GNAA suspected in death of Rob Levin GNAA suspected in death of Rob Levin
Mad Virii (GNAP) Washington, DC - In a baffling move that sent
shockwaves throughout the anuses of gay niggers everywhere, federal officials
investigating the death of Freenode administrator and posterboy Rob Levin have
recently announced clues that seem to assign blame towards the Gay Nigger
Association of America.
An announcement of his death was transmitted as a Global Notice
across the Freenode network, on September 17 at 06:18 JST:
06:18 -christel(i=christel@freenode/staff/gentoo.christe l)- [Global Notice] On the 12th September
Rob Levin, known to many as Freenode's lilo, was hit by a car while riding
his bike. He suffered head injuries and passed away in hospital on the 16th.
For more information please visit #freenode-announce
"It seems that the bike was impacted by a large pink bus in the shape of a
hypodermic phallus," an inside source stated. "Levin's carcass was penetrated
anally by the hood ornament, and it took a team of coroners to remove the
several gallons of what could only be described as seminal fluid from the
victim."
The GNAA reaction was astonishing. "We have stuck alot of things up Rob
Levin's ass in our time, but we maintain innocence," stated GNAA president
timecop, fingers crossed."Even when driving a bus up some nigger's ass was
fashionable, the GNAA never took part in it."
Later on at the Rob Levin's Death after-party, GNAA member madvirii
exclaimed "OH LAWD IZ DAT SUM DEAD FREENODE ADMIN?" and there was liberal
lolling.
About Freenode:
Leaderless.
About GNAA: GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first
organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one
common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.
If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy
all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member. GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing
GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of
America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join
today!
Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAAFirst Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website.
Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up
today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit
links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on
your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.
If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network.
The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to
irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.
The example you gave is completely inane. The Tauren in the game are depicted as a proud and honorable race of people(who yes do share a lot of similarities with Native Americans).
Even "positive" racism (if one can call being depicted as an eco-terroristic pagan cow-like animal as something positive) can be damaging, as they set unrealistic standards for the group that members are expected to live up to, thereby setting them up for a lifetime of disappointment and low self-esteem.
sensitism is almost MORE damaging than people who are actually racist.
So according to you, being sensitive is worse than racism. You heard it here first, folks.
You definitely need to take this as what it is - a GAME.
Yeah - a racist game, that 1.5 million impressionable young people are playing. If that isn't a template for hate then I don't know what is.
Forget the players; WoW itself is racist. From the moment you start the game you are racially segregated from the "enemy", who the NPCs constantly defame with derogatory and insensitive language ("Those filthy humans are at it again!", "The night elves are a bunch of tree-hugging scum", and so on). Now, you might be thinking, "But that's not real racism - it's just pretend! There are no "night elves" or "humans" in real life, so what harm could there be?" Besides the fact that such "pretend" racism has been scientifically demonstrated to provide a template for hate against actual ethnic groups, there are in fact plenty of examples of subtle (and not so subtle) slings against real minorities. Take the Tauren race, for example, which is a gross stereotype of native americans, complete with NPCs with such names as "Chief Runningbull" and "Brave Leapingdeer". As if the native peoples of this land haven't had enough to deal with already, now they must bear being mocked and compared to cattle in "World of Warcraft" (Or "World of Racism" as it should be called). Then there's the goblins, a race of money-grubbing, hook-nosed midgets, who have obviously been modeled after the stereotypical covetous Jew. 6 million didn't die in the Holocaust for Blizzard to get away with such disgusting racism.
There are infinitely many more examples of the blatant racist overtones that appear in this game, but I think my point has been made. Next time, before you go complaining about people acting "racist" in this game, remember that the game itself was made by and for racists. Blizzard should be ashamed, and so should you for playing it.
Um, no. Just because the brain "sends out waves" (so does Pluto when you think about it) doesn't mean anyone else's brain is able to read them. The only thing this proves is that we can build a machine that can read brainwaves in a primitave fashion when placed atop someone's head.
I hope you're not implying that the only way to fund software is by restricting people with draconian copyright measures. I think the OSS model has proven that is completely unnecessary.
Why does all-powerful God have to use a middleman like Jesus to do this? Surely it is within his power to instantly set everyone free from "sin" or whatever it is that he hates so much. In other words, why didn't he create humans already free from these laws? If your answer is that he did with Adam and Eve, who then fell into sin, that makes no sense. If you're free from the laws of sin and death it's impossible to sin. Right? Which really raises the question: once you get to heaven, can you do whatever you want, like disobey God or fornicate? If you can't, then you no longe r have free will. But if you can, it really makes one wonder what all the fuss is about morality on Earth, since once you get to heaven you can do all sorts of immoral things with impunity.
God does think people are worthless and evil. It's called "original sin". You're de facto evil and worthless. When you're "saved" by Jesus and die, God doesn't look at your character and say "he's a nice person, I think he belongs in heaven". Instead, Jesus takes the blame for your foul deeds and you get to go to heaven even though you don't deserve it. Doesn't that feel great? Um, no. I don't want someone else taking the blame for my actions. If God really loved people he wouldn't need such a ridiculous gimmick. Only an intolerant jerk would create a place of torture in the first place. There's no crime that would warrent such brutality. Even if humans were capable of monstrosities of that kind, even Jesus knows you don't answer a misdeed with another misdeed.
A divine tyrant is still a tyrant, and deserves none of our praise or admiration. If you lived in North Korea, would you worship Kim Jong-il simply because he is in charge and demands it? There's absolutely nothing praiseworthy about tyranny, and a good God would never allow people to be tortured forever simply because they disobeyed him or thought differently. Or, at the very least, at least God could have the kindness to not allow the creation of people he knows in his omniscient brain are bound for eternal hell. What kind of evil is that? He should have had an abortion!
This argument works both ways. If we can't criticize your God, please tell us how you are in a position to praise him? Rational, caring people see a lot of problems with the alleged goodnes of your deity. If you lived in the same neighborhood with someone who acted like your God you'd probably think he was a huge asshole. Think about it.
Why do you worship someone who feels you are inherently worthless treats you worse than dirt until you appease his angry vanity and beg for forgivness for "crimes" caused by a human nature that he obviously designed? I see nothing of positive value in such a relationship. There is no love in a relationship built on substitutionary forgiveness, fear and subservience. I'm sorry you feel so lonely but turning to barbaric mythologies isn't the answer. You really need to find some friends in the here and now who will care for you, and get off of being dependent on superstition. Please, think of yourself. You're not a second class citizen in the universe.
It's not wrong to make a living as long as you're ethical about it. Phishing or spamming may be a way to make a living but it's not ethical. And neither is suing your fans or restricting the sharing of published information such as music. And before someone goes "blah blah blah, how will there be an incentive without all the $$$ that comes from restricting people", just remember that the entire Renaissance got along just fine without copyright laws.
Oh, the GPL is a completely different matter. It's the good kind of license; people shouldn't illegally break that license because it promotes good values, unlike those other, evil licenses.
Yes, that's exactly what it is. Licenses, like laws, can be very good or very bad, depending on their intention. Fighting against bad laws doesn't mean that you're opposed to laws in general. The same can be said about licenses.
If you feel, as I do, that being denied of the right to write a bad review is absurd, then there's an even better solution to flagrantly breaking the license -- just don't use it!
This is sound advice - "just stay away from such licenses" - but you and I know how easy it is to just click through a typical license agreement. Very few people actually read them. What if you accepted the license to some benign-looking software only to discover later that they owned your firstborn child? (maybe not that extreme, but you get my drift) Some kinds of licenses are bad for society and should be illegal. Nobody, careless or otherwise, should be able to just click-away their freedom. The McAfee license is an example of this. Their license in effect violates the 1st Amendement to the constitution.
Your sarcasm falls short because the GPL is a completely different matter. First, you do not have to accept the GPL to use GPLed software, unlike the licesnes I was referring to. The only time you have to accept the GPL is if you distribute the software. The only point of the GPL is to encourage software freedom despite the copyright law. If copyright didn't exist the GPL would be irrelevent. It is also important to take into consideration the goals of the GPL vs a typical software license. It seems to me that what the GPL tries to do is a much nobler goal than is the case with your typical EULA (which the GPL isn't - it's merely a distribution clause), which is to lure you into agreeing to betray your neighbor by denying him/her a copy, or to not write a negative review of the software, and so on.
Shrink-wrapped "by breaking this seal" license agreements are the bullshit tactic of the decade. They write all sorts of looney right-waiving illegal garbage into them, like clauses that forbid you from writing negative reviews of their products (McAfee did this). If you think license "agreements" have any moral bearing on the use of the information they proport to "protect," then you're crazy.
You're absolutely right. Freedom is more fundamental than profit, and Cooperation is more important than copyright. Copyright enthusiasts will probably bitch and moan here about "stealing" and the fate of creativity, but the facts are that people were creative long before there was copyright, and they'll continue to be creative after it's gone. And for those who've been suckered into the idea that copying equals theft, relax. If using information without paying for it is theft, then all the people who've ever watched a DVD or played computer games at their neighbor's house instead of buying their own copy are just as guilty of theft as the software "pirates" - and that likely includes most everybody. Just watch, though - with the advent of nanotechnology soon companies will be incorporating DRM into everyone's brain, and you'll have to pay everytime you want to watch anything. Go ahead and laugh, but you know they'd do it given half a chance and the technology.
I assume by shape scientists mean the curvature of the space-time topology, outside of which nothing exists. Kinda like a quake map, where you turn off clipping and go outside of it nothing exists but you can still say what the map is "shaped" like.
The problem is, now it simply makes publishers rich. It doesn't seem to help the public overall, in fact it seems to hurt it. Alas, the economic argument for copyright probably won't be settled for a while, but I can think of several ways to encourage creativity while not resorting to these draconian measures. In the case of software, for instance, why not put a tax on all hardware sold in the country to fund software development? That way, the public's freedoms aren't restricted, and we are guaranteed funds to help in the creation of more software. It may not be necessary to require people to pay much at all - they may very well start doing it on their own accord. After all, tipping at restaurants is voluntary, but most people do it. Who says, for instance, that you couldn't fund music that way? If you had a p2p program that had a button when you were downloading songs that said "click here to give one dollar to the author," wouldn't you click it? Maybe you'd decide to give them two dollars, which is more than musicians get from a single CD sale. In any case, it's clear that copyright in its current form is increasingly becoming a thorn in the side of society and needs to be addressed. Freedom and creativity should be given a chance to coexist peacefully together.
Slashdot Mirror
GNAA suspected in death of Rob Levin
Mad Virii (GNAP) Washington, DC - In a baffling move that sent shockwaves throughout the anuses of gay niggers everywhere, federal officials investigating the death of Freenode administrator and posterboy Rob Levin have recently announced clues that seem to assign blame towards the Gay Nigger Association of America.
An announcement of his death was transmitted as a Global Notice across the Freenode network, on September 17 at 06:18 JST:
06:18 -christel(i=christel@freenode/staff/gentoo.christe l)- [Global Notice] On the 12th September Rob Levin, known to many as Freenode's lilo, was hit by a car while riding his bike. He suffered head injuries and passed away in hospital on the 16th. For more information please visit #freenode-announce
"It seems that the bike was impacted by a large pink bus in the shape of a hypodermic phallus," an inside source stated. "Levin's carcass was penetrated anally by the hood ornament, and it took a team of coroners to remove the several gallons of what could only be described as seminal fluid from the victim."
The GNAA reaction was astonishing. "We have stuck alot of things up Rob Levin's ass in our time, but we maintain innocence," stated GNAA president timecop, fingers crossed."Even when driving a bus up some nigger's ass was fashionable, the GNAA never took part in it."
Later on at the Rob Levin's Death after-party, GNAA member madvirii exclaimed "OH LAWD IZ DAT SUM DEAD FREENODE ADMIN?" and there was liberal lolling.
About Freenode:
Leaderless.
About GNAA:
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.
Are you GAY ?
Are you a NIGGER ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER ?
If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!
Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.
If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.
If you have mod points a
The example you gave is completely inane. The Tauren in the game are depicted as a proud and honorable race of people(who yes do share a lot of similarities with Native Americans).
Even "positive" racism (if one can call being depicted as an eco-terroristic pagan cow-like animal as something positive) can be damaging, as they set unrealistic standards for the group that members are expected to live up to, thereby setting them up for a lifetime of disappointment and low self-esteem.
sensitism is almost MORE damaging than people who are actually racist.
So according to you, being sensitive is worse than racism. You heard it here first, folks.
You definitely need to take this as what it is - a GAME. Yeah - a racist game, that 1.5 million impressionable young people are playing. If that isn't a template for hate then I don't know what is.
Forget the players; WoW itself is racist. From the moment you start the game you are racially segregated from the "enemy", who the NPCs constantly defame with derogatory and insensitive language ("Those filthy humans are at it again!", "The night elves are a bunch of tree-hugging scum", and so on). Now, you might be thinking, "But that's not real racism - it's just pretend! There are no "night elves" or "humans" in real life, so what harm could there be?" Besides the fact that such "pretend" racism has been scientifically demonstrated to provide a template for hate against actual ethnic groups, there are in fact plenty of examples of subtle (and not so subtle) slings against real minorities. Take the Tauren race, for example, which is a gross stereotype of native americans, complete with NPCs with such names as "Chief Runningbull" and "Brave Leapingdeer". As if the native peoples of this land haven't had enough to deal with already, now they must bear being mocked and compared to cattle in "World of Warcraft" (Or "World of Racism" as it should be called). Then there's the goblins, a race of money-grubbing, hook-nosed midgets, who have obviously been modeled after the stereotypical covetous Jew. 6 million didn't die in the Holocaust for Blizzard to get away with such disgusting racism.
There are infinitely many more examples of the blatant racist overtones that appear in this game, but I think my point has been made. Next time, before you go complaining about people acting "racist" in this game, remember that the game itself was made by and for racists. Blizzard should be ashamed, and so should you for playing it.
Um, no. Just because the brain "sends out waves" (so does Pluto when you think about it) doesn't mean anyone else's brain is able to read them. The only thing this proves is that we can build a machine that can read brainwaves in a primitave fashion when placed atop someone's head.
propz 2 GNAA
I hope you're not implying that the only way to fund software is by restricting people with draconian copyright measures. I think the OSS model has proven that is completely unnecessary.
Why does all-powerful God have to use a middleman like Jesus to do this? Surely it is within his power to instantly set everyone free from "sin" or whatever it is that he hates so much. In other words, why didn't he create humans already free from these laws? If your answer is that he did with Adam and Eve, who then fell into sin, that makes no sense. If you're free from the laws of sin and death it's impossible to sin. Right? Which really raises the question: once you get to heaven, can you do whatever you want, like disobey God or fornicate? If you can't, then you no longe r have free will. But if you can, it really makes one wonder what all the fuss is about morality on Earth, since once you get to heaven you can do all sorts of immoral things with impunity.
God does think people are worthless and evil. It's called "original sin". You're de facto evil and worthless. When you're "saved" by Jesus and die, God doesn't look at your character and say "he's a nice person, I think he belongs in heaven". Instead, Jesus takes the blame for your foul deeds and you get to go to heaven even though you don't deserve it. Doesn't that feel great? Um, no. I don't want someone else taking the blame for my actions. If God really loved people he wouldn't need such a ridiculous gimmick. Only an intolerant jerk would create a place of torture in the first place. There's no crime that would warrent such brutality. Even if humans were capable of monstrosities of that kind, even Jesus knows you don't answer a misdeed with another misdeed.
A divine tyrant is still a tyrant, and deserves none of our praise or admiration. If you lived in North Korea, would you worship Kim Jong-il simply because he is in charge and demands it? There's absolutely nothing praiseworthy about tyranny, and a good God would never allow people to be tortured forever simply because they disobeyed him or thought differently. Or, at the very least, at least God could have the kindness to not allow the creation of people he knows in his omniscient brain are bound for eternal hell. What kind of evil is that? He should have had an abortion!
This argument works both ways. If we can't criticize your God, please tell us how you are in a position to praise him? Rational, caring people see a lot of problems with the alleged goodnes of your deity. If you lived in the same neighborhood with someone who acted like your God you'd probably think he was a huge asshole. Think about it.
Why do you worship someone who feels you are inherently worthless treats you worse than dirt until you appease his angry vanity and beg for forgivness for "crimes" caused by a human nature that he obviously designed? I see nothing of positive value in such a relationship. There is no love in a relationship built on substitutionary forgiveness, fear and subservience. I'm sorry you feel so lonely but turning to barbaric mythologies isn't the answer. You really need to find some friends in the here and now who will care for you, and get off of being dependent on superstition. Please, think of yourself. You're not a second class citizen in the universe.
read it and weep!
No, no... you don't understand - marriage is the problem.
Huhuhuhuh
It's not wrong to make a living as long as you're ethical about it. Phishing or spamming may be a way to make a living but it's not ethical. And neither is suing your fans or restricting the sharing of published information such as music. And before someone goes "blah blah blah, how will there be an incentive without all the $$$ that comes from restricting people", just remember that the entire Renaissance got along just fine without copyright laws.
Whoa, site's getting slow. Anyway, here's a mirror
Oh, the GPL is a completely different matter. It's the good kind of license; people shouldn't illegally break that license because it promotes good values, unlike those other, evil licenses.
Yes, that's exactly what it is. Licenses, like laws, can be very good or very bad, depending on their intention. Fighting against bad laws doesn't mean that you're opposed to laws in general. The same can be said about licenses.
If you feel, as I do, that being denied of the right to write a bad review is absurd, then there's an even better solution to flagrantly breaking the license -- just don't use it!
This is sound advice - "just stay away from such licenses" - but you and I know how easy it is to just click through a typical license agreement. Very few people actually read them. What if you accepted the license to some benign-looking software only to discover later that they owned your firstborn child? (maybe not that extreme, but you get my drift) Some kinds of licenses are bad for society and should be illegal. Nobody, careless or otherwise, should be able to just click-away their freedom. The McAfee license is an example of this. Their license in effect violates the 1st Amendement to the constitution.
Your sarcasm falls short because the GPL is a completely different matter. First, you do not have to accept the GPL to use GPLed software, unlike the licesnes I was referring to. The only time you have to accept the GPL is if you distribute the software. The only point of the GPL is to encourage software freedom despite the copyright law. If copyright didn't exist the GPL would be irrelevent. It is also important to take into consideration the goals of the GPL vs a typical software license. It seems to me that what the GPL tries to do is a much nobler goal than is the case with your typical EULA (which the GPL isn't - it's merely a distribution clause), which is to lure you into agreeing to betray your neighbor by denying him/her a copy, or to not write a negative review of the software, and so on.
Shrink-wrapped "by breaking this seal" license agreements are the bullshit tactic of the decade. They write all sorts of looney right-waiving illegal garbage into them, like clauses that forbid you from writing negative reviews of their products (McAfee did this). If you think license "agreements" have any moral bearing on the use of the information they proport to "protect," then you're crazy.
You're absolutely right. Freedom is more fundamental than profit, and Cooperation is more important than copyright. Copyright enthusiasts will probably bitch and moan here about "stealing" and the fate of creativity, but the facts are that people were creative long before there was copyright, and they'll continue to be creative after it's gone. And for those who've been suckered into the idea that copying equals theft, relax. If using information without paying for it is theft, then all the people who've ever watched a DVD or played computer games at their neighbor's house instead of buying their own copy are just as guilty of theft as the software "pirates" - and that likely includes most everybody. Just watch, though - with the advent of nanotechnology soon companies will be incorporating DRM into everyone's brain, and you'll have to pay everytime you want to watch anything. Go ahead and laugh, but you know they'd do it given half a chance and the technology.
Not mono-related, but fun to look at nonetheless
what Bill Gates doesn't want you to know about Windows
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Does this include watching episodes of the Simpsons I downloaded off BitTorrent?
I assume by shape scientists mean the curvature of the space-time topology, outside of which nothing exists. Kinda like a quake map, where you turn off clipping and go outside of it nothing exists but you can still say what the map is "shaped" like.
The problem is, now it simply makes publishers rich. It doesn't seem to help the public overall, in fact it seems to hurt it. Alas, the economic argument for copyright probably won't be settled for a while, but I can think of several ways to encourage creativity while not resorting to these draconian measures. In the case of software, for instance, why not put a tax on all hardware sold in the country to fund software development? That way, the public's freedoms aren't restricted, and we are guaranteed funds to help in the creation of more software. It may not be necessary to require people to pay much at all - they may very well start doing it on their own accord. After all, tipping at restaurants is voluntary, but most people do it. Who says, for instance, that you couldn't fund music that way? If you had a p2p program that had a button when you were downloading songs that said "click here to give one dollar to the author," wouldn't you click it? Maybe you'd decide to give them two dollars, which is more than musicians get from a single CD sale. In any case, it's clear that copyright in its current form is increasingly becoming a thorn in the side of society and needs to be addressed. Freedom and creativity should be given a chance to coexist peacefully together.
Who is Bruce Sterling?
Many more Bruce Sterling Interviews