out. How this theoretical waste is processed, recyled or disposed of on an industrial scale is something to consider.
Yeah, if anything showed us the kind of teeth EU has for corporate globalists, its the HSBC scandals. If it is anything like window dressing, I'm sure they'll think twice.
Corporations own everything now. I'm not against business. Hell. I'm a republican, but if we let them silence speech, no matter how vile when they control the public square, we will by default lose the right to free speech. Popular speech doesn't need protection, it's unpopular speech that needs protecting. Were it not for the first amendment the entire civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s wouldn't have happened.
An advertiser friendly world is a totalitarian hell hole whereeverything has to work as a billboard for skittles and Budweiser. Fuck that.
Here, read that again and please tell me how a simple response of 'first amendment only applies to government' isn't disingenuous.
AC is correct to assert that free speech is threatened when what now serves as the defacto public commons is completely dominated by monopolistic corporations who are now using that position to suppress any speech they dislike, and deplatform anyone they disagree with. Having a internet presence without the cooperation and approval of corporate interests really isn't an option. Actual free speech platforms being suppressed, delisted from search, removed from app stores, and genuinely made unavailable from the public should be cause for anti-trust action.
"Because Nazis" is the excuse for censorship that's used today, "Because fuck you" is the reason of tomorrow.
I understand perfectly that when people like you are setting the standards for free speech, Nazi gets redefined as anyone you disagree with. Just like it already has.
Nazis are cockroaches. When you promote genocide by idolizing genocide that already happened you forfeit your right to be part of civil society.
And who gets to set the bar for what is permissible discourse for participation in a free society. You? The anti-defamation league? The corporate gatekeepers to the internet?
This, on the heels of witnessing someone getting railroaded and smeared for challenging the ideological dogma of one of the largest gatekeepers. Free speech, whether at political rallies or at college campuses or online, is being extinguished, and here you are cheerleading for it.
fucking lever-pullers have an easy time keeping the weak-minded distracted, divided and conquerable
Not effortless enough. This is why free speech on personal platforms such as Twitter and Youtube was the first to fall, now this. China has a billion people with a tightly filtered information bubble. Why can't we?
A core tenant of Nazis is violence against certain people. Therefore, promotion of Nazi ideas is inherently incitement to violence, which is not protected by speech.
You can say the same for Islam (apostates) and BLM (cops). Therefore both groups should be suppressed and have their free speech rights revoked. Since the debate of 'punching nazis' in a free society seems to have been settled within what is likely your political sphere, shall I assume that violence against certain people is a core tenant of yours as well?
I'm sure though that non of that applies, since condemnation shall be selective and arbitrary.
If you're opposed to the fundamental human right of freedom of expression, just say so. Don't be a pussy and hide behind metaphors, similes, turns of phrase, or any other slimy spineless evasion. Just stand up and say, "I don't believe that all people should be free to express themselves."
You are perfectly free to hold that opinion, but be warned that by establishing the precedent you empower your enemies. Once we can have a legal concept of "wrongthink" in the United States, don't get upset when the tables turn and your ideas are the ones that can lose you your job, get you kicked out of school, or even sent to prison. It is you who created the power to do so.
You guys are like the idiots who pushed the local school district into allowing churches to distribute pamphlets with kids, and then cried bloody murder when the church of satan was suddenly sending stuff home with kids. You opened the door you fucking morons.
A cry of "show some intellectual honesty!" to the face of those whose power of persuasion relies on exactly the opposite. Where are my mod points.
No, I feel bad for you that you're content to allow corporations to pick and choose winners in the marketplace of ideas. That the noose is being drawn around the neck of freedom of expression, and that in a society that puts on a big show about protecting liberty, said freedom of expression now depends on how well you are able to mask your identity from billionaire-funded outrage mobs.
YES, I did read the memo. Try replacing all the words of Women or Woman or females with Asian, black or hispanic. I'm guessing you will notice how screwed up it sound then.
What a shibboleth. Good to know it sounds perfectly reasonable, until you inject arbitrary words irrespective of the overall point that people should be hired based on their individual merits and not respective of gender.
The only point is that you can't tell someone else what's right and wrong, because you really don't have any concept of it yourself.
So this is about moral nihilism? In the scope of the unfathomably immense universe of space and time, sure, there is no discernible difference between an ant colony and human civilization in its entirety. That all morals and ethics are arbitrary, such that in the complete set of values, there may be a culture somewhere that puts an equal or greater emphasis on the humane handling of plant life as it does that of sentient animals, so who are we to judge.
With this greater understanding, I'd like to welcome you to our planet. I would caution against erecting any domicile made out of the bone and or living flesh of the native inhabitants, as it could garner undesired attention. Unless you've come well equipped to handle that, of course.
I have a special appreciation for bumblebees as well, as they were my introduction to entomology at an early age. Never once was I stung, even when I deserved it!
But if you're going to bring some sort of moral compass to the conversation, then you're going to need to answer my original abstract question: what makes the carrots, trees, bugs, insects, spiders, forests, rivers, fishes, and viruses, less deserving of your protection than the cows, dogs, cheetahs, elephants, and pandas.
The only answer that I've ever seen, with any degree of validity, is merely "social acceptance".
Your argument seems to boil down to why shouldn't we regard everything that reproduces as the same, just a mere collection of atoms, ecological conservation non withstanding. You might as well argue, why not just kill everyone you meet, since the universe will eventually fizzle out in heat death anyway.
The fact that 'social acceptance' is the only valid reason you can find for the humane treatment of animals, and then be dismissive of it as merely what's fashionable, makes me hope that those who interact with you in your daily life are aware of your condition.
If something is too good to be true, it usually is. What could be better for leftist propaganda than images of white males carrying both confederate and nazi flags? Look what happened at Politicon, where SJW protestors took to wearing swastika armbands and giving seig heil salutes to conservative speakers.
It times of near universal deceit, it is prudent to be skeptical as nothing can be taken at face value.
'all forms of hate' is now a euphemism for all political speech they disagree with. It's the same bullshit excuse that youtube is using to shut down independent journalists by demonetizing and quarantining their videos, under the banner of 'fighting extremism.'
Ironically enough, the very definition of fascism includes social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. I hope those celebrating this move enjoy having their speech dictated to by a corporate controlled media, because once censorship is the norm, eventually they'll get a turn at being silenced or excommunicated because the goal posts are always being moved.
Slashdot Mirror
Because 'start' is a command being called from within an infinite loop, that opens up a command line window and doesn't care if an instance of cmd.exe is already running.
I'm seriously struggling to figure out if that was sarcasm or if society has degraded to the point where people can no longer sense hypocrisy in their own voices.
Here, let me introduce you to The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies which I think should be mandatory reading before engaging in online discussion. This document outlines various methods that could be used to derail statements made by the GP when he said:
So the banks that govern our fiat currencies have "moral responsibilities" do they? Actually, no, they don't at all. This is precisely why cryptocurrency was invented.
My guess is the term 'fiat currrency' is what triggered the AC troll or bot to attempt to shift the subject. Seems like it worked.
So 'taxed properly' involves an even larger bureaucracy and overhead, with related expenses such as the tracking devices. Should all businesses that accept cash-on-delivery be subject to this level of scrutiny?
So that is why all the major distros have systemd now. Seems plausible.
Seems to me all modes of transport that aren't subject to traffic cameras and license plate readers is being excluded. Apparently an "active GPS device" with the package just wasn't enough for the surveillance state to be satisfied. Right there in the 500 page regulations document a stated objective is the development of a complete "track and trace system" for the distribution chain.
"CA wants complete surveillance for the MJ market" seems like the real headline and not the clickbait-esq "ban on weed drones".
I am not worried about anyone trying to sell me stuff I don't want.
If the targeted ads reveal sensitive information about you, such as being pregnant, or even having a bad case of hemorrhoids, then there is cause to be concerned.
I am not worried about my employer, insurance company or spouse finding out my browsing history, opinions or habits.
So you don't care about possibly being passed up for advancement because who you voiced political support for. You're not concerned about the insurance cartel's placing you in a high-risk category or preemptively canceling your policy because you may develop a sudden and intense interest in certain types of diseases.
I am mildly worried that my government will use my online behaviour against me.
No offense intended, but perhaps you lack imagination. poor humor on facebook can brand you a felon.
I am very worried that companies will use my behaviour to tint or change my world view by more precisely manipulating and tailoring my news feeds, search hits, education resources etc in order to achieve political or economic interests.
I am terrified by the thought that this manipulation will inevitably be performed by ever smarter algorithms which have extremely egoistic target functions.
There is every reason to expect this. Witness the destruction of Youtube as a free speech platform, the manipulation of search results for the purpose of 'inclusiveness', and Facebook's prior 'experiments' in manipulating users with selective news articles.
Up next are turing-test capable bots that will be used to drive consensus. The efficiency in which new mantras infest the various echo chambers makes me wonder the extent in which this is already utilized.
Liang was part of a long-term conspiracy that perpetrated a "stunning fraud on the American consumer," Cox said, as the defendant's family looked on in the courtroom. "This is a very serious and troubling crime against our economic system."
There is a very special club for those who are allowed to do that, and you're not in it, buddy.
I've spent a lot of time over the past year meeting with news organizations to talk about how we can work better together. As more people get more of their news from places like Facebook, we have a responsibility to create an informed community and help build common understanding. --Mark Zuckerberg
I think I need to go take Google's depression survey now, after considering the kind of 'informed community' that could only be created with the people that would let Facebook create an information filter bubble for them.
I agree. There are better ways of collecting funny political memes than using a platform that ought to read you your Miranda rights before you use it. I'd rather not create legal affadavits that can be used to prove guilt of felony offenses, regardless of context, or intent for sarcasm.
They would require far less water and land than raising animals. After all, you aren't supporting a brain, mobility, or reproductive systems. You're only growing the meat.
Meat that has been finely butchered also has much of the fat already trimmed from it. If the meat that is being produced is already in a trimmed state for best flavor, then there is less food waste. This could include inedible waste, such as bone.
However, Drinkypoo (as ironic as the name seems to me right now) may be considering the waste produced from the metabolism of the animal cells being cultivated. Invariably, food goes in, shit comes out. How this theoretical waste is processed, recyled or disposed of on an industrial scale is something to consider.
Yeah, if anything showed us the kind of teeth EU has for corporate globalists, its the HSBC scandals. If it is anything like window dressing, I'm sure they'll think twice.
Corporations own everything now. I'm not against business. Hell. I'm a republican, but if we let them silence speech, no matter how vile when they control the public square, we will by default lose the right to free speech. Popular speech doesn't need protection, it's unpopular speech that needs protecting. Were it not for the first amendment the entire civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s wouldn't have happened.
An advertiser friendly world is a totalitarian hell hole whereeverything has to work as a billboard for skittles and Budweiser. Fuck that.
Here, read that again and please tell me how a simple response of 'first amendment only applies to government' isn't disingenuous.
AC is correct to assert that free speech is threatened when what now serves as the defacto public commons is completely dominated by monopolistic corporations who are now using that position to suppress any speech they dislike, and deplatform anyone they disagree with. Having a internet presence without the cooperation and approval of corporate interests really isn't an option. Actual free speech platforms being suppressed, delisted from search, removed from app stores, and genuinely made unavailable from the public should be cause for anti-trust action.
"Because Nazis" is the excuse for censorship that's used today, "Because fuck you" is the reason of tomorrow.
I understand perfectly that when people like you are setting the standards for free speech, Nazi gets redefined as anyone you disagree with. Just like it already has.
Nazis are cockroaches. When you promote genocide by idolizing genocide that already happened you forfeit your right to be part of civil society.
And who gets to set the bar for what is permissible discourse for participation in a free society. You? The anti-defamation league? The corporate gatekeepers to the internet?
This, on the heels of witnessing someone getting railroaded and smeared for challenging the ideological dogma of one of the largest gatekeepers. Free speech, whether at political rallies or at college campuses or online, is being extinguished, and here you are cheerleading for it.
Cockroaches? More like canaries in the coal mine.
fucking lever-pullers have an easy time keeping the weak-minded distracted, divided and conquerable
Not effortless enough. This is why free speech on personal platforms such as Twitter and Youtube was the first to fall, now this. China has a billion people with a tightly filtered information bubble. Why can't we?
A core tenant of Nazis is violence against certain people. Therefore, promotion of Nazi ideas is inherently incitement to violence, which is not protected by speech.
You can say the same for Islam (apostates) and BLM (cops). Therefore both groups should be suppressed and have their free speech rights revoked. Since the debate of 'punching nazis' in a free society seems to have been settled within what is likely your political sphere, shall I assume that violence against certain people is a core tenant of yours as well?
I'm sure though that non of that applies, since condemnation shall be selective and arbitrary.
If you're opposed to the fundamental human right of freedom of expression, just say so. Don't be a pussy and hide behind metaphors, similes, turns of phrase, or any other slimy spineless evasion. Just stand up and say, "I don't believe that all people should be free to express themselves."
You are perfectly free to hold that opinion, but be warned that by establishing the precedent you empower your enemies. Once we can have a legal concept of "wrongthink" in the United States, don't get upset when the tables turn and your ideas are the ones that can lose you your job, get you kicked out of school, or even sent to prison. It is you who created the power to do so.
You guys are like the idiots who pushed the local school district into allowing churches to distribute pamphlets with kids, and then cried bloody murder when the church of satan was suddenly sending stuff home with kids. You opened the door you fucking morons.
A cry of "show some intellectual honesty!" to the face of those whose power of persuasion relies on exactly the opposite. Where are my mod points.
No, I feel bad for you that you're content to allow corporations to pick and choose winners in the marketplace of ideas. That the noose is being drawn around the neck of freedom of expression, and that in a society that puts on a big show about protecting liberty, said freedom of expression now depends on how well you are able to mask your identity from billionaire-funded outrage mobs.
YES, I did read the memo. Try replacing all the words of Women or Woman or females with Asian, black or hispanic. I'm guessing you will notice how screwed up it sound then.
What a shibboleth. Good to know it sounds perfectly reasonable, until you inject arbitrary words irrespective of the overall point that people should be hired based on their individual merits and not respective of gender.
The only point is that you can't tell someone else what's right and wrong, because you really don't have any concept of it yourself.
So this is about moral nihilism? In the scope of the unfathomably immense universe of space and time, sure, there is no discernible difference between an ant colony and human civilization in its entirety. That all morals and ethics are arbitrary, such that in the complete set of values, there may be a culture somewhere that puts an equal or greater emphasis on the humane handling of plant life as it does that of sentient animals, so who are we to judge.
With this greater understanding, I'd like to welcome you to our planet. I would caution against erecting any domicile made out of the bone and or living flesh of the native inhabitants, as it could garner undesired attention. Unless you've come well equipped to handle that, of course.
I have a special appreciation for bumblebees as well, as they were my introduction to entomology at an early age. Never once was I stung, even when I deserved it!
But if you're going to bring some sort of moral compass to the conversation, then you're going to need to answer my original abstract question: what makes the carrots, trees, bugs, insects, spiders, forests, rivers, fishes, and viruses, less deserving of your protection than the cows, dogs, cheetahs, elephants, and pandas.
The only answer that I've ever seen, with any degree of validity, is merely "social acceptance".
Your argument seems to boil down to why shouldn't we regard everything that reproduces as the same, just a mere collection of atoms, ecological conservation non withstanding. You might as well argue, why not just kill everyone you meet, since the universe will eventually fizzle out in heat death anyway.
The fact that 'social acceptance' is the only valid reason you can find for the humane treatment of animals, and then be dismissive of it as merely what's fashionable, makes me hope that those who interact with you in your daily life are aware of your condition.
If something is too good to be true, it usually is. What could be better for leftist propaganda than images of white males carrying both confederate and nazi flags? Look what happened at Politicon, where SJW protestors took to wearing swastika armbands and giving seig heil salutes to conservative speakers.
It times of near universal deceit, it is prudent to be skeptical as nothing can be taken at face value.
Free speech != free of repercussions from said speech
Baby, why you gotta make me hit you?
'all forms of hate' is now a euphemism for all political speech they disagree with. It's the same bullshit excuse that youtube is using to shut down independent journalists by demonetizing and quarantining their videos, under the banner of 'fighting extremism.'
Ironically enough, the very definition of fascism includes social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. I hope those celebrating this move enjoy having their speech dictated to by a corporate controlled media, because once censorship is the norm, eventually they'll get a turn at being silenced or excommunicated because the goal posts are always being moved.