A government CAN do it.. Just as long as it's not paying for vaporware. I think the poster meant the government could fund projects that are already *somewhat* successful.. Like it would be better to give money to advance the Linux kernel, KDE desktop, GCC, etc.. Rather than giving money to Open Source to develop Ubernix OS.
In nuking the Sons of Saddam last week, US forces apparently blew eight civilians apart, including one, as I recall, who arrived alive in the ER with his brains on the outside of his skull.
Good job, start out by shocking the audience with your 'nuking' comment and graphic description. Let me guess.. You want to be a lawyer when you grow up, right? Do you really think people don't know what rifles, grenades, and other weapons do to their victims? I don't see you making any graphical descriptions about what Saddam and his sons' victims looked like after being shot up, ground up, cut up, half eaten up.. Hey, at least we let the victims go to a hospital.. Our medics in the field can and do provide as much medical attention to their people as they do for our people.
You have to understand that people who are being blown apart don't care whether or not they are "deliberately targeted". The US killed tens of thousands in the last two years, a large number of those civilians.
No kidding, they don't care about anything after they're dead. What's your point? It's a tragedy that civilians are getting killed, but there's a reason we use laser and gps guided missiles. There's a reason we give deadlines and warnings to clear out civilians. Our soldiers do not want to kill civilians. For the most part, they don't want to kill anyone if they don't have to. Talk to a soldier that's been in combat, talk to a cop who's had to kill someone aiming a gun at them.. We take every precaution possible to protect the civilians. What I'd like to know is what these 'civilians' were doing there in the first place. It's easy to randomly say wrong place, wrong time, we just kill. I'm not saying *anyone* deserves to die, but you do have to wonder why the 'civilians' didn't get the fudge out of the way. Even Saddam's sons could have surrendered if they wanted.
Those civilians don't see much difference between the two planes bin Laden's people used, and the missles that blew out that man's brains. We are the terrorists now, as far as most of the world is concerned.
That might possibly be because they are uninformed? Did you ever hear Osama going get out of the twin towers in 15 minutes because I'm blowing them up? Did he ever offer any medical attention to the victims? What was in the towers that might possibly cause him harm in even the distant future? Absolutely nothing. The pentagon was at least somewhat a military target, even though heavily staffed by civilians, but other than that he didn't even try to attack anything with any military value. When have we intentionally gone in and destroyed anything in Iraq or Afghanistan that we didn't think could cause us or the civilians harm? We haven't. We only attack people that we believe to be involved in military/paramilitary operations. Our soldiers have taken extra risk, possibly way too much risk, to attempt and capture political and military leaders rather than kill them. It may not be much of a choice, surrender or die, but at least the coalition forces give the Iraqis a chance. The actual soldiers following orders, the underground forces, and whoever else can surrender their arms and more or less go back to a normal life eventually.
This is insane. We had EVERYONE on our side two years ago. Now we're blowing up civilians, and everyone hates our guts.
We shouldve finished the job in Iraq back in '92. The fact that everyone hates our guts is the insane part of it all. Personally, I don't believe that.. I have friends all over the world, and while they may not agree on what our president does, they certainly don't hate all of our guts. I guess the thing is, the idiots are always the ones that yell the loudest/most. People like you certainly aren't helping our image. We aren't running around blowi
Yeah, I do get the amusing factor.. It's something I like seeing in RPG games, gives a break from the hack and slash.. I don't mean to be putting down the creation, it just seemed weird to make it to being a slashdot story;)
I don't see what's new about this.. I mean it's amusing that someone made interfaces for the bot like they did, but we've been doing this sort of thing in MUDs for the past... Well, I haven't been mudding regularly in 5 years, but even then I saw things that you could hold better conversations than with this thing.. Is there something that makes this bot better than looking at a webpage filled with quotes?
A real money deal COULD work out though.. Rather than making it so people can shovel in real money to buy the things they want, everyone could just start out with a set amount of real money, then through trades, fighting, pking, and such.. The economy would eventually be fluid.. This means though you can't charge a newbie $20 for a cool sword though, more like $1-$2.. but it does reward those that play a lot and really, you don't expect to get rich playing a game do you?
If money doesn't motivated you, and you aren't greedy.. What problem do you have with capitalism? In a capitalist society you have the ability to choose a lax job where you can use the skills you've learned to make a half decent living. The problem seems to be that you are in fact greedy, and that you are very jealous. Really, what difference does it make if Bill Gates has a lot of money to you? You apparently believe you're entitled to a lot, but you hide behind socialism and say oh I'm not greedy, it should just be mine! Yeah yeah..
Oh my.. This is one of the few posts that I can sympathize with the poster for using AC;) Just curious though, you said the limit was ep4-6.. Care to elaborate what made you want to vomit? =P
I don't want this to sound like a flame or anything, cause I believe ya, but could you tell us more about how you managed to get your position? I've been programming since I got my first computer (free QBASIC, not many real games) at 7 years old.. Started playing with linux and freebsd and was running Slackware as my main operating system at 11, but no one out there cares about what I've learned on my own.. I have great references as far as non-computer related jobs go, have hs diploma and such.. References for cheap freelance work I've done, but even out here in rural no where land.. I don't get a second look from anyone wanting an admin or techie.. Tried to go apprenticeship route, hoping I could could a intern level job or something.. No one wants to take anyone on who isn't 'qualified' to do it all... Well, unless you're the boss's nephew or something =P
A lot of the record labels in America are duplicated in Canada. I don't know of a link that shows all of them, but you can get a sample at http://www.cria.ca/gold.htm
Notice EMI Music Canada, Warner Music Canada, Sony Music Canada, Virgin Music Canada, etc,... You might not see the smaller labels there, but a lot of American companies have Canadian divisions..
Riight.. So you think Canada doesn't care about illlegal filesharing? You can bet if RIAA has success with it's lawsuits, the CRIA will be happy to follow up with their own.
Re:So why is Bush giving money to Africa and Iraq?
on
Saving the Net
·
· Score: 1
Why should we give money to these countries?
I'm so amazed I can agree with you on the fact that we shouldn't give money to other countries.
I mean conservatives believe the poor should help themselves right?
No where in the definition of conservative does it say that a conservative has to lack compassion. Conservatives are against abusing the welfare/foodstamp/etc systems by able bodied individuals that can obtain jobs. The money would be better used in America to compensate for these tax cuts, but being a conservative does not mean you can't try to help out people in other countries.
Why should we be protecting Isreal?
Maybe because they're our friends? All of our middle eastern problems won't go away if we drop Israel. In fact, we'd probably have more.. Especially after staying friends with them so long and allowing them to obtain powerful weapons. The thing is though, like I said, they ARE our friends. I have plenty of friends from Israel, and while I can't say they *all* do, but the ones I've met love Americans.. Whereas your extremists from certain other middle eastern countries.. They're going to hate us no matter what happens, and it has nothing to do with Israel. Blaming Israel is just an excuse to attempt and sway political opinion.
Why give 15 Billion to Africa? Let them solve the Aids problem themselves
I'm wondering if you actually feel that way or if you're saying that's the way conservatives are supposed to feel in your opinion.. Either it contradicts your other opinions or it's a stupid comment.. Or both!
I can't read the full message thanks to Yahoo not getting along with me, but.. if that guy is the coder.. It must take him months to debug his code. I mean.. "thik microsoft is so eveil"? I understand people don't have unlimited time to spend on these groups, and I'm obviously not a grammar expert, but it's weird to me when people who *appear* rather smart make so many mistakes on a small message. Just makes me feel a little better about my accidentally hitting the shift button while typing a variable..
I feel bad for any guy who's name can be easily morphed into "Black man eats watermelon".
Re:Oh and I forgot to address part of your argueme
on
Freenet 0.5.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
You are being a hypocrite. If I can have control and not go around raping women because I'm horny, and a gay person can have control and not rape men , and a hater can have enough control to not go and kill everyone they hate, why do you assume that all people who look at childporn are suddenly going to go rape children?
I'm not being a hyprocrite if you listen to what I say.. Pedophiles have a mental disorder. Some people in hate groups do I'm sure, but not close to all of them. Horny guys do not have a mental disorder. Homosexuals do not have a mental disorder, they're just like straight people except they like people of the same sex. When I speak of pedophilia, you'd have to be crazy to think I mean 19 year olds liking 17 year olds or something.. Or really, any consenting, physically mature female is going to turn on a guy no matter what the age.. Pedophilia has to deal with unconsenting partners that are being abused and cannot possibly control the situation no matter how much they want. You don't wish to acknowledge that it's a mental disorder like practically every doctor practicing in the field today.. So this discussion isn't going to go any further I suppose.. Interesting fact to know though about your opinions. 'night
Re:Oh and I forgot to address part of your argueme
on
Freenet 0.5.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
I hate my dsl connection whenever I'm posted to slashdot.. Anyway.. To make a long story short.. What you don't seem to acknowledge is that pedophiles have a mental disorder. This mental disorder is the same in both the people that take the pictures and the people that view them. Of course, some people are going to have various different secondary afflictions that others may not have.. It's still the same basic thing and the potential for violent acts against children is very likely. By definition, pedophiles cannot really control their urges on their own. They have a disorder that makes them feel the way that they do, a lot like how some serial killers have been known to do various mutilations and rituals as part of their killing.. The way they function forces them to be this way. You don't wake up one more and say hey I bet that child porn is interesting, I'm going to download everything I can find! No, people that do that have mental disorders and need the assistance of a psyche doctor. I mean it's weird to me in some cases you acknowledge pedophiles are evil selfish people, but then at the same time you want to treat them like normal sound people as far as assuming they can fight urges and make rational decisions when placed in positions where they may be able to take advantage of children. I mean, if you don't want to give them jail time, fine.. If having a disorder is their only crime, send them to the psyche ward to be evaluated. You can have free speech all you want, but the fact is it's a disorder that's generating this "speech", which to me.. Isn't really speech at all.. I mean it's like an NRA member saying they should have the right to carry a loaded shotgun around in the mall because they have a right to bear arms.. I mean come on, no one's going to agree with that.. Besides maybe Denis Leary and a few friends, but in general I mean.. it's not acceptable.. Why? Because there's a massive potential for violence.. Same thing goes for free speech, I want free speech, I want freenet, but I don't want pedophiles to be able to avoid treatment by hiding behind P2P. I know blocking "13yo" "preteen" etc in p2p software isn't going to stop children from being abused, I'm saying though these people if they can be tracked down.. *Should* be tracked down and forced to seek treatment for their illness. As far as hate groups and such, I'm not really going to go into that too far because we could go on and on for years..but anyway I mean I agree that hate groups are evil and everything, the cause of so many atrocities, but the fact is 'hate' is a human emotion that most everyone feels at some point in time.. If we didn't, it wouldn't be such a big problem. A KKK or Neo Nazi member CAN in fact resist the urge to kill people of other races, because just because they're in a hate group it doesn't mean that they're mentally impaired (other than stupid). A pedophile (child porn producer and view both) is the way they are because of a mental disorder, they have only limited control over their actions without therapy and proper medication. I don't suggest you ban questionable material, I suggest people that have mental disorders which would cause them to cause harm to people be treated for those disorders because they do not have full control over themselves to make the decision to seek treatment on their own or hold back urges 100% of the time. This is the same reason we have a mental ward in the hospital and a section in our prisons for the insane, there are people there so screwed up in the head that if we let them out who knows what they'd do to themselves and other people.. I mean there really are people in mental institutions that have not committed a crime YET.. They're just a bit..well.. 'weird' as you say.. Do you suggest we let out Johnny Psychopath so he can murder his first family?
Re:Oh and I forgot to address part of your argueme
on
Freenet 0.5.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
Ok so your arguement is, vast amounts of childporn are bad? How much is vast amounts?
Any amount that can easily be considered more than investigative or 'stumbling'.. As in.. If you have the remnants of ads and and maybe still have a handfull of pictures, it'd just be too hard to decide if you're someone who has a problem or not.
This is debateable. You view straight porn, have you raped any women lately?
No, I haven't raped any women lately.. However, you could just ask my girlfriend and she'd probably tell you how much I hit on her and talk about sex. The thing here is, she's an adult woman capable of making informed decisions, and I'm rational, fairly mentally sound, and respectful of her so I know when to back off. My point was that people view what they want to to, as I'm sure a rapist would probably enjoy rape porn more than something I might like. Don't forget either, pedophiles are *sick* and are not capable of rational decision under circumstances when they might possibly have the chance to assert authority over children.
I don't believe eradicating child pornography is going to eliminate all child abuse any more than removing alcohol would make all car wrecks go away, but I do believe that people with a problem should be located whenever possible and receive treatment for the benefit of society.
I don't feel as if there is any good reason to protect these people in the name of free speech. No, the internet doesn't teach them to be pedophiles.. What I'm saying is it's like.. Cops pulling people over for a minor violation and finding out that the person is in a stolen vehicle or that the person has outstanding warrants. Even if you don't want to incarcerate someone for viewing child porn, do you not understand that getting a mental disturbed person help before they can harm anyone will do good?
We can agree to disagree I suppose, I just can't imagine you being okay and excusing people's actions in the name of free speech instead of being for getting them help.. (if nothing else..)
Freedom of speech is all or nothing. If you censor childporn you dont truely believe in freedom of speech.
You cannot have freedom with censorship. Its all or nothing.
Why?
Also there ARE people who like viewing dead bodies and who actually get sexually excited from it.
Okay.. Well like I was saying, viewing dead people after the fact is legal (provided you aren't violating some privacy laws) and looking at dead people isn't harming anyone.. As I said before, it's only when you're in knowledge of an act being committed that you're in the wrong. Viewing crime scene photos and fake pictures aren't worse than watching most violent movies out lately. I honestly believe that if that stuff gets you off, you need to see a psyche therapist because you have a problem that needs to be addressed. We do not need people running around that are mentally programmed for random acts of violence against others.
Straight people look at straight porn, gay people look at gay porn, and pedophiles look at child porn. A curious person may take a glance at something different once or twice, but it takes a lot more than a curiousity to view mass amounts of child pornography. You view it because you like it, it's MENTAL DISORDER.. We are not talking about sane, rational people.. The bridge from viewing to creating is not a big one! I mean, I'm sure there's some model or actress.. or just any other person in particular out there you'd love to have over for a few 'personal pictures' right? You don't/can't because obviously, there's some reason why that person is unattainable.. You couldn't force them to take off their coat, let alone strip.. Why? Because they're an adult, and you aren't a hypnotist. When it comes to a pedophile and children however.. A lot of them are very trusting, they're easily tricked and influenced by an adult, and the pedophile has a mental disorder which is literally overriding all other common sense. If you can find a reason why child pornography would be used for a reason OTHER than enjoyment by a pedophile, I'd feel you'd have a stronger case as far as keeping it from censorship..
Anyway I dont feel your censorship method is the way to stop child abuse.
I don't propose it'll stop child abuse entirely, but the fact is.. By getting these freaks off the streets, punishing them for their crimes, and then putting them on treatment for their illness while alerting those around them.. I'd bet my life that more children will be saved. This is called a pre-emptive strike against child abusers. This is the worst kind of crime and does not need any type of protecting. I know that one day if you do have children you'll understand.
You can hide the world from the abusers, but abusers will trade photos and movies in the real world and you'll have an even harder time of catching them.
I don't want to hide the world from anything, I want the pedophiles to get treatment so they don't commit atrocities against young children. Which in my opinion can be a fate worse than death, having to live with that garbage for the rest of your life. I also don't believe for one second that it's harder to catch them in the real world. You go ask a cop that's on a taskforce specifically made for combatting this sort of thing, they'll tell you the internet has made it HARDER to get these people since they can trade it so anonymously. It's generally easier to follow local leads on this sort of thing, nail everyone you can and then flip them so you can find the sources and nail them harder. When you do it online it's hard to find the source. In any case, it's better to deal with this things by erradicating every trace of it you can, and the only reason you can give me why not to erradicate it is because of your all or nothing statement that doesn't
Sadly this will my second time posting a reply, the first time I think it was just Windows telling me my post was too long or something.. This time I'll try for some shorter responses so I can go to bed.
Yes but we shouldnt outlaw the knife just because a crazy person might get a hold of it. Theres so many useful things a knife can do in the hands of a sane person.
Of course not! However, a knife serves multiple purposes, from the cook to the surgeon to the average household. Child porn really does not serve any purpose does it? To a psyche evaluating a pedophile perhaps, but obviously someone like that is different from the weirdos and would have an acceptable reason to view, to an extent at least. I never said we should go out and ban Freenet because people can use it to transfer porn, for the same reason I don't want gimp, xview, paint, or cameras to be banned. This is not an all or nothing situation, we as a society are generally capable of banning one thing without a million others. What I will give you though, is that politicians sometimes try to disguise other motives by saying please think of the children. We have to stop these kinds of politicians by not voting (or voting) for them, making their true motives known, and of course by mailing the hell out of them with complaints and signed petitions.
The viewer is not always "BAD", the viewer might view it by mistake while looking at normal porn. You know how the net is, its too easy to accidently view stuff.
I really feel that the investigations into these things should be handled case by case rather than by the book. I mean seriously, in real life if you buy a laptop for 25% off and it turns out to be stolen property the cops don't lock you up on the spot. On the other hand, if they have reason to believe you knew it was stolen and bought it anyway, you go to jail. I believe that the same policy should be applied to child pornography cases. Obviously if you've stumbled on five or six ads that show hints of child porn, a webpage that wasn't what it should have been, or if you downloaded a cheerleaderxxx file that ended up not being what you thought.. It shouldn't be hard for authorities to figure this out, especially if they're a task force specifically targeting these types of offenses.
But I cant really say the same for the viewer, I know people who view stuff at rotten.com and who might look at a snuff film if it were on freenet, but this person isnt creating it, they just look at it because its there.
It's been a while since I've seen rotten.com type stuff, but I'll agree that it doesn't make them evil. However! It's much different to see something only slightly more graphic than I can see in an 'R' rated movie compared to child porn. These things might be in the same league, both CAN be horrible atrocities, but you have to analyze closer since as I said it should NOT be an all or nothing ban/censorship. If you or I or anyone else does a search for death/murder/whatever on google and then view the results that does not mean that we are getting any sort of graitification from it. It also does not imply that we want people to be hurt, to be killed, or anything of the sort.. It doesn't even mean that the person searching even LIKES what they're viewing anyway. As I said before even, someone that stumbles upon child pornography should not be instantly persecuted or prosecuted. If someone has been abused as a child and then goes on google or newsgroups to search for 'child abuse' and sees pictures of abused people, that person has a legitimate excuse for viewing in my opinion.. An excuse that should be easily uncovered by anyone doing a full investigation which includes logging and interviews.
A second point I wanted to make about that comment was just about the support factor, since I know I'd be called on it later if I didn'
It just doesnt make since, theres no logic. I mean sure its logical for someone like us to share, but murderers, rapists and thieves are selfish, they are doing these things because they only think about themselves, they want to get off and they dont care about you, me, the kids, or anything else but themselves.
Murderers, rapists, and thieves are seriously messed up, I know.. Their selfishness is exactly what causes them to enjoy popularity. I mean, haven't you ever heard of serial killers and other high profile murderers and such trying to get caught so they can have the fame? To us, it's sick and disgusting, but to them it truly is their work.. They do want to be appreciated for it whether you think so or not.
But I'll give you the benefit of a doubt, if you can find some evidence proving that some pedophiles actually believe its not harmful to the children which they are abusing, then we can come back to this debate.
Ever hear of NAMBLA? I'm serious, just because you and I see it as an evil disgusting thing, it can seem very normal to a person who's screwed up in the head..
Perhaps I'm missing something in this debate though.. I'm just against both the provider and the viewer of this kind of trash.. I don't want Freenet to die or anything, I'm just arguing that one point.
Slashdot Mirror
A government CAN do it.. Just as long as it's not paying for vaporware. I think the poster meant the government could fund projects that are already *somewhat* successful.. Like it would be better to give money to advance the Linux kernel, KDE desktop, GCC, etc.. Rather than giving money to Open Source to develop Ubernix OS.
Good job, start out by shocking the audience with your 'nuking' comment and graphic description. Let me guess.. You want to be a lawyer when you grow up, right? Do you really think people don't know what rifles, grenades, and other weapons do to their victims? I don't see you making any graphical descriptions about what Saddam and his sons' victims looked like after being shot up, ground up, cut up, half eaten up.. Hey, at least we let the victims go to a hospital.. Our medics in the field can and do provide as much medical attention to their people as they do for our people.
No kidding, they don't care about anything after they're dead. What's your point? It's a tragedy that civilians are getting killed, but there's a reason we use laser and gps guided missiles. There's a reason we give deadlines and warnings to clear out civilians. Our soldiers do not want to kill civilians. For the most part, they don't want to kill anyone if they don't have to. Talk to a soldier that's been in combat, talk to a cop who's had to kill someone aiming a gun at them.. We take every precaution possible to protect the civilians. What I'd like to know is what these 'civilians' were doing there in the first place. It's easy to randomly say wrong place, wrong time, we just kill. I'm not saying *anyone* deserves to die, but you do have to wonder why the 'civilians' didn't get the fudge out of the way. Even Saddam's sons could have surrendered if they wanted.
That might possibly be because they are uninformed? Did you ever hear Osama going get out of the twin towers in 15 minutes because I'm blowing them up? Did he ever offer any medical attention to the victims? What was in the towers that might possibly cause him harm in even the distant future? Absolutely nothing. The pentagon was at least somewhat a military target, even though heavily staffed by civilians, but other than that he didn't even try to attack anything with any military value. When have we intentionally gone in and destroyed anything in Iraq or Afghanistan that we didn't think could cause us or the civilians harm? We haven't. We only attack people that we believe to be involved in military/paramilitary operations. Our soldiers have taken extra risk, possibly way too much risk, to attempt and capture political and military leaders rather than kill them. It may not be much of a choice, surrender or die, but at least the coalition forces give the Iraqis a chance. The actual soldiers following orders, the underground forces, and whoever else can surrender their arms and more or less go back to a normal life eventually.
We shouldve finished the job in Iraq back in '92. The fact that everyone hates our guts is the insane part of it all. Personally, I don't believe that.. I have friends all over the world, and while they may not agree on what our president does, they certainly don't hate all of our guts. I guess the thing is, the idiots are always the ones that yell the loudest/most. People like you certainly aren't helping our image. We aren't running around blowi
Yeah, I do get the amusing factor.. It's something I like seeing in RPG games, gives a break from the hack and slash.. I don't mean to be putting down the creation, it just seemed weird to make it to being a slashdot story ;)
I don't see what's new about this.. I mean it's amusing that someone made interfaces for the bot like they did, but we've been doing this sort of thing in MUDs for the past... Well, I haven't been mudding regularly in 5 years, but even then I saw things that you could hold better conversations than with this thing.. Is there something that makes this bot better than looking at a webpage filled with quotes?
A real money deal COULD work out though.. Rather than making it so people can shovel in real money to buy the things they want, everyone could just start out with a set amount of real money, then through trades, fighting, pking, and such.. The economy would eventually be fluid.. This means though you can't charge a newbie $20 for a cool sword though, more like $1-$2.. but it does reward those that play a lot and really, you don't expect to get rich playing a game do you?
If money doesn't motivated you, and you aren't greedy.. What problem do you have with capitalism? In a capitalist society you have the ability to choose a lax job where you can use the skills you've learned to make a half decent living. The problem seems to be that you are in fact greedy, and that you are very jealous. Really, what difference does it make if Bill Gates has a lot of money to you? You apparently believe you're entitled to a lot, but you hide behind socialism and say oh I'm not greedy, it should just be mine! Yeah yeah..
I asked a simple question.. I can't ask via message cause the person is an AC.. Why the hell do I get modded redundant? ;(
uhmm The person said 4,5, and 6.. I can understand ep1,2, and probably 3 when it comes out, my question was on the ones the person mentioned..
Oh my.. This is one of the few posts that I can sympathize with the poster for using AC ;) Just curious though, you said the limit was ep4-6.. Care to elaborate what made you want to vomit? =P
I don't want this to sound like a flame or anything, cause I believe ya, but could you tell us more about how you managed to get your position? I've been programming since I got my first computer (free QBASIC, not many real games) at 7 years old.. Started playing with linux and freebsd and was running Slackware as my main operating system at 11, but no one out there cares about what I've learned on my own.. I have great references as far as non-computer related jobs go, have hs diploma and such.. References for cheap freelance work I've done, but even out here in rural no where land.. I don't get a second look from anyone wanting an admin or techie.. Tried to go apprenticeship route, hoping I could could a intern level job or something.. No one wants to take anyone on who isn't 'qualified' to do it all... Well, unless you're the boss's nephew or something =P
:p
So.. How did you do it?
Ahh I was right! Patents are hated so much I get modded down for pointing out something with the same name ;p
Yeah, I know.. I mean, everyone on slashdot hates patents.. They're so quick to judge, but I don't think they've even seen this one.
Defense spending is not exactly typical regional business.. You could have at least used a better example ;P
A lot of the record labels in America are duplicated in Canada. I don't know of a link that shows all of them, but you can get a sample at http://www.cria.ca/gold.htm
Notice EMI Music Canada, Warner Music Canada, Sony Music Canada, Virgin Music Canada, etc,... You might not see the smaller labels there, but a lot of American companies have Canadian divisions..
Riight.. So you think Canada doesn't care about illlegal filesharing? You can bet if RIAA has success with it's lawsuits, the CRIA will be happy to follow up with their own.
I'm so amazed I can agree with you on the fact that we shouldn't give money to other countries.
No where in the definition of conservative does it say that a conservative has to lack compassion. Conservatives are against abusing the welfare/foodstamp/etc systems by able bodied individuals that can obtain jobs. The money would be better used in America to compensate for these tax cuts, but being a conservative does not mean you can't try to help out people in other countries.
Maybe because they're our friends? All of our middle eastern problems won't go away if we drop Israel. In fact, we'd probably have more.. Especially after staying friends with them so long and allowing them to obtain powerful weapons. The thing is though, like I said, they ARE our friends. I have plenty of friends from Israel, and while I can't say they *all* do, but the ones I've met love Americans.. Whereas your extremists from certain other middle eastern countries.. They're going to hate us no matter what happens, and it has nothing to do with Israel. Blaming Israel is just an excuse to attempt and sway political opinion.
I'm wondering if you actually feel that way or if you're saying that's the way conservatives are supposed to feel in your opinion.. Either it contradicts your other opinions or it's a stupid comment.. Or both!
I can't read the full message thanks to Yahoo not getting along with me, but.. if that guy is the coder.. It must take him months to debug his code. I mean.. "thik microsoft is so eveil"? I understand people don't have unlimited time to spend on these groups, and I'm obviously not a grammar expert, but it's weird to me when people who *appear* rather smart make so many mistakes on a small message. Just makes me feel a little better about my accidentally hitting the shift button while typing a variable..
I feel bad for any guy who's name can be easily morphed into "Black man eats watermelon".
I'm not being a hyprocrite if you listen to what I say.. Pedophiles have a mental disorder. Some people in hate groups do I'm sure, but not close to all of them. Horny guys do not have a mental disorder. Homosexuals do not have a mental disorder, they're just like straight people except they like people of the same sex. When I speak of pedophilia, you'd have to be crazy to think I mean 19 year olds liking 17 year olds or something.. Or really, any consenting, physically mature female is going to turn on a guy no matter what the age.. Pedophilia has to deal with unconsenting partners that are being abused and cannot possibly control the situation no matter how much they want. You don't wish to acknowledge that it's a mental disorder like practically every doctor practicing in the field today.. So this discussion isn't going to go any further I suppose.. Interesting fact to know though about your opinions. 'night
I hate my dsl connection whenever I'm posted to slashdot.. Anyway.. To make a long story short.. What you don't seem to acknowledge is that pedophiles have a mental disorder. This mental disorder is the same in both the people that take the pictures and the people that view them. Of course, some people are going to have various different secondary afflictions that others may not have.. It's still the same basic thing and the potential for violent acts against children is very likely. By definition, pedophiles cannot really control their urges on their own. They have a disorder that makes them feel the way that they do, a lot like how some serial killers have been known to do various mutilations and rituals as part of their killing.. The way they function forces them to be this way. You don't wake up one more and say hey I bet that child porn is interesting, I'm going to download everything I can find! No, people that do that have mental disorders and need the assistance of a psyche doctor. I mean it's weird to me in some cases you acknowledge pedophiles are evil selfish people, but then at the same time you want to treat them like normal sound people as far as assuming they can fight urges and make rational decisions when placed in positions where they may be able to take advantage of children. I mean, if you don't want to give them jail time, fine.. If having a disorder is their only crime, send them to the psyche ward to be evaluated. You can have free speech all you want, but the fact is it's a disorder that's generating this "speech", which to me.. Isn't really speech at all.. I mean it's like an NRA member saying they should have the right to carry a loaded shotgun around in the mall because they have a right to bear arms.. I mean come on, no one's going to agree with that.. Besides maybe Denis Leary and a few friends, but in general I mean.. it's not acceptable.. Why? Because there's a massive potential for violence.. Same thing goes for free speech, I want free speech, I want freenet, but I don't want pedophiles to be able to avoid treatment by hiding behind P2P. I know blocking "13yo" "preteen" etc in p2p software isn't going to stop children from being abused, I'm saying though these people if they can be tracked down.. *Should* be tracked down and forced to seek treatment for their illness. As far as hate groups and such, I'm not really going to go into that too far because we could go on and on for years..but anyway I mean I agree that hate groups are evil and everything, the cause of so many atrocities, but the fact is 'hate' is a human emotion that most everyone feels at some point in time.. If we didn't, it wouldn't be such a big problem. A KKK or Neo Nazi member CAN in fact resist the urge to kill people of other races, because just because they're in a hate group it doesn't mean that they're mentally impaired (other than stupid). A pedophile (child porn producer and view both) is the way they are because of a mental disorder, they have only limited control over their actions without therapy and proper medication. I don't suggest you ban questionable material, I suggest people that have mental disorders which would cause them to cause harm to people be treated for those disorders because they do not have full control over themselves to make the decision to seek treatment on their own or hold back urges 100% of the time. This is the same reason we have a mental ward in the hospital and a section in our prisons for the insane, there are people there so screwed up in the head that if we let them out who knows what they'd do to themselves and other people.. I mean there really are people in mental institutions that have not committed a crime YET.. They're just a bit..well.. 'weird' as you say.. Do you suggest we let out Johnny Psychopath so he can murder his first family?
Any amount that can easily be considered more than investigative or 'stumbling'.. As in.. If you have the remnants of ads and and maybe still have a handfull of pictures, it'd just be too hard to decide if you're someone who has a problem or not.
No, I haven't raped any women lately.. However, you could just ask my girlfriend and she'd probably tell you how much I hit on her and talk about sex. The thing here is, she's an adult woman capable of making informed decisions, and I'm rational, fairly mentally sound, and respectful of her so I know when to back off. My point was that people view what they want to to, as I'm sure a rapist would probably enjoy rape porn more than something I might like. Don't forget either, pedophiles are *sick* and are not capable of rational decision under circumstances when they might possibly have the chance to assert authority over children.
I don't believe eradicating child pornography is going to eliminate all child abuse any more than removing alcohol would make all car wrecks go away, but I do believe that people with a problem should be located whenever possible and receive treatment for the benefit of society.
I don't feel as if there is any good reason to protect these people in the name of free speech. No, the internet doesn't teach them to be pedophiles.. What I'm saying is it's like.. Cops pulling people over for a minor violation and finding out that the person is in a stolen vehicle or that the person has outstanding warrants. Even if you don't want to incarcerate someone for viewing child porn, do you not understand that getting a mental disturbed person help before they can harm anyone will do good?
We can agree to disagree I suppose, I just can't imagine you being okay and excusing people's actions in the name of free speech instead of being for getting them help.. (if nothing else..)
Why?
Okay.. Well like I was saying, viewing dead people after the fact is legal (provided you aren't violating some privacy laws) and looking at dead people isn't harming anyone.. As I said before, it's only when you're in knowledge of an act being committed that you're in the wrong. Viewing crime scene photos and fake pictures aren't worse than watching most violent movies out lately. I honestly believe that if that stuff gets you off, you need to see a psyche therapist because you have a problem that needs to be addressed. We do not need people running around that are mentally programmed for random acts of violence against others.
Straight people look at straight porn, gay people look at gay porn, and pedophiles look at child porn. A curious person may take a glance at something different once or twice, but it takes a lot more than a curiousity to view mass amounts of child pornography. You view it because you like it, it's MENTAL DISORDER.. We are not talking about sane, rational people.. The bridge from viewing to creating is not a big one! I mean, I'm sure there's some model or actress.. or just any other person in particular out there you'd love to have over for a few 'personal pictures' right? You don't/can't because obviously, there's some reason why that person is unattainable.. You couldn't force them to take off their coat, let alone strip.. Why? Because they're an adult, and you aren't a hypnotist. When it comes to a pedophile and children however.. A lot of them are very trusting, they're easily tricked and influenced by an adult, and the pedophile has a mental disorder which is literally overriding all other common sense. If you can find a reason why child pornography would be used for a reason OTHER than enjoyment by a pedophile, I'd feel you'd have a stronger case as far as keeping it from censorship..
I don't propose it'll stop child abuse entirely, but the fact is.. By getting these freaks off the streets, punishing them for their crimes, and then putting them on treatment for their illness while alerting those around them.. I'd bet my life that more children will be saved. This is called a pre-emptive strike against child abusers. This is the worst kind of crime and does not need any type of protecting. I know that one day if you do have children you'll understand.
I don't want to hide the world from anything, I want the pedophiles to get treatment so they don't commit atrocities against young children. Which in my opinion can be a fate worse than death, having to live with that garbage for the rest of your life. I also don't believe for one second that it's harder to catch them in the real world. You go ask a cop that's on a taskforce specifically made for combatting this sort of thing, they'll tell you the internet has made it HARDER to get these people since they can trade it so anonymously. It's generally easier to follow local leads on this sort of thing, nail everyone you can and then flip them so you can find the sources and nail them harder. When you do it online it's hard to find the source. In any case, it's better to deal with this things by erradicating every trace of it you can, and the only reason you can give me why not to erradicate it is because of your all or nothing statement that doesn't
Of course not! However, a knife serves multiple purposes, from the cook to the surgeon to the average household. Child porn really does not serve any purpose does it? To a psyche evaluating a pedophile perhaps, but obviously someone like that is different from the weirdos and would have an acceptable reason to view, to an extent at least. I never said we should go out and ban Freenet because people can use it to transfer porn, for the same reason I don't want gimp, xview, paint, or cameras to be banned. This is not an all or nothing situation, we as a society are generally capable of banning one thing without a million others. What I will give you though, is that politicians sometimes try to disguise other motives by saying please think of the children. We have to stop these kinds of politicians by not voting (or voting) for them, making their true motives known, and of course by mailing the hell out of them with complaints and signed petitions.
I really feel that the investigations into these things should be handled case by case rather than by the book. I mean seriously, in real life if you buy a laptop for 25% off and it turns out to be stolen property the cops don't lock you up on the spot. On the other hand, if they have reason to believe you knew it was stolen and bought it anyway, you go to jail. I believe that the same policy should be applied to child pornography cases. Obviously if you've stumbled on five or six ads that show hints of child porn, a webpage that wasn't what it should have been, or if you downloaded a cheerleaderxxx file that ended up not being what you thought.. It shouldn't be hard for authorities to figure this out, especially if they're a task force specifically targeting these types of offenses.
It's been a while since I've seen rotten.com type stuff, but I'll agree that it doesn't make them evil. However! It's much different to see something only slightly more graphic than I can see in an 'R' rated movie compared to child porn. These things might be in the same league, both CAN be horrible atrocities, but you have to analyze closer since as I said it should NOT be an all or nothing ban/censorship. If you or I or anyone else does a search for death/murder/whatever on google and then view the results that does not mean that we are getting any sort of graitification from it. It also does not imply that we want people to be hurt, to be killed, or anything of the sort.. It doesn't even mean that the person searching even LIKES what they're viewing anyway. As I said before even, someone that stumbles upon child pornography should not be instantly persecuted or prosecuted. If someone has been abused as a child and then goes on google or newsgroups to search for 'child abuse' and sees pictures of abused people, that person has a legitimate excuse for viewing in my opinion.. An excuse that should be easily uncovered by anyone doing a full investigation which includes logging and interviews.
A second point I wanted to make about that comment was just about the support factor, since I know I'd be called on it later if I didn'
were == where
her == here
It just doesnt make since, theres no logic. I mean sure its logical for someone like us to share, but murderers, rapists and thieves are selfish, they are doing these things because they only think about themselves, they want to get off and they dont care about you, me, the kids, or anything else but themselves.
Murderers, rapists, and thieves are seriously messed up, I know.. Their selfishness is exactly what causes them to enjoy popularity. I mean, haven't you ever heard of serial killers and other high profile murderers and such trying to get caught so they can have the fame? To us, it's sick and disgusting, but to them it truly is their work.. They do want to be appreciated for it whether you think so or not.
But I'll give you the benefit of a doubt, if you can find some evidence proving that some pedophiles actually believe its not harmful to the children which they are abusing, then we can come back to this debate.
Ever hear of NAMBLA? I'm serious, just because you and I see it as an evil disgusting thing, it can seem very normal to a person who's screwed up in the head..
Perhaps I'm missing something in this debate though.. I'm just against both the provider and the viewer of this kind of trash.. I don't want Freenet to die or anything, I'm just arguing that one point.