Why is it that people that say things like this never place themselves in this group?
Because that was not a post discussing me as a person, but the historical reasons for how our modern economy has evolved to its current state.
Read the thread. At the very least read about the French Revolution. Look at the title of the post 1806. Why did I choose that year?
Perhaps I sound as if I advocate the wholesale system of indoctrination used to maintain our modern caste system. That is not so. The fact is that it exists, and outside of India prior to their societies collapse and assimilation into the British Empire, this kind of caste system never works and always leads to civil war. This happens either quickly as with the Glorious Revolution in England or the French Revolution, or it happens slowly as in Rome. These revolutions begin because people who realize they are an irrelevant part of society have nothing to gain in maintaining that society and everything to gain by destroying it.
Simply by my interest in the subject it should be quite clear I hold the latter view. Those who believe our system "works" do everything in their power to suggest that this is a meritocracy, not an oligarchy.
You mention correctly that competition for scarce resources can lead to war. Up until the rise of imperial Rome this was almost always the case.
With the prosperity enjoyed by humanity in the last 3000 years, a new problem has begun to appear: There are now lots of people who really have no reason to exist and nothing to offer society. They are a liability, rather than an asset.
Bread and circuses were not the only means of keeping an unruly population in check, but so was military conquest. Many would argue that the primary reason Octavian was able to become the first Roman emperor was so many in the military became rich through conquest and booty. You can either have a riotous group who make your daily life unbearable, or you can appease them through whatever means you can.
The United States was settled primarily by people who had no future in Europe. This country was for the most part immune to the social upheaval which came with increasing numbers of people because many could, and did migrate to unsettled regions. It wasn't until the turn of the twentieth century this was no longer the case, but it was recognized to be a future problem in the east. In many ways, the discovery of the New World provided something of an outlet for a densely populated Europe. Too bad Machiavelli didn't grasp the importance of exporting your nations undesirables.
Flashback to 1806 with the defeat of the Prussians by Napoleon at the Battle of Jena. This was a huge deal, one frequently not appreciated today. The Prussian state was perhaps the first truly militaristic society since Rome, or even Sparta. Not only was militarism a staple of their culture, but it was a foundation of their economy. Perhaps you recall the British using Hessians in the early days of the American Revolution. They supplied mercenaries all over the world, and perfected the art of diplomatic extortion under threat of their soldiery.
Napoleon's army were rabble, the masses brought together in the aftermath of the French Revolution. This revolution was caused by hundreds of thousands of educated, by relatively poor formlerly middle class with nothing to do, and nothing to lose. The defeat of the world's greatest and most professional army by what amounted to amateurs was a serious problem for the future of the Prussian economy. Waterloo came and went, and the Germans went back to working on their reich. Needless to say, they were absolutely intent on preventing any future defeat. One of the first steps to furthering this goal was establishing compulsory schooling as a means of conditioning the populace to best serve the state to make themselves free.
The Prussian philosopher Fichte wrote much of how this was to be accomplished, and Edward Bernays and Ivy Leed spread his word through the United States. It is no coincidence that Mary Shelley's Frankenstein was published the same year Prussia's compuslory schooling was set in motion. (1819).
The end goal of this Prussian experiment in social control was to create obedient soldiers for the army, and obedient workers for mines, factories, and farms, and to create a constant uniformity in thought, word, and deed amongst the citizenry. Since you seem to be the military type, a great book on the subject how this precisely created the German military machine of the 20th century check out Fighting Power by Martin van Creveld.
By 1864, the disparate German state, disunited for a thousand years since the days of Charlamagne, became one nation under Bismark. The unity and strength of Germany in the late 19th century inspired every upper class intellectual in the United States. Seeing the masses of immigrants with their different languages, mannerisms, and beliefs, the same system of centralized control was instituted in the US. The wealthy, particularly the great industrialists of the late 19th century were absolutely terrifed of this mass of people. The University system we have today in the United States was founded to find ways to manipulate the masses. By 1932, the Rockefeller foundation stated they now had the total means to condition the people to be peaceful and obedient. The first eugenic government policies were instituted in Indinia, directed by Indiana University. When Hitler began sterilizing undesireables in the name of eugenics, it was always called the "Indiana Plan"
The military-industrial complex as we know it today, goes far beyond Eisenhower's speech in 1961. It goes back to the days our free nation was perverted to resemble Prussian Germany. It goes back to the implimentation of the income tax and the federal reserve. Our nation, once free, was molded into a fascistic centralized economy where people ceased being individual citizens and were molded to not only serve the state, but do so willingly.
I will be among the first to argue that every war of the twentieth century was neither about scarce resources or revolution, they were simply attempts at acquiring wealth and power either directly or indirectly. The only reason World War II happened so easily is after decades of conditioning the people to be obedient to authority could they so willingly become a part of the military economy created during the war.
This is a large topic, I hope I have at least made you question the timeline of the infamous "military-industrial complex". Today, between the military, related industry, government bureauocracy, and the nearly 25% of our people employed in the educational system, a free country based on free market principles no longer exists and sadly has not for a long time.
Back to my original point of the military being dispersed around the world to prevent revolution, this entire system we have has been created to prevent revolution. Schools were created to make people stupid so they would be content taking orders and pulling levers in factories. Schooling was extended well into the mid twenties to prevent adolescent rebelliousness from becoming outright civil war. By the time your average youngster is through being processed into a productive human, his youthful vigor is gone and nearly half his productive years are behind him. This sytem was created because ever since the French Revolution, it has been realized that you cannot allow your middle class to become purposeless in your society otherwise they revolt. The military-educational-industrial complex exists PRIMARILY to give the masses something to do. Other things have resulted surely, but life, HUMAN life as it once used to be, free, limitless, dangerous, were lost as a result. This system started to get out of control after world war II, so artificial conflicts were created to station troops all over the world in large numbers. Maintaing the peace is but a nice precept. The reality is peaceful trade would occur anyway, even with a navy preventing piracy only.
The reason revolution is around the corner is there are simply too many people. The game is up. Talk to anyone on the street and they realize their jobs are irrelevant, THEY are irrelevant. We have lost our society in an endless maze of rules and regulations intended to keep the masses busy. The financial markets were a game created to continue the misery of structure and those too are failing. Usury went from a way for the rich to get richer to an entire industry, with millions employed simply to administer it.
The system is breaking down, organized revolution which would involve nuclear weapons is not what I am talking about. The United States is one of the few countries with unemployment less than 10%. When that increases to say 20% which it certainly will, you will see what I mean. Street gangs are only the beginning. The 200 year old attempt as maintaining order through fictions is over. The sad part is order will be easier to maintain in cities, but distant suburbs will be ransacked.
Also, the military and paramilitary personnel probably don't want to fight, but ultimately they will have no choice. the government will attempt to maintain something of a civil society, and that will be the way. Historically, that kind of activity leads to conflict as different factions result. If revolution becomes civil war, that will be the way it happens.
Sorry, the revolution has already happened. And we lost. It was sown with the conservative response to the 1960s counterculture and was reaped with the election of a CIA chief and now his son. Hate the break the news to you.
Oh yeah, I was wrong. Thanks for that important tip. What was I thinking?
Did you not read my original post? When I say revolution, I am not referring to a bunch of pussy hippies listening to shitty music and getting stoned on weed. I am talking about the real deal.
Guns, tanks, death, amphetamine, heroin, Wagner, Sousa. Violent revolution, real drugs, and real music.
If you think in the entire history of human civilization, the 1960's is at all relevant you really need to read up more.
The point of my post is the Military-Industrial complex was foisted upon the nation as a foundation of our economy, but the end result was a huge military was created. To prevent that military from causing trouble here in the United States, they were spread all around the world. That way, more guns weapons, and people could be employed by that System without fear of revolution caused by that military machine.
Between the millions of veterans, national guardsmen, reserves, and active duty personal we have a huge cadre of personal trained and ready to wreck havoc.
As the world economy collapses, the civilized order which allowed hippies to march freely on streets in the 1960's will cease to exist. Violent confrontation will become the norm, as it has been for virtually all of human existence.
Revolution will come out of necessity, because the existing government will cease to maintain a civilized society.
When that day comes, people will care more about carrying an automatic rifle than a pipe. No one will smoke marijuana, but amphetamine and morphine will be necessities. Speed to keep you fighting, narcotics to dull the physical and emotional pain of war. Souless pop music will fail to impress those who experience true bloodshed. We will return to more complex music, especially militaristic music.
Nonsense. We are involved all over the world, but the State refuses to close the southern border.
Do you think I agree with that? The military of today is a result of the military-industrial complex created in the 1950's. We need to ship our army all over the world because it is a foundation of our modern economy but more importantly, if the enter US military was centered in the contintental US, they would unite and start a revolution.
Revolution IS just around the corner. Foreign games will only delay the inevitable.
Then, we can close the southern border. A nation without borders ceases to be a nation.
Lest we want to happen to us what is now happening to Japan and Europe. Due to lowered levels of immigration those regions are experiencing an aging of the population. This busts the social security systems. With less people paying in, less money can be sent out.
We need more people. Not less. Immigrants add to the economy. They add workers, and consumers. What they bring to the economy more than outweighs what they take out via usage of social services.
Listen jack, I am something of a radical in a lot of ways. But Social Security systems are just bogus. What you are describing is the problem found in ANY Ponzi scheme.
And the problem will continue forever. Are we supposed to ship the entire worlds population to Europe ad infitum in order to maintain their social security system? There are other ways, better ways. We don't need more people. We need less on this planet and we need a government that doesn't just redistribute wealth but actually directs the meaninful creation of a civilization.
Wealth redistrubtion does not work. Pay people to pick up TRASH on the street at least. There is PLENTY of work that needs to be done in this country, but don't just pay people to do nothing.
The reality is your tech skills are basically irrelevant in the grand scheme of human civilization. The pride you derive from posting on/. is nothing but a fantasy, a fiction. A generation from now, let alone a millenium, and your feeble existence will be forgotten except by a few scarabs feasting on your putrid remains.
You serve a purpose NOW at this moment, but with the speed of technological advancement even modern wrench monkeys such as yourself will be have little to offer society. People ARE a dime a dozen. Do you really think we need 300 million people in the United States? Even if they are not contributing anything of value, what CAN they contribute?
Better yet, you should be looking at what YOU contribute. Trust me, it is YOU who not only need a lifestyle change but are going to experience one unwillingly very soon. When the civilized society you enjoy collapses you will not be able to function in meaningful way. Perhaps you will be a prostitute, some will pay a pittance for a little ass raping here and there. "Squeal like a pig!"
You may think you are a valuable member of your company but you are hardly a valuable member of the society that protects your worthless way of life. When the protection you are afforded disappears, everything you hold dear will be wiped out.
So I suggest you get that fat ass into shape, stop leeching off your parents, and get used to physical pain. When the revolution comes you will either fight and survive, with some scars to keep your mind clear or you will be buying massive quantites of K-Y.
Your arrogance reeks of ignorant hubris. If you want a place in the new world, I suggest you get over it.
This is not a racial or ethnic debate, but one of citizenship. India just happens to have a lot of capable programmers, but the debate would be similar if it was Russia which was the source or even someplace like Italy.
US Citizens come first. Our government exists to protect us.
You will feel very different once whatever youthful beauty you possess has disappeared from your body. Your post represents at its heart, the profound element of decay present in our society and the essential reason why women are so pervasivly unhappy.
The reality is work has never been fun, most people regardless of gender never had careers. But through it all, the creative drive of masculinity has surpassed the mundane in an endless quest to express infinite beauty. Conformity, drudgery, and emotional poverty did not become the norm in the world until feminism showed its ugly head.
I will simply say this, it doesn't matter what work you do, but it does matter what you do with your life. The primary reason women do not have hobbies and are never artists is because without the structure of our fascist society, women would have no idea what to do with themselves. The creative spark is not bestowed, you can only find it within yourself. For reasons I do not understand women tend to lack this inspiration, such that when they are left to their own devices idolness and stagnation is the result. As evidence, the constant abuse by women of opiates and modern antidepressants virtually since the opium trade began in the 18th century indicates a strong biological desire for satisfaction. Just as nearly 50% of white women were narcotic addicts in 1890, nearly 50% of women have taken a psychotropic drug at some point in their lives.
The flaw in your argument is the idea that men are raised to see their whole identities as their jobs. How naive can you possibly be? Do you think the average factory worker 50 years ago truly gained some measure of pride in the fact he was glamorous? Or the janitor? or the garbage man? or even coal miners? Do you realize that 100 years ago nearly 1 out of every 8 jobs was as a miner? And they were all men? What about the 2% of American men who are incarcarated?
Yet men still created beautiful paintings, houses, wrote music. You see, men accept drudgery as a part of their lives and seek to create some measure of happiness here on earth, right now. To think that a job has any meaning to a man is to fail to understand not simply yourself, but your entire species.
The sad part is, now that we are a generation of men raised by women, enslaved by them through the maternal educational-industrial complex, robbed of our fathers so they can feed a woman her endless materialistic desires... many of us are nothing more than women with cocks. Indeed, they pursue ridiculous posts in the bureaucratic system of our depraved society, but do they contribute to it? Will their lives, their deeds be remembered 100 or even 20 years from now? Certainly not.
People and work BOTH are irrelevant to the average man. There is a reason why there are no female hermits. A woman would never lock herself in a room composing music for weeks at a time. For men, work and women are in constant battle with the Muses for his creative fire. Only in banishing both can his heart burn with its full force.
The incredible homosexual revolution is but one step in freeing men from the burden of women and children. The artistic vibrancy of the homosexual community should indiciate the artistic drive of men in a clear fashion... but it is ignored.
Like most women, you have a brain, but don't know how to use it. Until you can understand what drove Mozart, or Michaelangelo, and feel at least the DESIRE to create... you will never know what it means to be alive, or human. Twenty years from now, when you realize how irrelevant your career truly was to humanity and how irrelevant your "skills" have become to your profession you will see there is something else. Ambition is not a creative drive, its a covetous desire for fame and fortune. It is an anathema to humanity, and a cardinal indicator of a morally corrupt individual. Do not dismiss masculinity, you will forever lead an empty life if you do.
I've had 3 ati cards in my life, and 3 of them had drivers and software as stable as a tau lepton.
You know, I have felt the same way. I have had four myself. I had the original Mach32 with 2 megs of DRAM. I got that thing like ten years ago. Like 8 years ago, the Mach64 with 4 megs of VRAM was the schnitz. I had to get that bad boy. The thing lasted until 1998 when I got a rage pro with 8 megs of some ram. Never had a complaint with that card, it wasn't 3dfx, but it did the job and was noticably faster than my Mach64 from 1994.
Anyway, 2001 i decided to go ATI again, since I had always gotten ATI. Got the original Radeon with 32 megs of DDR ram. Drivers sucked, had to flash my BIOS like 3 times to get the card to work. The thing is, I didn't write off the company. I mean, I have only used ATI since I stopped using my original IBM 8514/A adapter, one of the very first SVGA video cards ever. In fact, the reason I originally got ATI was not only did they have the best drives all during the 90's, all there cards were 8514/A compatible. With early slackware distros, I ran x in that mode. ATI always had perfect OS/2 drivers, since 2.0 came out. That was the primary reason I always used them.
So, the point is its the youngins who are bitching about ATI. No company can be perfect forever, so cut them some slack. I plan on getting a 9700 Pro as soon as they drop a little more in price. I had some bad experience with the Radeon, but nearly 10 years of solid experience with ATI is more than enough to maintain my brand loyalty.
Unlike highschool, people pay to go to college. Its not logical to pay for something you dont REALLY want.
Well, this is LAW school we are talking about. Prior to 80 years ago, most states did not require lawyers to go to law school, and those that did not require an undergraduate degree as a prerequisite. (note, lawyering used to be like a trade, you worked as an apprentice. This is still required in Canada) Law school as we know it today was created to make it exceedingly difficult for lower classes to become involved with the American system of jurisprudence.
That being said, law school doesn't really teach you anything. As the article states, most of these teachers are stuck in the 1970's, during the great heyday of the wealthy elite ruling the universities thinking they knew what was best for America. The "Paper Chase" is nowhere near accurate today.
The reality is that Law is being changed by the internet more than any other profession. You used to pay for the experience a lawyer gains over a lifetime. But now, anyone with a credit card can go to Westlaw or Lexis-Nexis and find tons of resources.
But students get it for free. This makes the entire research process infinitely easier, as well as makes the process of summarizing cases for class discussion much easier. Many cases are already summarized online.
The teachers hate this more than anything. Between the internet and the many hornbooks and study guides available, most teachers know students don't learn jack shit in class. All class teaches you is how deal with pressure. Personally, I believe that is questionable, but in the face of overwhelming evidence that class instruction is not required to do well on an exam they have to claim something.
The point? No one WANTS to go to class in law school. It sucks. But, if you want to be a lawyer you have to go. So people go through the motions, and try and look busy.
While the masculine drive is to create, the feminine drive is to control. The primary maternal belief is that the purpose of life is children. Protect them, care from them, foster life. Never in their minds is death respected, revered, understood. It is something to be feared.
Every aspect of our degraded society today stems from the error in this animalistic view of life. We have today, the guiding principle that absolute safety of all people is the primary purpose of society. No deviation is allowed, no challenging of what safety truly is, no realization that the greatest benefits of living come only with great risk. Society merely stagnates, and the mascualine creative drive goes ever underground. Where once the Male Light shown in the furthest corners of the civilized world, from the most simple artisans to the greatest of artists, today the light is constantly fighting for its survival. Monoculture seeks to make everyone and everything exactly the same. To prevent deviation in all its form, the maternal authoritarian drive is dedicated to one purpose and one purpose alone: To destroy masculinity in any of its recognizable forms, save the most base animalistic qualities.
Dear brothers, resist that evil that is woman. Trust not her vile ways. The muses will battle for your mind day in and day out, but the women are winning.
Now is the time for revolution.
Always remember: There is no female Leondardo da Vinci because there is no female Jack the Ripper. It is our rebellious hearts that lead to magical world of dreams. Do not sacrifice your masculinity for the vaginal bottom line. In it you will find merely shame and stagnation.
The K5/K6 were Pentium/Pentium II clones, but the K7 was basically AMD's coming out in the Microprocessor realm, and has been extremely successful!
Nope.
Around 1995, AMD was really struggling to build a Pentium class processor. In 1994, the first company to ever reverse engineer an intel processor and create a functional equivalent was NexGen and their Nx586. This processor utilized a RISC core and a translation unit to get 386 instructions into RISC form. I actually owned two of these, a Nx586 66 and a Nx586 100. They were pretty funky. FPU's were optional, but most of the Nx586 100's had FPUs on board. There was always talk of putting a FPU socket a la 487 on the boards, but it never happened.
Neadless to say, AMD purchased NexGen in late 1995 and released the K5, a clone of the Nx586. The K6 was the first processor released by AMD which was faster than the current Intel processor, a oft forgotten fact. For about 3 months before the Pentium II was released, the K6 233 was 5% or so faster than the Pentium Pro 233.
The K6 and Athlon lines of AMD all utilized the same internal RISC core with a translation unit.
So, you are wrong, no one ever cloned the Pentium or Pentium II. A lot of nasty history between Intel and AMD in the 386 days made sure that would never happen ever again. I wish I could find some fun links on the Nx586 for you, but even on google it seems to have been forgotten.
It would me. I remember the conversation I had with my credit card company when I couldn't get through to AOL to cancel my account. They told me that even if I switched card numbers AOL would automatically be transferred with it and continue to bill me. If I cancelled the card, I'd still be liable for ongoing charges due to my 'agreement' with AOL. I finally had to wait on hold for 45 minutes to get through to AOL in person. It's like having the mafia after you. One guess whether MSFT will follow the same model.
You know, sometimes I read these wonderful stories on slashdot and just have to ask WHY DO YOU MAKE UP SUCH LIES???
Credit card companies WANT you to initiate chargebacks. They make a LOT more money charging the merchant a fee than they will on your interest payments. They are not in business of enforcing ANY agreements besides the credit card receipt you sign.
Of course, you admit you are an AOL user, so perhaps you aren't the brightest star in the sky. But gimme a break. I request chargebacks all the the time, especially for monthly billers which fuck me all the time. ISP's, gyms, banks, none of them ever cancel your service when you request it. They do this intentionally to rape you. So deal with it. If you honestly have such a terrible bank they are going to shaft you like that, don't pay. Settle it in small claims court if the disputed amount is less than say $2000, a nice average for all states. Trust me, the judge will not force you to pay that shit.
The "free sex" angle just gets young men hooked and young girls broken before they realize that the only ones getting free sex are the cult leaders.
I think you are stuck in the Victorian world of maternal purity. 10,000 years of human civilization has condemned women for their grotesque sexual nature, but the British decided it was the exact opposite because they had to defend their foolish choice to have a female dictator. They are wrong. It is men who are enslaved by female sexuality, and it is young girls who torture men as they perfect their art of manipulation.
Your error is you presume sexuality has any relevence in our humanity. Maybe it is for women, as their entire self image is dependent upon the level of desire they can provoke in men. But that means they should have sex as often as possible, thus reaffirming them that they are sexually desirable.
If there is any cult which is more destructive to human happiness, its the constant assertion that sex has some intrinsic value far greater than the other bodily urges such as eating or defacating. The worst part about this neurotic focus on sexuality is that it is, at its heart, animalistic. It is the believe that humans (and men in particular) are like cattle, who desire nothing more than to eat and fuck. The creative qualities which make us human and differentiate us from cattle are completely ignored by the do-gooder obssessed with sex.
The reality is sex is cheap. Its easy to get laid, but prostitution would make a lot of geeks much healthier and happier people. Free sex does sell, but only because we live in a restrictive matriarchy which uses sex as a tool of control over men. 200 years ago, young men learned at an early age what sex was all about and cheap and plentiful prostitutes made sure that no female would dominate a man with her pussy. There were no pussy whipped men in the 18th century. You wanted sex, you got. Sex was an urge to be satisified at will, not parceled out on like carrot on a stick.
You, friend, are someone who has bought into this sick system of slavery. You need to get laid, and often. Otherwise you are going to turn 40 and realize what a fool you have been.
Maasculinity is the driving force behind human civilization. Male sexuality is one aspect of the male creative spirit. It is minor in comparison to our rational and imaginitive abilities, but it is a necessary part.
Any group that actively recruits is dangerous because it inevitably puts the welfare of the group ahead that of its members.
Do you really believe that? Any group which active recruits members is inherently dangerous? What about a company which needs employees? What about the military? Hell, governments ALWAYS put the welfare of the group ahead of its members.
Recruiting school children into a cult ranks around the same as giving them free heroine.
Its spelled "Heroin" btw. That was the trademark diacetylmorphine was sold as by the Bayer corporation. Its a common analogy to abuse these days. Instead saying that human beings make many decisions not through rational deliberation, but due to biochemical conditioning many say something like is Heroin. Yeah, we have all heard it before. Any time someone seems to do something irrational, it because they were a foolish addict. The only problem is cult members don't break out with goosebumps, have uncontrolable muscle spasms, sneeze incessantly, or any other manifestation of physical withdrawal when they are abruptly removed from their cult. I think you really need to experience some narcotic withdrawal before you make that comment. Drug withdrawal is a radically different thing that not belong to a group any longer.
Post Scriptum
I am an atheist, but I believe it is human nature to form groups around a similar ideology. We are a social species, and the political correct world we have today that demands conformity in all mannerisms has left many feeling lost and confused. They cling to these groups to provide some reassurance that they really aren't just one worthless prick out of six billion. These cults are not drugs, but are manifestations of the isolation caused by these modern times. Your simplistic condemnation of these folks neglects their own freedom and humanity. They don't think like you, but that does not mean they have lost their free will like a rat on a cocaine IV.
For more interesting reading on how masculinity is superior to femininity I highly suggest reading these excerpts from the fabulous comic Cerebus.
The French tried that, along with other laws that made it very difficult to fire anyone. But, their unemployment is still up near 10%. Why is this? Because making it difficult to fire someone vastly increases the risk of a bad hire, so the effect was simply to lock in the existing jobs and not create any new ones.But in the US and to a slightly lesser extent the UK, you can get fired easily but on the other hand, unemployment in those countries is around 4% and 2% respectively.
Summary: you cannot protect the good workers by protecting the bad ones.
This is a non-sequitor, FYI. You are connecting two unrelated issues. You claim that because the French have laws which mandate retention of employees AND have laws which mandate an 8 hour work day, that BOTH must lead to their relatively high unemployment rate. Really, the entire issue of preventing employers from terminating employees is irrelevant to this discussion.
I have no doubt that preventing employers from terminating employees discourages hiring in the future. But to suggest that is at all related to not allowing your employees to work more than 8 hours in a day is absurd. We already have laws regulating to this effect, they simply don't apply to salaried individuals. I merely advocate the elimination of the exempt vs non-exempt employee status.
This is why I spend a lot of my spare cash on purchasing high powered weaponry while its still legal. There are a lot of discontented people out there. They are everywhere. We might like to think a plutocracy is the natural progression of society, but that is not the case.
You are very right my friend. I think the revolution will come sooner than most people think. Join your local national guard now, so you at least have access to automatic weapons when you need them.
Your leftist speech has confused me. "American corporate fascist system of life"?
From the moment you first step foot in a school you are trained to be a consumer and to serve the system by desiring to subvert your will to a master. Maybe not you specifically, but the American corporate fascist system is the culmination of forced education, limited access to media, and an oppressive system of government controls and taxes. This sytem creates the illusion of freedom, but in reality just perpetuates the status quo: the continued maintenance of a class sytem.
People in foreign countries see how Americans believe they are free when in reality they shackled by usury, a lifetime of worthless education, high taxes, and an overwhelming desire to buy shit they don't need, thanks to the aforemention brainwashing of the educational establishment. The first step towards making your society a part of that system is by frequenting their "businesses".
We should be happy this Egyptian citizen is doing is part to prevent one more country from joining the system. We should celebrate him! merry christmas!!!
Anyway, I am no leftist. Just an anarchist. Just an anarchist who has had too much eggnog!!! Ciao!
And open source zealots wonder why nobody in the business world takes them seriously. Come on. Linux, just like every other operating system, is nothing more than a tool. There is no possible way that it is going to be right for every single situation, every single time. That would explain my you haven't had success on every situation (and not even on "a lot" of situations, but only "more than one" occassion). Next time, try assessing the problem properly and tailoring a solution for the problem itself. Knee-jerking and screaming "Linux!" is not the proper reaction.
Its not quite that simple. Perhaps what you are saying can hold some weight in the United States, but in Egypt things are very different. The people as a rule experience the economic impact of huge American corporations like Microsoft much more than the average American. Or to put it another way, they are not as invested in the American corporate fascist system of life as are those of us who live in America. Many people in Egypt will not support large corporations like Microsoft soley because they are in fact large corporations.
The parent poster was probably not just some zealot but someone who is involved in providing business software or knows someone who does. For business, someone writing email, working with a database front end, or a POS system, Linux is sufficient. Egyptians would rather put their money in the hands of a young, struggling Egyptian than some Microsoft fat cat.
When, in a debate on Constitutional law, you assert your own opinions, over and above the opinions of the Supreme Court, you better have some very strong legal credentials.
Well, I certainly hope you don't go to law school. Quoting a case is one quarter the battle when writing a brief. ESPECIALLY when dealing with constitutional issues, case law is of little value. You will find that the interpretation of the constitution varies with the days, and is decidedly not uniform. Whatever your high school teacher has told you is wrong. Each of the cases you quoted had dissenting opinions very much in favor of what we are saying here for instance and they are just as valid in a legal debate.
I will not even get into the fact the cases you mention were not deciding the second amendment, but merely determing how the second amendment applies to the issue at hand. Part of the reason there is such ambiguity is this is what the court always does. This always allows room for someone to construct an argument for any side of an issue.
The point is you do not have those legal credentials and have demonstrated your ignorance and immaturity about the issue. The American legal system is constantly evolving, there is not right or wrong answer in the vast majority of issues. You also must remember the supreme court does not write law, they merely determine the constitutionality of existing law. Until a state bans firearms outright, we are not going to have a supreme ccourt opinion on the matter.
2010--- that's 7 years from now. 7 years ago I was dumbfounded by Pentium 166's with 200MB hard drives.
I don't know what it is with youngins today not knowing the history of hard drives. Needless to say, 200 meg hard drives were common with 486's were the dominant process. This was around 1992-1993. When I got a 486 DX/2 66 Dell in 1994, it came with a 360 meg hard drive.
gigabyte were common by the time Pentium 166's came out in 1996. That same year I got a 1.6 GB western digital that still works to this day. Hell, even my Compaq laptop from that era, 486 DX/2 50, 16 megs of ram, 640x480 256 color screen, and a 340 meg hard drive! This laptop was super high end, nearly $5000 in 1994.
Technology moves fast, but not that fast. besides, you are making me feel old and I am only 25
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it that people that say things like this never place themselves in this group?
Because that was not a post discussing me as a person, but the historical reasons for how our modern economy has evolved to its current state.
Read the thread. At the very least read about the French Revolution. Look at the title of the post 1806. Why did I choose that year?
Perhaps I sound as if I advocate the wholesale system of indoctrination used to maintain our modern caste system. That is not so. The fact is that it exists, and outside of India prior to their societies collapse and assimilation into the British Empire, this kind of caste system never works and always leads to civil war. This happens either quickly as with the Glorious Revolution in England or the French Revolution, or it happens slowly as in Rome. These revolutions begin because people who realize they are an irrelevant part of society have nothing to gain in maintaining that society and everything to gain by destroying it.
Simply by my interest in the subject it should be quite clear I hold the latter view. Those who believe our system "works" do everything in their power to suggest that this is a meritocracy, not an oligarchy.
You mention correctly that competition for scarce resources can lead to war. Up until the rise of imperial Rome this was almost always the case.
With the prosperity enjoyed by humanity in the last 3000 years, a new problem has begun to appear: There are now lots of people who really have no reason to exist and nothing to offer society. They are a liability, rather than an asset.
Bread and circuses were not the only means of keeping an unruly population in check, but so was military conquest. Many would argue that the primary reason Octavian was able to become the first Roman emperor was so many in the military became rich through conquest and booty. You can either have a riotous group who make your daily life unbearable, or you can appease them through whatever means you can.
The United States was settled primarily by people who had no future in Europe. This country was for the most part immune to the social upheaval which came with increasing numbers of people because many could, and did migrate to unsettled regions. It wasn't until the turn of the twentieth century this was no longer the case, but it was recognized to be a future problem in the east. In many ways, the discovery of the New World provided something of an outlet for a densely populated Europe. Too bad Machiavelli didn't grasp the importance of exporting your nations undesirables.
Flashback to 1806 with the defeat of the Prussians by Napoleon at the Battle of Jena. This was a huge deal, one frequently not appreciated today. The Prussian state was perhaps the first truly militaristic society since Rome, or even Sparta. Not only was militarism a staple of their culture, but it was a foundation of their economy. Perhaps you recall the British using Hessians in the early days of the American Revolution. They supplied mercenaries all over the world, and perfected the art of diplomatic extortion under threat of their soldiery.
Napoleon's army were rabble, the masses brought together in the aftermath of the French Revolution. This revolution was caused by hundreds of thousands of educated, by relatively poor formlerly middle class with nothing to do, and nothing to lose. The defeat of the world's greatest and most professional army by what amounted to amateurs was a serious problem for the future of the Prussian economy. Waterloo came and went, and the Germans went back to working on their reich. Needless to say, they were absolutely intent on preventing any future defeat. One of the first steps to furthering this goal was establishing compulsory schooling as a means of conditioning the populace to best serve the state to make themselves free.
The Prussian philosopher Fichte wrote much of how this was to be accomplished, and Edward Bernays and Ivy Leed spread his word through the United States. It is no coincidence that Mary Shelley's Frankenstein was published the same year Prussia's compuslory schooling was set in motion. (1819).
The end goal of this Prussian experiment in social control was to create obedient soldiers for the army, and obedient workers for mines, factories, and farms, and to create a constant uniformity in thought, word, and deed amongst the citizenry. Since you seem to be the military type, a great book on the subject how this precisely created the German military machine of the 20th century check out Fighting Power by Martin van Creveld.
By 1864, the disparate German state, disunited for a thousand years since the days of Charlamagne, became one nation under Bismark. The unity and strength of Germany in the late 19th century inspired every upper class intellectual in the United States. Seeing the masses of immigrants with their different languages, mannerisms, and beliefs, the same system of centralized control was instituted in the US. The wealthy, particularly the great industrialists of the late 19th century were absolutely terrifed of this mass of people. The University system we have today in the United States was founded to find ways to manipulate the masses. By 1932, the Rockefeller foundation stated they now had the total means to condition the people to be peaceful and obedient. The first eugenic government policies were instituted in Indinia, directed by Indiana University. When Hitler began sterilizing undesireables in the name of eugenics, it was always called the "Indiana Plan"
The military-industrial complex as we know it today, goes far beyond Eisenhower's speech in 1961. It goes back to the days our free nation was perverted to resemble Prussian Germany. It goes back to the implimentation of the income tax and the federal reserve. Our nation, once free, was molded into a fascistic centralized economy where people ceased being individual citizens and were molded to not only serve the state, but do so willingly.
I will be among the first to argue that every war of the twentieth century was neither about scarce resources or revolution, they were simply attempts at acquiring wealth and power either directly or indirectly. The only reason World War II happened so easily is after decades of conditioning the people to be obedient to authority could they so willingly become a part of the military economy created during the war.
This is a large topic, I hope I have at least made you question the timeline of the infamous "military-industrial complex". Today, between the military, related industry, government bureauocracy, and the nearly 25% of our people employed in the educational system, a free country based on free market principles no longer exists and sadly has not for a long time.
Back to my original point of the military being dispersed around the world to prevent revolution, this entire system we have has been created to prevent revolution. Schools were created to make people stupid so they would be content taking orders and pulling levers in factories. Schooling was extended well into the mid twenties to prevent adolescent rebelliousness from becoming outright civil war. By the time your average youngster is through being processed into a productive human, his youthful vigor is gone and nearly half his productive years are behind him. This sytem was created because ever since the French Revolution, it has been realized that you cannot allow your middle class to become purposeless in your society otherwise they revolt. The military-educational-industrial complex exists PRIMARILY to give the masses something to do. Other things have resulted surely, but life, HUMAN life as it once used to be, free, limitless, dangerous, were lost as a result. This system started to get out of control after world war II, so artificial conflicts were created to station troops all over the world in large numbers. Maintaing the peace is but a nice precept. The reality is peaceful trade would occur anyway, even with a navy preventing piracy only.
The reason revolution is around the corner is there are simply too many people. The game is up. Talk to anyone on the street and they realize their jobs are irrelevant, THEY are irrelevant. We have lost our society in an endless maze of rules and regulations intended to keep the masses busy. The financial markets were a game created to continue the misery of structure and those too are failing. Usury went from a way for the rich to get richer to an entire industry, with millions employed simply to administer it.
The system is breaking down, organized revolution which would involve nuclear weapons is not what I am talking about. The United States is one of the few countries with unemployment less than 10%. When that increases to say 20% which it certainly will, you will see what I mean. Street gangs are only the beginning. The 200 year old attempt as maintaining order through fictions is over. The sad part is order will be easier to maintain in cities, but distant suburbs will be ransacked.
Also, the military and paramilitary personnel probably don't want to fight, but ultimately they will have no choice. the government will attempt to maintain something of a civil society, and that will be the way. Historically, that kind of activity leads to conflict as different factions result. If revolution becomes civil war, that will be the way it happens.
Sorry, the revolution has already happened. And we lost. It was sown with the conservative response to the 1960s counterculture and was reaped with the election of a CIA chief and now his son. Hate the break the news to you.
Oh yeah, I was wrong. Thanks for that important tip. What was I thinking?
Did you not read my original post? When I say revolution, I am not referring to a bunch of pussy hippies listening to shitty music and getting stoned on weed. I am talking about the real deal.
Guns, tanks, death, amphetamine, heroin, Wagner, Sousa. Violent revolution, real drugs, and real music.
If you think in the entire history of human civilization, the 1960's is at all relevant you really need to read up more.
The point of my post is the Military-Industrial complex was foisted upon the nation as a foundation of our economy, but the end result was a huge military was created. To prevent that military from causing trouble here in the United States, they were spread all around the world. That way, more guns weapons, and people could be employed by that System without fear of revolution caused by that military machine.
Between the millions of veterans, national guardsmen, reserves, and active duty personal we have a huge cadre of personal trained and ready to wreck havoc.
As the world economy collapses, the civilized order which allowed hippies to march freely on streets in the 1960's will cease to exist. Violent confrontation will become the norm, as it has been for virtually all of human existence.
Revolution will come out of necessity, because the existing government will cease to maintain a civilized society.
When that day comes, people will care more about carrying an automatic rifle than a pipe. No one will smoke marijuana, but amphetamine and morphine will be necessities. Speed to keep you fighting, narcotics to dull the physical and emotional pain of war. Souless pop music will fail to impress those who experience true bloodshed. We will return to more complex music, especially militaristic music.
Nonsense. We are involved all over the world, but the State refuses to close the southern border.
Do you think I agree with that? The military of today is a result of the military-industrial complex created in the 1950's. We need to ship our army all over the world because it is a foundation of our modern economy but more importantly, if the enter US military was centered in the contintental US, they would unite and start a revolution.
Revolution IS just around the corner. Foreign games will only delay the inevitable.
Then, we can close the southern border. A nation without borders ceases to be a nation.
Lest we want to happen to us what is now happening to Japan and Europe. Due to lowered levels of immigration those regions are experiencing an aging of the population. This busts the social security systems. With less people paying in, less money can be sent out.
We need more people. Not less. Immigrants add to the economy. They add workers, and consumers. What they bring to the economy more than outweighs what they take out via usage of social services.
Listen jack, I am something of a radical in a lot of ways. But Social Security systems are just bogus. What you are describing is the problem found in ANY Ponzi scheme.
And the problem will continue forever. Are we supposed to ship the entire worlds population to Europe ad infitum in order to maintain their social security system? There are other ways, better ways. We don't need more people. We need less on this planet and we need a government that doesn't just redistribute wealth but actually directs the meaninful creation of a civilization.
Wealth redistrubtion does not work. Pay people to pick up TRASH on the street at least. There is PLENTY of work that needs to be done in this country, but don't just pay people to do nothing.
The reality is your tech skills are basically irrelevant in the grand scheme of human civilization. The pride you derive from posting on /. is nothing but a fantasy, a fiction. A generation from now, let alone a millenium, and your feeble existence will be forgotten except by a few scarabs feasting on your putrid remains.
You serve a purpose NOW at this moment, but with the speed of technological advancement even modern wrench monkeys such as yourself will be have little to offer society. People ARE a dime a dozen. Do you really think we need 300 million people in the United States? Even if they are not contributing anything of value, what CAN they contribute?
Better yet, you should be looking at what YOU contribute. Trust me, it is YOU who not only need a lifestyle change but are going to experience one unwillingly very soon. When the civilized society you enjoy collapses you will not be able to function in meaningful way. Perhaps you will be a prostitute, some will pay a pittance for a little ass raping here and there. "Squeal like a pig!"
You may think you are a valuable member of your company but you are hardly a valuable member of the society that protects your worthless way of life. When the protection you are afforded disappears, everything you hold dear will be wiped out.
So I suggest you get that fat ass into shape, stop leeching off your parents, and get used to physical pain. When the revolution comes you will either fight and survive, with some scars to keep your mind clear or you will be buying massive quantites of K-Y.
Your arrogance reeks of ignorant hubris. If you want a place in the new world, I suggest you get over it.
But he was a US citizen.
This is not a racial or ethnic debate, but one of citizenship. India just happens to have a lot of capable programmers, but the debate would be similar if it was Russia which was the source or even someplace like Italy.
US Citizens come first. Our government exists to protect us.
BTW, I haven't the faintest clue what marshmallow peeps are...
Thats too bad, because Just Born, the makers of Marshmallow Peeps have a great web page.
Personally, Marshallow Peeps are delicious. They are a staple of every Easter morning. Unless of course you are a nasty heratic.
You will feel very different once whatever youthful beauty you possess has disappeared from your body. Your post represents at its heart, the profound element of decay present in our society and the essential reason why women are so pervasivly unhappy.
The reality is work has never been fun, most people regardless of gender never had careers. But through it all, the creative drive of masculinity has surpassed the mundane in an endless quest to express infinite beauty. Conformity, drudgery, and emotional poverty did not become the norm in the world until feminism showed its ugly head.
I will simply say this, it doesn't matter what work you do, but it does matter what you do with your life. The primary reason women do not have hobbies and are never artists is because without the structure of our fascist society, women would have no idea what to do with themselves. The creative spark is not bestowed, you can only find it within yourself. For reasons I do not understand women tend to lack this inspiration, such that when they are left to their own devices idolness and stagnation is the result. As evidence, the constant abuse by women of opiates and modern antidepressants virtually since the opium trade began in the 18th century indicates a strong biological desire for satisfaction. Just as nearly 50% of white women were narcotic addicts in 1890, nearly 50% of women have taken a psychotropic drug at some point in their lives.
The flaw in your argument is the idea that men are raised to see their whole identities as their jobs. How naive can you possibly be? Do you think the average factory worker 50 years ago truly gained some measure of pride in the fact he was glamorous? Or the janitor? or the garbage man? or even coal miners? Do you realize that 100 years ago nearly 1 out of every 8 jobs was as a miner? And they were all men? What about the 2% of American men who are incarcarated?
Yet men still created beautiful paintings, houses, wrote music. You see, men accept drudgery as a part of their lives and seek to create some measure of happiness here on earth, right now. To think that a job has any meaning to a man is to fail to understand not simply yourself, but your entire species.
The sad part is, now that we are a generation of men raised by women, enslaved by them through the maternal educational-industrial complex, robbed of our fathers so they can feed a woman her endless materialistic desires... many of us are nothing more than women with cocks. Indeed, they pursue ridiculous posts in the bureaucratic system of our depraved society, but do they contribute to it? Will their lives, their deeds be remembered 100 or even 20 years from now? Certainly not.
People and work BOTH are irrelevant to the average man. There is a reason why there are no female hermits. A woman would never lock herself in a room composing music for weeks at a time. For men, work and women are in constant battle with the Muses for his creative fire. Only in banishing both can his heart burn with its full force.
The incredible homosexual revolution is but one step in freeing men from the burden of women and children. The artistic vibrancy of the homosexual community should indiciate the artistic drive of men in a clear fashion... but it is ignored.
Like most women, you have a brain, but don't know how to use it. Until you can understand what drove Mozart, or Michaelangelo, and feel at least the DESIRE to create... you will never know what it means to be alive, or human. Twenty years from now, when you realize how irrelevant your career truly was to humanity and how irrelevant your "skills" have become to your profession you will see there is something else. Ambition is not a creative drive, its a covetous desire for fame and fortune. It is an anathema to humanity, and a cardinal indicator of a morally corrupt individual. Do not dismiss masculinity, you will forever lead an empty life if you do.
I've had 3 ati cards in my life, and 3 of them had drivers and software as stable as a tau lepton.
You know, I have felt the same way. I have had four myself. I had the original Mach32 with 2 megs of DRAM. I got that thing like ten years ago. Like 8 years ago, the Mach64 with 4 megs of VRAM was the schnitz. I had to get that bad boy. The thing lasted until 1998 when I got a rage pro with 8 megs of some ram. Never had a complaint with that card, it wasn't 3dfx, but it did the job and was noticably faster than my Mach64 from 1994.
Anyway, 2001 i decided to go ATI again, since I had always gotten ATI. Got the original Radeon with 32 megs of DDR ram. Drivers sucked, had to flash my BIOS like 3 times to get the card to work. The thing is, I didn't write off the company. I mean, I have only used ATI since I stopped using my original IBM 8514/A adapter, one of the very first SVGA video cards ever. In fact, the reason I originally got ATI was not only did they have the best drives all during the 90's, all there cards were 8514/A compatible. With early slackware distros, I ran x in that mode. ATI always had perfect OS/2 drivers, since 2.0 came out. That was the primary reason I always used them.
So, the point is its the youngins who are bitching about ATI. No company can be perfect forever, so cut them some slack. I plan on getting a 9700 Pro as soon as they drop a little more in price. I had some bad experience with the Radeon, but nearly 10 years of solid experience with ATI is more than enough to maintain my brand loyalty.
Of course, its the FIRST 'C' that is for Communications.
It stands for Federal Communications Commission.
Unlike highschool, people pay to go to college. Its not logical to pay for something you dont REALLY want.
Well, this is LAW school we are talking about. Prior to 80 years ago, most states did not require lawyers to go to law school, and those that did not require an undergraduate degree as a prerequisite. (note, lawyering used to be like a trade, you worked as an apprentice. This is still required in Canada) Law school as we know it today was created to make it exceedingly difficult for lower classes to become involved with the American system of jurisprudence.
That being said, law school doesn't really teach you anything. As the article states, most of these teachers are stuck in the 1970's, during the great heyday of the wealthy elite ruling the universities thinking they knew what was best for America. The "Paper Chase" is nowhere near accurate today.
The reality is that Law is being changed by the internet more than any other profession. You used to pay for the experience a lawyer gains over a lifetime. But now, anyone with a credit card can go to Westlaw or Lexis-Nexis and find tons of resources.
But students get it for free. This makes the entire research process infinitely easier, as well as makes the process of summarizing cases for class discussion much easier. Many cases are already summarized online.
The teachers hate this more than anything. Between the internet and the many hornbooks and study guides available, most teachers know students don't learn jack shit in class. All class teaches you is how deal with pressure. Personally, I believe that is questionable, but in the face of overwhelming evidence that class instruction is not required to do well on an exam they have to claim something.
The point? No one WANTS to go to class in law school. It sucks. But, if you want to be a lawyer you have to go. So people go through the motions, and try and look busy.
While the masculine drive is to create, the feminine drive is to control. The primary maternal belief is that the purpose of life is children. Protect them, care from them, foster life. Never in their minds is death respected, revered, understood. It is something to be feared.
Every aspect of our degraded society today stems from the error in this animalistic view of life. We have today, the guiding principle that absolute safety of all people is the primary purpose of society. No deviation is allowed, no challenging of what safety truly is, no realization that the greatest benefits of living come only with great risk. Society merely stagnates, and the mascualine creative drive goes ever underground. Where once the Male Light shown in the furthest corners of the civilized world, from the most simple artisans to the greatest of artists, today the light is constantly fighting for its survival. Monoculture seeks to make everyone and everything exactly the same. To prevent deviation in all its form, the maternal authoritarian drive is dedicated to one purpose and one purpose alone: To destroy masculinity in any of its recognizable forms, save the most base animalistic qualities.
Dear brothers, resist that evil that is woman. Trust not her vile ways. The muses will battle for your mind day in and day out, but the women are winning.
Now is the time for revolution.
Always remember: There is no female Leondardo da Vinci because there is no female Jack the Ripper. It is our rebellious hearts that lead to magical world of dreams. Do not sacrifice your masculinity for the vaginal bottom line. In it you will find merely shame and stagnation.
The K5/K6 were Pentium/Pentium II clones, but the K7 was basically AMD's coming out in the Microprocessor realm, and has been extremely successful!
Nope.
Around 1995, AMD was really struggling to build a Pentium class processor. In 1994, the first company to ever reverse engineer an intel processor and create a functional equivalent was NexGen and their Nx586. This processor utilized a RISC core and a translation unit to get 386 instructions into RISC form. I actually owned two of these, a Nx586 66 and a Nx586 100. They were pretty funky. FPU's were optional, but most of the Nx586 100's had FPUs on board. There was always talk of putting a FPU socket a la 487 on the boards, but it never happened.
Neadless to say, AMD purchased NexGen in late 1995 and released the K5, a clone of the Nx586. The K6 was the first processor released by AMD which was faster than the current Intel processor, a oft forgotten fact. For about 3 months before the Pentium II was released, the K6 233 was 5% or so faster than the Pentium Pro 233.
The K6 and Athlon lines of AMD all utilized the same internal RISC core with a translation unit.
So, you are wrong, no one ever cloned the Pentium or Pentium II. A lot of nasty history between Intel and AMD in the 386 days made sure that would never happen ever again. I wish I could find some fun links on the Nx586 for you, but even on google it seems to have been forgotten.
It would me. I remember the conversation I had with my credit card company when I couldn't get through to AOL to cancel my account. They told me that even if I switched card numbers AOL would automatically be transferred with it and continue to bill me. If I cancelled the card, I'd still be liable for ongoing charges due to my 'agreement' with AOL. I finally had to wait on hold for 45 minutes to get through to AOL in person. It's like having the mafia after you. One guess whether MSFT will follow the same model.
You know, sometimes I read these wonderful stories on slashdot and just have to ask WHY DO YOU MAKE UP SUCH LIES???
Credit card companies WANT you to initiate chargebacks. They make a LOT more money charging the merchant a fee than they will on your interest payments. They are not in business of enforcing ANY agreements besides the credit card receipt you sign.
Of course, you admit you are an AOL user, so perhaps you aren't the brightest star in the sky. But gimme a break. I request chargebacks all the the time, especially for monthly billers which fuck me all the time. ISP's, gyms, banks, none of them ever cancel your service when you request it. They do this intentionally to rape you. So deal with it. If you honestly have such a terrible bank they are going to shaft you like that, don't pay. Settle it in small claims court if the disputed amount is less than say $2000, a nice average for all states. Trust me, the judge will not force you to pay that shit.
The "free sex" angle just gets young men hooked and young girls broken before they realize that the only ones getting free sex are the cult leaders.
I think you are stuck in the Victorian world of maternal purity. 10,000 years of human civilization has condemned women for their grotesque sexual nature, but the British decided it was the exact opposite because they had to defend their foolish choice to have a female dictator. They are wrong. It is men who are enslaved by female sexuality, and it is young girls who torture men as they perfect their art of manipulation.
Your error is you presume sexuality has any relevence in our humanity. Maybe it is for women, as their entire self image is dependent upon the level of desire they can provoke in men. But that means they should have sex as often as possible, thus reaffirming them that they are sexually desirable.
If there is any cult which is more destructive to human happiness, its the constant assertion that sex has some intrinsic value far greater than the other bodily urges such as eating or defacating. The worst part about this neurotic focus on sexuality is that it is, at its heart, animalistic. It is the believe that humans (and men in particular) are like cattle, who desire nothing more than to eat and fuck. The creative qualities which make us human and differentiate us from cattle are completely ignored by the do-gooder obssessed with sex.
The reality is sex is cheap. Its easy to get laid, but prostitution would make a lot of geeks much healthier and happier people. Free sex does sell, but only because we live in a restrictive matriarchy which uses sex as a tool of control over men. 200 years ago, young men learned at an early age what sex was all about and cheap and plentiful prostitutes made sure that no female would dominate a man with her pussy. There were no pussy whipped men in the 18th century. You wanted sex, you got. Sex was an urge to be satisified at will, not parceled out on like carrot on a stick.
You, friend, are someone who has bought into this sick system of slavery. You need to get laid, and often. Otherwise you are going to turn 40 and realize what a fool you have been.
Maasculinity is the driving force behind human civilization. Male sexuality is one aspect of the male creative spirit. It is minor in comparison to our rational and imaginitive abilities, but it is a necessary part.
Any group that actively recruits is dangerous because it inevitably puts the welfare of the group ahead that of its members.
Do you really believe that? Any group which active recruits members is inherently dangerous? What about a company which needs employees? What about the military? Hell, governments ALWAYS put the welfare of the group ahead of its members.
Recruiting school children into a cult ranks around the same as giving them free heroine.
Its spelled "Heroin" btw. That was the trademark diacetylmorphine was sold as by the Bayer corporation. Its a common analogy to abuse these days. Instead saying that human beings make many decisions not through rational deliberation, but due to biochemical conditioning many say something like is Heroin. Yeah, we have all heard it before. Any time someone seems to do something irrational, it because they were a foolish addict. The only problem is cult members don't break out with goosebumps, have uncontrolable muscle spasms, sneeze incessantly, or any other manifestation of physical withdrawal when they are abruptly removed from their cult. I think you really need to experience some narcotic withdrawal before you make that comment. Drug withdrawal is a radically different thing that not belong to a group any longer.
Post Scriptum
I am an atheist, but I believe it is human nature to form groups around a similar ideology. We are a social species, and the political correct world we have today that demands conformity in all mannerisms has left many feeling lost and confused. They cling to these groups to provide some reassurance that they really aren't just one worthless prick out of six billion. These cults are not drugs, but are manifestations of the isolation caused by these modern times. Your simplistic condemnation of these folks neglects their own freedom and humanity. They don't think like you, but that does not mean they have lost their free will like a rat on a cocaine IV.
For more interesting reading on how masculinity is superior to femininity I highly suggest reading these excerpts from the fabulous comic Cerebus.
The French tried that, along with other laws that made it very difficult to fire anyone. But, their unemployment is still up near 10%. Why is this? Because making it difficult to fire someone vastly increases the risk of a bad hire, so the effect was simply to lock in the existing jobs and not create any new ones.But in the US and to a slightly lesser extent the UK, you can get fired easily but on the other hand, unemployment in those countries is around 4% and 2% respectively.
Summary: you cannot protect the good workers by protecting the bad ones.
This is a non-sequitor, FYI. You are connecting two unrelated issues. You claim that because the French have laws which mandate retention of employees AND have laws which mandate an 8 hour work day, that BOTH must lead to their relatively high unemployment rate. Really, the entire issue of preventing employers from terminating employees is irrelevant to this discussion.
I have no doubt that preventing employers from terminating employees discourages hiring in the future. But to suggest that is at all related to not allowing your employees to work more than 8 hours in a day is absurd. We already have laws regulating to this effect, they simply don't apply to salaried individuals. I merely advocate the elimination of the exempt vs non-exempt employee status.
This has to be one of the funniest posts I have ever read on any board anywhere. I really hope its true.
Perhaps if we legislate the 8 hour work day, we can immediately bring about that change.
This is why I spend a lot of my spare cash on purchasing high powered weaponry while its still legal. There are a lot of discontented people out there. They are everywhere. We might like to think a plutocracy is the natural progression of society, but that is not the case.
You are very right my friend. I think the revolution will come sooner than most people think. Join your local national guard now, so you at least have access to automatic weapons when you need them.
Your leftist speech has confused me. "American corporate fascist system of life"?
From the moment you first step foot in a school you are trained to be a consumer and to serve the system by desiring to subvert your will to a master. Maybe not you specifically, but the American corporate fascist system is the culmination of forced education, limited access to media, and an oppressive system of government controls and taxes. This sytem creates the illusion of freedom, but in reality just perpetuates the status quo: the continued maintenance of a class sytem.
People in foreign countries see how Americans believe they are free when in reality they shackled by usury, a lifetime of worthless education, high taxes, and an overwhelming desire to buy shit they don't need, thanks to the aforemention brainwashing of the educational establishment. The first step towards making your society a part of that system is by frequenting their "businesses".
We should be happy this Egyptian citizen is doing is part to prevent one more country from joining the system. We should celebrate him! merry christmas!!!
Anyway, I am no leftist. Just an anarchist. Just an anarchist who has had too much eggnog!!! Ciao!
And open source zealots wonder why nobody in the business world takes them seriously. Come on. Linux, just like every other operating system, is nothing more than a tool. There is no possible way that it is going to be right for every single situation, every single time. That would explain my you haven't had success on every situation (and not even on "a lot" of situations, but only "more than one" occassion). Next time, try assessing the problem properly and tailoring a solution for the problem itself. Knee-jerking and screaming "Linux!" is not the proper reaction.
Its not quite that simple. Perhaps what you are saying can hold some weight in the United States, but in Egypt things are very different. The people as a rule experience the economic impact of huge American corporations like Microsoft much more than the average American. Or to put it another way, they are not as invested in the American corporate fascist system of life as are those of us who live in America. Many people in Egypt will not support large corporations like Microsoft soley because they are in fact large corporations.
The parent poster was probably not just some zealot but someone who is involved in providing business software or knows someone who does. For business, someone writing email, working with a database front end, or a POS system, Linux is sufficient. Egyptians would rather put their money in the hands of a young, struggling Egyptian than some Microsoft fat cat.
When, in a debate on Constitutional law, you assert your own opinions, over and above the opinions of the Supreme Court, you better have some very strong legal credentials.
Well, I certainly hope you don't go to law school. Quoting a case is one quarter the battle when writing a brief. ESPECIALLY when dealing with constitutional issues, case law is of little value. You will find that the interpretation of the constitution varies with the days, and is decidedly not uniform. Whatever your high school teacher has told you is wrong. Each of the cases you quoted had dissenting opinions very much in favor of what we are saying here for instance and they are just as valid in a legal debate.
I will not even get into the fact the cases you mention were not deciding the second amendment, but merely determing how the second amendment applies to the issue at hand. Part of the reason there is such ambiguity is this is what the court always does. This always allows room for someone to construct an argument for any side of an issue.
The point is you do not have those legal credentials and have demonstrated your ignorance and immaturity about the issue. The American legal system is constantly evolving, there is not right or wrong answer in the vast majority of issues. You also must remember the supreme court does not write law, they merely determine the constitutionality of existing law. Until a state bans firearms outright, we are not going to have a supreme ccourt opinion on the matter.
Do you think 1.5TB will be such a big deal in 7 years? I don't think so. We'll have 1TB hard drives in 4-5 years from now.
no, I agree. I think 1000 gigabyte hard disks will be around in five years guaranteed.
2010--- that's 7 years from now. 7 years ago I was dumbfounded by Pentium 166's with 200MB hard drives.
I don't know what it is with youngins today not knowing the history of hard drives. Needless to say, 200 meg hard drives were common with 486's were the dominant process. This was around 1992-1993. When I got a 486 DX/2 66 Dell in 1994, it came with a 360 meg hard drive.
gigabyte were common by the time Pentium 166's came out in 1996. That same year I got a 1.6 GB western digital that still works to this day. Hell, even my Compaq laptop from that era, 486 DX/2 50, 16 megs of ram, 640x480 256 color screen, and a 340 meg hard drive! This laptop was super high end, nearly $5000 in 1994.
Technology moves fast, but not that fast. besides, you are making me feel old and I am only 25