You are absolutely correct about one thing. When enough American jobs have been outsourced, there won't be enough American economy left to purchase the luxury products being produced. All the outsourcers are basically freeloading the system. They make profits off of high paid American and European workers while paying low wages to external workers.
But seriously, what do you expect a single game company to do about this? Stand up and be the good guys? Compete with other companies with much lower labor costs? Save the world?
The problem is here to stay; no question about it. Unfortunately, I don't believe this is a problem that the free market will solve without first bleeding the American and European middle classes to the brink of survival. I don't claim to have "the right" solution, but one solution is an export tarrif on wages. Let the Russians develop Russian software, let the Americans develop American software.
"Exit polls" is what keeps the 2 party system entrenched in this country.
I agree with your points about exit polls, but this is sheer lunacy. The two party system is the result of the consolidation of power. When the 2nd and 3rd parties have small enough support that neither stands a chance to defeat the majority, the only sensible option is that they consolidate their power and attack the majority together.
Ralph Nader and the Green Party are a perfect example of this. They don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning any election on the east coast, but if they merged into either the Democrats or Republicans and pushed their agenda into the larger party's platform, then their policies stand a better chance of being implemented and the former Green Party members stand a far greater chance of being elected.
It has absolutely nothing to do with exit polls. The two party system is simple pragmatism.
I'm a computer scientist, so keep in mind my area of expertise...
There are a number of animals that use tools to complete tasks. Birds hunting for grubs with pointy sticks is a great example. I don't know if this would happen, but if you put such a bird in an enclosure with no pointy sticks but a supply of pointy stick-like objects and used one to catch a grub, there might be an argument for abstract thought. If you offered the bird different grub catching tools and it figured out how to use them, I think you probably have a good case that the bird can abstract the problem and the solution without a real language.
Then, of course, you wonder if the bird has a language or not. They might communicate with each other without a problem, but I doubt they have anything that would pass as a language that supports abstract ideas. But I'm no expert, just guessing.
then he noticed in outlook the "save password" button no longer worked
It might not be related to this problem, but using Outlook is probably the fastest way to get a virus short of deliberately installing one. The only exception to that is if you use Outlook in an extremely tight network where all the mail is examined before Outlook gets it's retarded little mitts on it.
So basically what we're saying is that outside of the context of a trusted corporate network where all mail is thoroughly scanned by the incoming server, Outlook = get virus. Do your friend a favor and have him try Mozilla, Eudora, Netscape, anything but Outlook.
I've actually been doing a lot of tech support work to pay bills in these economic glory days and if someone tells me that they use Outlook, I won't even bother trying to fix it. I tell them it'll be $50 an hour for probably 12 hours to clean up what Outlook did or for $50 I'll reinstall everything. And honestly, $600 to clean up what Outlook lets in is being very generous.
Yes, very true, but my non-DRM machine could have the very same media player as a DRM appliance, yet I will be forbidden from accessing content. I cede the fact that I characterized this incorrectly, but to the computer user, the result is largely the same. We can rant about DRM as much as we like, but the average user will hardly know the difference.
Another way to look at it is that there are two kinds of computer users: Those for whom the computer is a big mystery and are constantly plagued by spyware, popups, et cetera; and those who know how the computer works, solve their own problems, and could generally be known as computer enthusiasts.
With DRM infected appliances, the latter is locked out of their own machines to a certain extent. You'll no longer have the ability to solve your own problems but have to rely on the magical mystery software that comes with the computer.
The distinction will probably be slight at first, but I think it's hardly appropriate to call a DRM infected machine a "computer", since there will be technology in place to prevent the owner from doing certain general purpose computations. DRM infected machines will be entertainment/office appliances and horribly undesirable to people interested in their computers.
But, is it all worth it? Why not support FREE music?
In a sense, that is exactly what's happening. We're creating a market for bands that distribute their recordings for free and profit from performance. I'm tangentially involved with the local music scene and the ability to download major label music for free doesn't have the slightest impact on the cover charge for the local bar band. People still want to go out, have a drink, and see a performance.
What HAS changed is the fact that this unsigned, unmanaged local band can distribute their recordings to their fans with basically $0 overhead. Everybody talks about this, but very few people place enough emphasis on the fact that this is huge. If you can pack a bar and draw some applause, you probably have 50 people who could download your stuff from P2P and put it on their playlists -- even more so in a college town where the bar scene is filled with younger, computer literate people.
This band-business model builds a solid fanbase that in turn makes you profit. If people are playing your music on the college radio, if you can find 500 people sharing your music on P2P, you can book a night at the local bar and demand $500 instead of $100 or $0. You can show ahead of time that your presence will fill the place to the limits.
You have increased the profitability of your band by using P2P and freely distributing your music. This only hurts major acts, it only helps the small acts. P2P and downloading music does, in a roundabout not-what-you-meant way, support free music.
Hey now, I'm sympathetic to your fears about indiscriminate tapping of communications, but I don't think you can support your conclusions at all.
It does say that the investigators became suspicious after listening to the call. It doesn't say why they were listening in the first place. They might have been investigating the guy for drug deals, heard the suspicious call, looked a little closer, and uncovered links to terrorism. The only evidence against that is the phrase "Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists", which implies that the suspicion caused the investigation. That could easily be written off as creativity on the part of the journalist.
Incredible claims require unquestionable proof, I think. Yes, there is clearly reason to be suspicious of how the government conducts these taps, but I disagree that you've found a clear admission of indiscriminate eavesdropping.
One EMP burst and every automobile that has an Engine Control Computer within range of the EMP is dead. =/
I know! These things are WAY too susceptible to the side effects of a nuclear blast! That's why I drive 100% mechanical vehicles from the mid seventies or earlier. The rest of you ninnies are going to look really dumb when the next EMP comes around! HA! HA HA HA!
Not sure who Velikovsky is, but I'm intimiately familiar with the argument.
In short, everybody has a story about a big flood a long time ago, therefore (jump to conclusion) Noah's flood story is accurate.
Completely dismissed is the idea that all primitive civilizations needed to live near water. Almost all primitive civilizations had poor methods for measuring the passage of time. All rivers flood. Floods are rare, devastating, and worth remembering, even more so are the extra rare super floods.
Rather than conclude that the entire world MUST have flooded, isn't it infinitely more rational to conclude that every primitive civilization has experienced a traumatic flood at some point and that their method of remembering that event doesn't hold up to modern standards? Of course every civilization has a story about a horrible flood that happened long ago. They all need water, rivers flood, "long ago" could mean anything.
Not that this alone proves that Noah's flood didn't happen, but rather it is just as much evidence for and against Noah's flood.
The Chinese have a continuous culture and history that predates the flood of the Old Testament. That flood destroyed all people except for Noah's descendants. The Chinese didn't notice any unusual floods for at least 100 years in either direction from the date given by the most vocal Christian fundamenalists for Noah's flood.
It's either a fact that Noah's flood was not global, refuting the Bible; or a fact that Chinese written history is a fraud, refuting the legitimacy of any ancient written document such as the Bible. The only thing that separates the Bible from other ancient texts is the belief that it was authored by God which is an obvious fallacy. Take Old Testament 101 in any college and you'll spend a great amount of time studying the ample evidence that the OT has been edited, by whom, when, where, and how many times.
And as I've said elsewhere, even the notion that the Bible is a historically accurate document is brand new - less than 150 years old. The idea itself is not consistent and can only be supported by countless leaps of "faith", known to educated people as "pseudo science", "fallacy", and "make believe".
The Bible is an infinitely valuable document and an irreplaceable component of many people's spirituality, but a history text it is not.
First of all, you can't reason with a fanatic. I'm not rushing off to m-w.com, but I'm pretty sure that irrationality is part and parcel of being a fanatic.
Second of all, the Chinese have had a continuous history and civilization for thousands of years -- it predates the flood of the Old Testament. You can find a reference for that yourself. They are abundant.
You may find my arrogance amusing, but that's only possible because Christian fanatics forcibly inject all sorts of negative personality traits into people with half a clue - jealousy, evilness, arrogance, take your pick. There's no arrogance on my part, only rational conclusions, many of which are based on the Bible. There are countless irrational explanations for Chinese people and only one rational one. It takes an irrational conclusion to support the Old Testament's claim of a global flood, and yet another to declare that Chinese people are not some sort of abomination of God.
The alternative is the stunning realization that the Bible was not, is not, and never will be a history book. That was obvious to Christians from the years 100 through the late 1800s. Christian fundamentalism sprouted primarily in America, among people horribly unqualified to debate theology, and only in the last 100-150 years. And to the halfwits, everybody who laughs at them will appear arrogant.
I was only kidding about the Australians - forgot to add that as a PS on the last post. Kangaroos definitely do the bidding of the Prince of Darkness, though.
And these who pervert the purpose of religion are also forced to admit that Asian people must have been created by Satan else acknowledge the duality of the Bible and reality. It's easy to dismiss penguins, kangaroos, and Australians as the work of the devil, but to realize that one's faulty religious beliefs actually demand full fledged racism against the majority of the world - fully contradicting the teachings of Jesus Christ - is sometimes exactly the brand of clue stick needed.
Remember, Jesus taught us to love all of God's children. Those pesky Asians couldn't possibly be God's children if the Old Testament is an accurate account of history. Noah's flood must have wiped out all of those destable foreigners, except that the Chinese had a society at the time with written history that has no details of an unusual flood.
Even more eye-opening is the fact that literal interpretations of the Bible are extremely new. Such intellectual hobbling wasn't popular until the 19th or 20th century - for almost 2000 years Christians realized what the purpose of the Bible was, only recently did some of them shut off their God given faculties and prescribe to a system of belief founded on utter and incredible ignorance.
1. Telling you how to get rich in Reno is not a public service.
2. What on Earth told you that flipping a coin bears any relation to a roulette wheel?
3. One "filthy" would have been enough.
4. If you expect to get filthy rich in one weekend with a 1% margin, you're already rich enough to not affix your high hopes to a trip to the casino.
5. I suggest that it's better to try to be clever and score a +1 funny than try to be insightful, fail, and score +1 funny. You got that witticism for free, but the next one will cost ya.
I think the reason for that is that people who are already in the street aren't going to freeze up - they're obviously going to complete the trip across the street. The people who are still on the curb, though, see the "Don't Walk" sign when the other people are halfway across, hopefully preventing them from entering the street just as the traffic light turns green.
It's like killing an input stream and emptying your buffer so that you have some assurance that you got everything processed before letting someone else share your resources.
But I'm no urban planner. That's just my best guess.
I'm not trying to troll, but I gave anime a shot a few years ago and found it all very vacuous. Ghost in the Shell struck me as being both pretentious and half-baked. I've watched a couple other titles and the experience was about the same.
Someone once told me that there was a tremendous amount of Japanese cultural reference in anime. Any input on this? Is there a reputable online source where I might learn some of this material and reattempt to enjoy these movies?
Alternatively, I begin to suspect that anime is to film what trance is to music. And again, I'm just trying to draw a framework, not just troll... Both strike me as eye/ear candy that expect the audience to be non-skeptical of the legitimacy of the plot/expression and enjoy the experience without critical analysis. But I've already admitted that I don't truly understand the culture that produces anime.
At any rate, I like films by Kubrick and Wim Wenders among others, but I'm also a fan of tacky role playing games. I've played The Crescent Hawks Inception and the first Mechwarrior to completion, so I should have some affinity for giant robot fighters, right?
I guess what I'm looking for is the History channel documentary on anime that will give me enough insight to appreciate what makes anime interesting, or at least the internet's version of such a thing. Any suggestions?
The difference is when your website becomes more than a gathering place for fantasies. If you have a knitting website that helps people organize meetings and somebody ends up dead, gosh that's unfortunate. If you have a BDSM website that helps people organize meetings and somebody is cooked alive, the simple fact is that a judge and/or jury may decide that you are part of the crime. Even the knitting website isn't totally clear unless the prosecution decides that it's irrelevant.
As I've said, a collection of facts or even user supplied posts is not necessarily reason to muzzle the website. If that website begins to cross the line between fantasy and reality (by helping to organize real life meetings, for example) and that fantasy is potentially dangerous, then the website definitely shares the blame. The only question is whether or not you have to wait for someone to be killed in a situation that is otherwise smothered in red flags.
Homosexuality has been a controversial topic for a long time -- even though it was muted in 20th century America, it was alive and well during the classical civilizations. The same type of requoting you performed could be used for nose picking, procreating, punctuating sentences, or anything you like.
Necrophilia and cannibalism are often textbook cases of relativism in Philosophy or Ethics 101. Aside from the moral issues, there are plenty of health issues. I'm confident there is a substantial correlation between psychological problems and these unusual practices. Even more than that, both of these activities involve dead people, and for understandable reasons modern society has pretty clear rules on what to do with dead people. A coroner is not the type of job where you get 3 days of training with the shift supervisor and a personalized name tag.
So a person who adheres to Relativism can make any claim he likes - but the belief system isn't even self consistent. Punch a Relativist in the teeth - if he wants to file a police report, he has proven that his belief system is a fraud. Yeah, maybe necrophilia and cannibalism aren't obviously harmful, but declaring them as harmful isn't exactly controversial.
If I post detailed instructions on how to make a powerful bomb in your kitchen, must the government wait for someone to blow up a building and kill people before my site is taken down? I don't think so. To borrow a cliche, there is a clear and present danger in posting bomb instructions on the internet. I believe the same can be said for a cannibal dating service or a necrophiliac community network. I'm not suggesting that we persecute these people personally, but rather we do not protect their right to organize and further their interests specifically because these interests are widely believed to be harmful. It's not a perfect system, but it's a hell of a lot better than letting every last idiot run rampant without bounds.
Right.. and when somebody uses your Cannibal-Only Library to meet like minded people and conspire to eat someone, what are you going to tell the prosecution? "I just run a library, I had nothing to do with it!" I hope for your sake you wouldn't say something so dumb.
If you run a service that arguably exists only to facilitate crime, expect to end up arguing about it in court. This isn't complicated - if you run a website that facilitates crime you can be found liable and guilty of breaking laws.
Of course, if you run that cute and harmless Cannibalism library and nothing bad ever happens, then you have nothing to worry about. The moment your library is involved in an act of cannibalism, you will be dragged to court to defend yourself.
Yeah, genius, I am a proponent of thoughtcrime. I think necrophilia is bad, therefore I'm an Orwellian fascist. With intellectual cheetahs like you around, I'm sure that only the most intelligent decisions will be made.
Slashdot Mirror
But seriously, what do you expect a single game company to do about this? Stand up and be the good guys? Compete with other companies with much lower labor costs? Save the world?
The problem is here to stay; no question about it. Unfortunately, I don't believe this is a problem that the free market will solve without first bleeding the American and European middle classes to the brink of survival. I don't claim to have "the right" solution, but one solution is an export tarrif on wages. Let the Russians develop Russian software, let the Americans develop American software.
My, they ARE making binoculars smaller and smaller these days!
I agree with your points about exit polls, but this is sheer lunacy. The two party system is the result of the consolidation of power. When the 2nd and 3rd parties have small enough support that neither stands a chance to defeat the majority, the only sensible option is that they consolidate their power and attack the majority together.
Ralph Nader and the Green Party are a perfect example of this. They don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning any election on the east coast, but if they merged into either the Democrats or Republicans and pushed their agenda into the larger party's platform, then their policies stand a better chance of being implemented and the former Green Party members stand a far greater chance of being elected.
It has absolutely nothing to do with exit polls. The two party system is simple pragmatism.
It might not be related to this problem
The client is not related to foolish users opening attachments. It is related to a variety of other exploits.
There are a number of animals that use tools to complete tasks. Birds hunting for grubs with pointy sticks is a great example. I don't know if this would happen, but if you put such a bird in an enclosure with no pointy sticks but a supply of pointy stick-like objects and used one to catch a grub, there might be an argument for abstract thought. If you offered the bird different grub catching tools and it figured out how to use them, I think you probably have a good case that the bird can abstract the problem and the solution without a real language.
Then, of course, you wonder if the bird has a language or not. They might communicate with each other without a problem, but I doubt they have anything that would pass as a language that supports abstract ideas. But I'm no expert, just guessing.
then he noticed in outlook the "save password" button no longer worked
It might not be related to this problem, but using Outlook is probably the fastest way to get a virus short of deliberately installing one. The only exception to that is if you use Outlook in an extremely tight network where all the mail is examined before Outlook gets it's retarded little mitts on it.
So basically what we're saying is that outside of the context of a trusted corporate network where all mail is thoroughly scanned by the incoming server, Outlook = get virus. Do your friend a favor and have him try Mozilla, Eudora, Netscape, anything but Outlook.
I've actually been doing a lot of tech support work to pay bills in these economic glory days and if someone tells me that they use Outlook, I won't even bother trying to fix it. I tell them it'll be $50 an hour for probably 12 hours to clean up what Outlook did or for $50 I'll reinstall everything. And honestly, $600 to clean up what Outlook lets in is being very generous.
Yes, very true, but my non-DRM machine could have the very same media player as a DRM appliance, yet I will be forbidden from accessing content. I cede the fact that I characterized this incorrectly, but to the computer user, the result is largely the same. We can rant about DRM as much as we like, but the average user will hardly know the difference.
With DRM infected appliances, the latter is locked out of their own machines to a certain extent. You'll no longer have the ability to solve your own problems but have to rely on the magical mystery software that comes with the computer.
The distinction will probably be slight at first, but I think it's hardly appropriate to call a DRM infected machine a "computer", since there will be technology in place to prevent the owner from doing certain general purpose computations. DRM infected machines will be entertainment/office appliances and horribly undesirable to people interested in their computers.
In a sense, that is exactly what's happening. We're creating a market for bands that distribute their recordings for free and profit from performance. I'm tangentially involved with the local music scene and the ability to download major label music for free doesn't have the slightest impact on the cover charge for the local bar band. People still want to go out, have a drink, and see a performance.
What HAS changed is the fact that this unsigned, unmanaged local band can distribute their recordings to their fans with basically $0 overhead. Everybody talks about this, but very few people place enough emphasis on the fact that this is huge. If you can pack a bar and draw some applause, you probably have 50 people who could download your stuff from P2P and put it on their playlists -- even more so in a college town where the bar scene is filled with younger, computer literate people.
This band-business model builds a solid fanbase that in turn makes you profit. If people are playing your music on the college radio, if you can find 500 people sharing your music on P2P, you can book a night at the local bar and demand $500 instead of $100 or $0. You can show ahead of time that your presence will fill the place to the limits.
You have increased the profitability of your band by using P2P and freely distributing your music. This only hurts major acts, it only helps the small acts. P2P and downloading music does, in a roundabout not-what-you-meant way, support free music.
It does say that the investigators became suspicious after listening to the call. It doesn't say why they were listening in the first place. They might have been investigating the guy for drug deals, heard the suspicious call, looked a little closer, and uncovered links to terrorism. The only evidence against that is the phrase "Investigators, suspicious that the call was a signal between terrorists", which implies that the suspicion caused the investigation. That could easily be written off as creativity on the part of the journalist.
Incredible claims require unquestionable proof, I think. Yes, there is clearly reason to be suspicious of how the government conducts these taps, but I disagree that you've found a clear admission of indiscriminate eavesdropping.
Irony thrives everywhere.
I know! These things are WAY too susceptible to the side effects of a nuclear blast! That's why I drive 100% mechanical vehicles from the mid seventies or earlier. The rest of you ninnies are going to look really dumb when the next EMP comes around! HA! HA HA HA!
I second the notion of including a Flash blocker with the browser. It is one of my must-have features when installing a new version.
In short, everybody has a story about a big flood a long time ago, therefore (jump to conclusion) Noah's flood story is accurate.
Completely dismissed is the idea that all primitive civilizations needed to live near water. Almost all primitive civilizations had poor methods for measuring the passage of time. All rivers flood. Floods are rare, devastating, and worth remembering, even more so are the extra rare super floods.
Rather than conclude that the entire world MUST have flooded, isn't it infinitely more rational to conclude that every primitive civilization has experienced a traumatic flood at some point and that their method of remembering that event doesn't hold up to modern standards? Of course every civilization has a story about a horrible flood that happened long ago. They all need water, rivers flood, "long ago" could mean anything.
Not that this alone proves that Noah's flood didn't happen, but rather it is just as much evidence for and against Noah's flood.
It's either a fact that Noah's flood was not global, refuting the Bible; or a fact that Chinese written history is a fraud, refuting the legitimacy of any ancient written document such as the Bible. The only thing that separates the Bible from other ancient texts is the belief that it was authored by God which is an obvious fallacy. Take Old Testament 101 in any college and you'll spend a great amount of time studying the ample evidence that the OT has been edited, by whom, when, where, and how many times.
And as I've said elsewhere, even the notion that the Bible is a historically accurate document is brand new - less than 150 years old. The idea itself is not consistent and can only be supported by countless leaps of "faith", known to educated people as "pseudo science", "fallacy", and "make believe".
The Bible is an infinitely valuable document and an irreplaceable component of many people's spirituality, but a history text it is not.
Second of all, the Chinese have had a continuous history and civilization for thousands of years -- it predates the flood of the Old Testament. You can find a reference for that yourself. They are abundant.
You may find my arrogance amusing, but that's only possible because Christian fanatics forcibly inject all sorts of negative personality traits into people with half a clue - jealousy, evilness, arrogance, take your pick. There's no arrogance on my part, only rational conclusions, many of which are based on the Bible. There are countless irrational explanations for Chinese people and only one rational one. It takes an irrational conclusion to support the Old Testament's claim of a global flood, and yet another to declare that Chinese people are not some sort of abomination of God.
The alternative is the stunning realization that the Bible was not, is not, and never will be a history book. That was obvious to Christians from the years 100 through the late 1800s. Christian fundamentalism sprouted primarily in America, among people horribly unqualified to debate theology, and only in the last 100-150 years. And to the halfwits, everybody who laughs at them will appear arrogant.
I was only kidding about the Australians - forgot to add that as a PS on the last post. Kangaroos definitely do the bidding of the Prince of Darkness, though.
Remember, Jesus taught us to love all of God's children. Those pesky Asians couldn't possibly be God's children if the Old Testament is an accurate account of history. Noah's flood must have wiped out all of those destable foreigners, except that the Chinese had a society at the time with written history that has no details of an unusual flood.
Even more eye-opening is the fact that literal interpretations of the Bible are extremely new. Such intellectual hobbling wasn't popular until the 19th or 20th century - for almost 2000 years Christians realized what the purpose of the Bible was, only recently did some of them shut off their God given faculties and prescribe to a system of belief founded on utter and incredible ignorance.
2. What on Earth told you that flipping a coin bears any relation to a roulette wheel?
3. One "filthy" would have been enough.
4. If you expect to get filthy rich in one weekend with a 1% margin, you're already rich enough to not affix your high hopes to a trip to the casino.
5. I suggest that it's better to try to be clever and score a +1 funny than try to be insightful, fail, and score +1 funny. You got that witticism for free, but the next one will cost ya.
It's like killing an input stream and emptying your buffer so that you have some assurance that you got everything processed before letting someone else share your resources.
But I'm no urban planner. That's just my best guess.
Someone once told me that there was a tremendous amount of Japanese cultural reference in anime. Any input on this? Is there a reputable online source where I might learn some of this material and reattempt to enjoy these movies?
Alternatively, I begin to suspect that anime is to film what trance is to music. And again, I'm just trying to draw a framework, not just troll... Both strike me as eye/ear candy that expect the audience to be non-skeptical of the legitimacy of the plot/expression and enjoy the experience without critical analysis. But I've already admitted that I don't truly understand the culture that produces anime.
At any rate, I like films by Kubrick and Wim Wenders among others, but I'm also a fan of tacky role playing games. I've played The Crescent Hawks Inception and the first Mechwarrior to completion, so I should have some affinity for giant robot fighters, right?
I guess what I'm looking for is the History channel documentary on anime that will give me enough insight to appreciate what makes anime interesting, or at least the internet's version of such a thing. Any suggestions?
The difference is when your website becomes more than a gathering place for fantasies. If you have a knitting website that helps people organize meetings and somebody ends up dead, gosh that's unfortunate. If you have a BDSM website that helps people organize meetings and somebody is cooked alive, the simple fact is that a judge and/or jury may decide that you are part of the crime. Even the knitting website isn't totally clear unless the prosecution decides that it's irrelevant.
As I've said, a collection of facts or even user supplied posts is not necessarily reason to muzzle the website. If that website begins to cross the line between fantasy and reality (by helping to organize real life meetings, for example) and that fantasy is potentially dangerous, then the website definitely shares the blame. The only question is whether or not you have to wait for someone to be killed in a situation that is otherwise smothered in red flags.
Homosexuality has been a controversial topic for a long time -- even though it was muted in 20th century America, it was alive and well during the classical civilizations. The same type of requoting you performed could be used for nose picking, procreating, punctuating sentences, or anything you like.
Necrophilia and cannibalism are often textbook cases of relativism in Philosophy or Ethics 101. Aside from the moral issues, there are plenty of health issues. I'm confident there is a substantial correlation between psychological problems and these unusual practices. Even more than that, both of these activities involve dead people, and for understandable reasons modern society has pretty clear rules on what to do with dead people. A coroner is not the type of job where you get 3 days of training with the shift supervisor and a personalized name tag.
So a person who adheres to Relativism can make any claim he likes - but the belief system isn't even self consistent. Punch a Relativist in the teeth - if he wants to file a police report, he has proven that his belief system is a fraud. Yeah, maybe necrophilia and cannibalism aren't obviously harmful, but declaring them as harmful isn't exactly controversial.
If I post detailed instructions on how to make a powerful bomb in your kitchen, must the government wait for someone to blow up a building and kill people before my site is taken down? I don't think so. To borrow a cliche, there is a clear and present danger in posting bomb instructions on the internet. I believe the same can be said for a cannibal dating service or a necrophiliac community network. I'm not suggesting that we persecute these people personally, but rather we do not protect their right to organize and further their interests specifically because these interests are widely believed to be harmful. It's not a perfect system, but it's a hell of a lot better than letting every last idiot run rampant without bounds.
If you run a service that arguably exists only to facilitate crime, expect to end up arguing about it in court. This isn't complicated - if you run a website that facilitates crime you can be found liable and guilty of breaking laws.
Of course, if you run that cute and harmless Cannibalism library and nothing bad ever happens, then you have nothing to worry about. The moment your library is involved in an act of cannibalism, you will be dragged to court to defend yourself.
Yeah, genius, I am a proponent of thoughtcrime. I think necrophilia is bad, therefore I'm an Orwellian fascist. With intellectual cheetahs like you around, I'm sure that only the most intelligent decisions will be made.