It seems you're implying that that is the default method of doing things, which it is not. If it were, it would not be exceptional and would not be worthy of attention. Look at places like Brazil or Venezuela where there are constant videos of police doing what they do in those countries, and nobody cares. And yet, in America, whenever it happens it is front-page news and the footage is endlessly replayed on the 24-hour media.
Here's a project: ask actual African people what they think about African-Americans. Then, ask them how they would behave if the situations were reversed.
Because it's not? Seriously, this sort of "it's ruined already, let's go ahead and implement THE REVOLUTION" thinking is wrongheaded. Your life will be worse off, on every measurable metric, after the revolution. Unless you're one of the elite, and you're not. It is better to live under robber barons than oppressive moral busybodies. Especially moral busybodies who are so far to the left that anything to the right of Mao Zedong looks like fascism.
I have long been aware of the fact that Microsoft quietly sank a lot of resources into rewriting Windows and improving performance so I'm not exactly thunderstruck by news that they succeeded.
You should be. That is entirely out of character for Microsoft. In fact, devoting more resources to a problem just makes it worse, see the book "The Mythical Man-Month" where this is discussed at length. This book was written in the 1960s! So this has been with us for a long time.
Funny how socialism always devolves into that, isn't it? It's because it concentrates power in the government, and then the government does the obvious thing and abuses that power. And then socialists have to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy in order to even make any kind of point on discussion boards. "Nay, tha's na REAL communism, laddie! A real communist would never have murdered millions of people!" Meanwhile people with actual doctorates in Marxism don't get what all the fuss is about. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, after all.
I have a bottom-of-the-line ordinary rice cooker. It makes rice just as good as yours. If I want to specify the time I want the rice to be ready, I just start it 20 minutes before that time. I do this by pressing a single button.
Are you trying to justify the counter space spent for a specialty device, or are you retroactively trying to justify spending way too much on import tax for a tchotchke? Because those are two different things.
Since that is their response to everything, how can one know when they are telling the truth and when they are simply reciting the narrative? Even when the facts are wrong, the narrative can still be right. According to leftists.
The reason we had pixel art in the first place is that's what screens could display. Then, we got super-high resolution displays and the need for pixels went away. I can't even see the pixels on my LCD screen even though it's a foot away from my face right now. So why are they clinging to this outdated concept?
Because something in the artsy fartsy mind takes great delight in "we can do it much better now, but we're going to deliberately use the outdated method instead!" People don't understand why the graphics are blocky and give low ratings. Cue the anguished whining that people just don't understand great artists, smelly unwashed commoners don't deserve the kind of great art that we offer, etc., I think all of us know the rest of it from here by heart because we've heard it so many times.
It's not their fault for making crappy-looking graphics, it's everyone else's fault for failing to recognize artistic brilliance when we see it. If it IS popular, then it's bad art by definition (Leland D Howard, Norman Rockwell, etc.)
This is why Drew will never win a political contest. He says what he really thinks instead of what he is expected to say, and that absolutely infuriates certain people that he does not toe their party line.
You think rape jokes can't be funny? Imagine Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.
I notice how the naming of hurricanes and great advancements in weather forecasting happened at the same time, and question your assumption that that's what led to greater evacuations. If you don't even know the storm is coming, how can you be expected to evacuate? And if you look at the sky and it looks like the other three times this year it's rained heavily, how can you really justify leaving your house where it will be smashed and robbed for social justice?
We don't have to cut our energy usage to the bone, we just have to invest in carbon-neutral energy generation - then we can easily support our lavish lifestyles with zero carbon cost, and save money in the process.
Where do you GET crazy ideas like this? Have you even seen what global warming alarmists are saying? The whole climate change thing is just a tool to destroy Western civilization. And no, that's not a typo or a joke, it's what they've said themselves. They're quite proud of it, too.
But that utopia can never exist. It's a pipe dream, it's already been tried. At the largest scales, and by people who were much smarter and more committed than you. They were willing to murder millions of people to achieve utopia and they still didn't get it. In fact, they created a dystopia (for everyone but themselves, of course).
It doesn't work and it can never work. Now we're going to corrupt science, our only hope, so that it fits this utopian false thinking? That leads...to dystopia. For everyone except you, of course.
If we compare this to even the crappiest online definition of violence: âoebehaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or somethingâ. Bingo. It fits: Pregnancy = may hurt, damage or kill. Intercourse = a man using his physical force to penetrate a woman. Intention / purpose of the act of intercourse = to cause pregnancy. PIV is therefore intentional harm / violence. Intentional sexual harm of a man against a woman through penile penetration = RAPE.
Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie â" or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise. The fact we may not immediately feel raped doesnâ(TM)t mean itâ(TM)s not rape, objectively speaking.
Blaming the victim. What are we, as a society, doing to help these men learn how to find women? All I see is abuse heaped on them by people who get squicked out to discover that these men have sexual desires, too. It's like a national sport, everyone does it and to express any sympathy with these unwillingly celibate males is social poison.
It's just hypocritical because non-profit entities set themselves above businesses who pursue that filthy profit - and yet the non-profits do the same thing. Using evil means to achieve good goals - what is that?
When's the last time you opened a product labeled "Made in one of those four countries"? Yeah, that's what I thought. Seriously, there needs to be a meme or something that eliminates whatever argument someone made, if the only counter-argument is "it works in 100% white countries where everyone agrees on everything and the population is less than most US states". In 20 years demographic trends will be very, very different in these countries and we may be able to have a sane conversation about these issues, after diversity has been achieved.
Protectionism AND socialism? WTF? Which one are you, a racist or a progressive? If you're progressive, you support socialism. If you're a racist, you support protectionism. You seem to be confused. Progressives are internationalists. If there is a decision that Obama could make that benefits 10,000 Americans or 10,003 Somalians, then the second choice is clearly correct. If you're a racist, then you think "America first" and fuck the rest of the world.
So, which are you? Nationalist, or socialist? There's no union between these two sets. They are polar opposites.
The problem is when you define those that don't agree with you as bigots, and have no problem engaging in bigotry yourself. You call it social justice and really can't see why anyone would disagree with your extreme left-wing views. It's an affliction that, in my estimation, will only get worse. Why should any leftist listen to people who are obviously dissidents?
"What our enemies oppose, we will support. And whatever our enemies support, we will oppose."
-- Mao Tse-Tung
Do you even know what the No True Scotsman fallacy is? Seriously? "A true socialist would never have done that" gimme a fucking break. Deal with your historical legacy, because until you do, nobody will take you seriously. Socialists did horrible, horrible things in the name of socialism. Deal.
That's because their consultants told them to shut up because it was harming their brand image. Greenpeace hasn't changed, it's still full of the same wackos and want-to-end-civilization scary people.
If nobody gives a shit what they think, why'd you spend a bunch of words attempting to deflate what they said? Did that sting? Methinks he doth protest too much.
Hard evidence? Counselor, I move to bring Tolkien's letters into the courtroom. The hearing is adjourned for several days of reading. Get busy! Oh, you don't want to because you have better things to do than Tolkien-lore? Gosh, what's that called legally?
The Fell Beasts didn't need to be ridden. The Servants of Sauron were completely capable of acting on their own. It's not a rationalization. You'd have to learn a bit more to know this, but as you've already closed your mind I rather doubt you're in the mood for learning. Plus, studying Tolkien-lore is much like being good at chess...it's a useless skill that only pleases its student. Your time would be better spent learning applied skills.
Sigh...I love when people wave this around like they found something and have proved once and for all a beloved work of literature is stupid and pointless. The Eagles are standoffish and don't mix with the rest of Middle-Earth. Most of their interaction with society comes from stealing cattle, which doesn't exactly make them popular.
And the old "oh-ho, why didn't they just fly into Mordor and drop the Ring into the top of Mount Doom", yeah right the Eye would have spotted them coming a mile off and they would have been met by every Fell Beast from Barad-Dur. Great job handing the Ring to the bad guy, people. The only reason the Frodo plot worked in the first place was because Sauron never saw it coming, only purity of spirit and mercy can get rid of evil, not brute force, etc. etc. Plot hole my ass.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems you're implying that that is the default method of doing things, which it is not. If it were, it would not be exceptional and would not be worthy of attention. Look at places like Brazil or Venezuela where there are constant videos of police doing what they do in those countries, and nobody cares. And yet, in America, whenever it happens it is front-page news and the footage is endlessly replayed on the 24-hour media.
Here's a project: ask actual African people what they think about African-Americans. Then, ask them how they would behave if the situations were reversed.
Because it's not? Seriously, this sort of "it's ruined already, let's go ahead and implement THE REVOLUTION" thinking is wrongheaded. Your life will be worse off, on every measurable metric, after the revolution. Unless you're one of the elite, and you're not. It is better to live under robber barons than oppressive moral busybodies. Especially moral busybodies who are so far to the left that anything to the right of Mao Zedong looks like fascism.
I have long been aware of the fact that Microsoft quietly sank a lot of resources into rewriting Windows and improving performance so I'm not exactly thunderstruck by news that they succeeded.
You should be. That is entirely out of character for Microsoft. In fact, devoting more resources to a problem just makes it worse, see the book "The Mythical Man-Month" where this is discussed at length. This book was written in the 1960s! So this has been with us for a long time.
Funny how socialism always devolves into that, isn't it? It's because it concentrates power in the government, and then the government does the obvious thing and abuses that power. And then socialists have to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy in order to even make any kind of point on discussion boards. "Nay, tha's na REAL communism, laddie! A real communist would never have murdered millions of people!" Meanwhile people with actual doctorates in Marxism don't get what all the fuss is about. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, after all.
I have a bottom-of-the-line ordinary rice cooker. It makes rice just as good as yours. If I want to specify the time I want the rice to be ready, I just start it 20 minutes before that time. I do this by pressing a single button.
Are you trying to justify the counter space spent for a specialty device, or are you retroactively trying to justify spending way too much on import tax for a tchotchke? Because those are two different things.
Since that is their response to everything, how can one know when they are telling the truth and when they are simply reciting the narrative? Even when the facts are wrong, the narrative can still be right. According to leftists.
The reason we had pixel art in the first place is that's what screens could display. Then, we got super-high resolution displays and the need for pixels went away. I can't even see the pixels on my LCD screen even though it's a foot away from my face right now. So why are they clinging to this outdated concept?
Because something in the artsy fartsy mind takes great delight in "we can do it much better now, but we're going to deliberately use the outdated method instead!" People don't understand why the graphics are blocky and give low ratings. Cue the anguished whining that people just don't understand great artists, smelly unwashed commoners don't deserve the kind of great art that we offer, etc., I think all of us know the rest of it from here by heart because we've heard it so many times.
It's not their fault for making crappy-looking graphics, it's everyone else's fault for failing to recognize artistic brilliance when we see it. If it IS popular, then it's bad art by definition (Leland D Howard, Norman Rockwell, etc.)
This is why Drew will never win a political contest. He says what he really thinks instead of what he is expected to say, and that absolutely infuriates certain people that he does not toe their party line.
You think rape jokes can't be funny? Imagine Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.
I notice how the naming of hurricanes and great advancements in weather forecasting happened at the same time, and question your assumption that that's what led to greater evacuations. If you don't even know the storm is coming, how can you be expected to evacuate? And if you look at the sky and it looks like the other three times this year it's rained heavily, how can you really justify leaving your house where it will be smashed and robbed for social justice?
We don't have to cut our energy usage to the bone, we just have to invest in carbon-neutral energy generation - then we can easily support our lavish lifestyles with zero carbon cost, and save money in the process.
Where do you GET crazy ideas like this? Have you even seen what global warming alarmists are saying? The whole climate change thing is just a tool to destroy Western civilization. And no, that's not a typo or a joke, it's what they've said themselves. They're quite proud of it, too.
But that utopia can never exist. It's a pipe dream, it's already been tried. At the largest scales, and by people who were much smarter and more committed than you. They were willing to murder millions of people to achieve utopia and they still didn't get it. In fact, they created a dystopia (for everyone but themselves, of course).
It doesn't work and it can never work. Now we're going to corrupt science, our only hope, so that it fits this utopian false thinking? That leads...to dystopia. For everyone except you, of course.
If we compare this to even the crappiest online definition of violence: âoebehaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or somethingâ. Bingo. It fits: Pregnancy = may hurt, damage or kill. Intercourse = a man using his physical force to penetrate a woman. Intention / purpose of the act of intercourse = to cause pregnancy. PIV is therefore intentional harm / violence. Intentional sexual harm of a man against a woman through penile penetration = RAPE.
Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie â" or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise. The fact we may not immediately feel raped doesnâ(TM)t mean itâ(TM)s not rape, objectively speaking.
Blaming the victim. What are we, as a society, doing to help these men learn how to find women? All I see is abuse heaped on them by people who get squicked out to discover that these men have sexual desires, too. It's like a national sport, everyone does it and to express any sympathy with these unwillingly celibate males is social poison.
It's just hypocritical because non-profit entities set themselves above businesses who pursue that filthy profit - and yet the non-profits do the same thing. Using evil means to achieve good goals - what is that?
No such thing as a non-crazy feminist. The entire movement is hate-based, and founded upon a flawed assumption that men and women are the same.
When's the last time you opened a product labeled "Made in one of those four countries"? Yeah, that's what I thought. Seriously, there needs to be a meme or something that eliminates whatever argument someone made, if the only counter-argument is "it works in 100% white countries where everyone agrees on everything and the population is less than most US states". In 20 years demographic trends will be very, very different in these countries and we may be able to have a sane conversation about these issues, after diversity has been achieved.
Protectionism AND socialism? WTF? Which one are you, a racist or a progressive? If you're progressive, you support socialism. If you're a racist, you support protectionism. You seem to be confused. Progressives are internationalists. If there is a decision that Obama could make that benefits 10,000 Americans or 10,003 Somalians, then the second choice is clearly correct. If you're a racist, then you think "America first" and fuck the rest of the world.
So, which are you? Nationalist, or socialist? There's no union between these two sets. They are polar opposites.
A man who buys a drill doesn't need a drill. He needs holes.
The problem is when you define those that don't agree with you as bigots, and have no problem engaging in bigotry yourself. You call it social justice and really can't see why anyone would disagree with your extreme left-wing views. It's an affliction that, in my estimation, will only get worse. Why should any leftist listen to people who are obviously dissidents?
"What our enemies oppose, we will support. And whatever our enemies support, we will oppose."
-- Mao Tse-Tung
Do you even know what the No True Scotsman fallacy is? Seriously? "A true socialist would never have done that" gimme a fucking break. Deal with your historical legacy, because until you do, nobody will take you seriously. Socialists did horrible, horrible things in the name of socialism. Deal.
That's because their consultants told them to shut up because it was harming their brand image. Greenpeace hasn't changed, it's still full of the same wackos and want-to-end-civilization scary people.
If nobody gives a shit what they think, why'd you spend a bunch of words attempting to deflate what they said? Did that sting? Methinks he doth protest too much.
Hard evidence? Counselor, I move to bring Tolkien's letters into the courtroom. The hearing is adjourned for several days of reading. Get busy! Oh, you don't want to because you have better things to do than Tolkien-lore? Gosh, what's that called legally?
The Fell Beasts didn't need to be ridden. The Servants of Sauron were completely capable of acting on their own. It's not a rationalization. You'd have to learn a bit more to know this, but as you've already closed your mind I rather doubt you're in the mood for learning. Plus, studying Tolkien-lore is much like being good at chess...it's a useless skill that only pleases its student. Your time would be better spent learning applied skills.
Sigh...I love when people wave this around like they found something and have proved once and for all a beloved work of literature is stupid and pointless. The Eagles are standoffish and don't mix with the rest of Middle-Earth. Most of their interaction with society comes from stealing cattle, which doesn't exactly make them popular.
And the old "oh-ho, why didn't they just fly into Mordor and drop the Ring into the top of Mount Doom", yeah right the Eye would have spotted them coming a mile off and they would have been met by every Fell Beast from Barad-Dur. Great job handing the Ring to the bad guy, people. The only reason the Frodo plot worked in the first place was because Sauron never saw it coming, only purity of spirit and mercy can get rid of evil, not brute force, etc. etc. Plot hole my ass.