The Taliban murdered people who didn't toe the puritanical line. That's an entirely different ballgame.
So it's okay to punish people and criminalize them if they don't adhere to the puritanical ideals of one group as long as they stop short of murder?
So it's totally okay to give someone 50 lashes in the public square for cheating on their husband, as long as they aren't killed and it's okay to fine or imprison someone for sodomy? Great.
That everyone on my block is a whitebread Joe-Christian Jesus-Juicer that spends their weekends prostelatizing across town and has little pink flamingos in their front yard and say "gosh darn" when they're angry is irrelevant to who I'm fucking, how I'm fucking them or what kind of videos of other people fucking I'm watching in my own home.
The entire point of "community standards" for something that is not accessible to children is ridiculous.
Well, any kind of sex that isn't for procreation, I guess. Which would probably mean that all sex, sexual acts and sexual content intended to entertain rather than procreate is deviant and, thus, illegal in this new christian government.
Isn't this the sort of thing the Taliban did - only to a more restrictive degree?
I guess since we've won the "war on terror", it's we can finally start to devote resources to fighting the war on free speech, expression and personal liberties.
It doesn't make sense to say "let the market decide" when there is no limit to the supply. I mean, when you download a track, you're not reducing the quantity of available tracks out there in the world. So regardless of the DEMAND, the supply (and thus the price) is the same. Any notion otherwise is an artificial limitation - exploiting popularity by saying "this band is more popular and, thus, you should pay $1.50 per song".
Well, the difference is that it's possible to sit through an episode of Vampire Slayer. It's not possible to sit through and episode of Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman, Hulk, etc.
I mean, seriously, have you ever *tried* to watch a whole episode? It's as painful as trying to watch an episode of Night Rider. Bad acting, bad sets, bad special effects, bad costumes, bad plot and ugly people. Just incredibly lame. It's like until some time in the late 1970s, people didn't really even know how to act unless they were overly dramatic and uninteresting.
The only good Star Trek was TNG - and that's only in comparison to the other Star Trek spinoffs. Otherwise, comparing Star Trek series is like comparing the color of different shits. Yes, there are slight differences, but they're all still steaming turds.
It was already going hill and that's why John Rhys Davies left. He wanted Sliders to continue to be good science fiction and venture into more solid, hard science fiction whereas the rest of the powers that be wanted the show to be more light and fluffy and typical crap that qualifies, these days, as scifi. So, he left.
I've always liked him, but after that decision, I gained a lot of respect for him as a professional. And the fact that they couldn't keep a solid cast stringed together afterward just shows how important he actually was to the series. I mean, every week it was a different person out of the cast and another in. Including the two O'Connell brothers.
But at least the show had the super hot military chick. Yum.
It's okay to do business in communist China where they have plenty of nukes and seem quite willing to go nuts on us at any moment and we decry their terrible human rights record. But it's not alright to do business in communist Cuba where they couldn't realistically harm a fly without foreign help.
And yeah, the same thing is often done in the states that happened in China (which doesn't justify what happened in China as Yahoo! should have some base set of ethics and morals for their company to run by and those shouldn't be given up just because it's the way things are in a certain region) - but the difference is that the Chinese are godless communists. It's okay of an (all but officially) Christian Republic democracy does so.
Remember, only a country that pledges their allegiance to a flag and god can be trusted with safely ignoring your freedom!
Greatest American Hero, Lois & Clark, Batman, Adventures of Superman, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Wonder Woman, Tales from the Crypt, Xena, Lost and Twilight Zone have nothing to do with science fiction. Not even in the most remote and lax sense of the word or genre. Since when is adventure, horror or comedy science fiction? Vampires are not scifi. Superheros in tights are not scifi. Xena and Hercules are not scifi characters or stories. Shows with a unique twist at the end (Twilight Zone, Crypt) are not scifi - hell, we usually call things that have unexpected twists at the end MYSTERIES.
And how is 3rd rock from the Sun or My Favorite Martian a scifi show? They're comedies that just happen to have an alien there. The alien/scifi part is almost entirely non-existant. ALF is more scifi than either of those two.
And considering the crap they have on here (Wonderwoman, but no Hulk?!) they couldn't at least be bothered to include Farscape, Lexx or First Wave?!
And yes, it also pisses me off when the Sci-Fi channel has Chucky or Wishmaster on. What do those have to do with sci-fi? Those are horror flicks. And bad ones at that.
From the comments I've heard people make in the last month, it doesn't matter what a company does in another country - (even if the company is American) - as long as it's legal or is required, demanded, condoned by the government of the country they are doing it in.
In other words, if it's legal to have seven year old kids sewing shoes for your company to sell, locked in a basement with no ventilation or breaks - that's fine. If it's required that you turn over documents and inform on every employee you have and report the gay employees and non-(insert religion here) employees for government extermination - fine. If it means keeping tabs on office romances so that adulterers (women only of course) can be stoned to death, then so be it! It's just the cost of doing business and who are we to judge whether stoning a woman to death for cheating or executing non-believers or putting toddlers to work in a sweatshop is wrong?! It's called moral and ethical relativism and it rules the day now. Right or wrong only applies in the context of what others say is right or wrong in your specific part of the world and that's that.
But don't take my word for it. Just search for past comments from people on slashdot related to the Yahoo! incident in China.
Exactly. Blogging is writing personal crap that nobody (or less than a few) people in the entire world could possibly give a shit about in a public forum and hoping to boost your ego by having a lot of people read it like they gave a fuck, when it would all be best off written in a personal journal on your computer and never put on the web in the first place.
Just because a thought or a problem or complaint is in your head doesn't mean it deserves a web page.
So excuse the fuck out of me. 18 year old girls instead of 12 year olds.
It's still just a 3D chat room for people who like to spend time dressing up their characters and playing house. And no, I haven't played it. And yes, I've seen plenty of video of it and all the articles over the last couple of years.
It doesn't even seem to have any actual gameplay, other than "making stuff" and then selling it to other people ingame. *yawn*.
Of course I don't think that. I just think that ugly people should be responsible enough to breed. Rather than cosmetically hiding their ugliness so that they can sucker a partner into procreating with them and continuing the chain of ugly people.
Frankly, why would you want to produce ugly children in a world where it's as detrimental to be ugly as it is to have any other serious affliction, disability or malady?
The problem with Second Life's business model is that there are only so many twelve year old girls with computers, so your potential for growth is limited by that market - unless you can some how convince older people and boys to get off dressing up virtual dolls and chatting in a 3D AOL environment.
I think this is pretty cool, as long as it isn't used for cosmetic reasons (reconstructive is another thing altogether).
Actually, let me clarify - I don't have a problem with cosmetic surgery whatsoever - as long as people who have cosmetic (non-reconstructive) surgery don't have children.
Nobody wants to be with an ugly person. It's a biological and evolutionary thing. It's wrong to take an ugly person and cosmetically make them beautiful so that someone will procreate with them in the long run, continuing to propagate bad genetic material in the species. It's dishonest and dangerous to society.
I don't have anything against ugly people. I'm a very ugly person myself. It's not like I think we should be executed or anything. I just don't think we should breed.
I just skip the whole ordeal and buy my music from mp3search.ru for a dollar an album. No DRM. High quality MP3s. Huge selection. Works on all my hardware. Even for music I already owned, it was cheaper to go through that place than waste my time popping the disks in and out of my drive and waiting for the songs to burn.
Sure, nobody involved in the making, promoting or distribution of the music gets a dime of it, but what the fuck do I care? The pushers of music don't get a fuck about me except as something to suck cash from. So why should I give a shit about them? And, luckily, I don't.
Maybe I'll go to hell for it. I don't really care. I still buy CDs from really good indie bands who deserve it. But you're fucked if you think I'm going to stick $16 in the hands of some assholes still profiting off of music from an artist dead long ago.
Most bands really worth thinking about don't play christian (insert today's popular music genre here). Christian rock is offensive in the same way that rock music in the 60s praising the government and encouraging young men to go die for their country would be wrong. The same way rapping about how wonder "the white man" is would be. It goes against everything these forms of music stand for in the first place.
Hah. Unless I'm in the Rolling Stones, I'm probably having a hard enough time negotiating a contract that allows me to own a home and consider retiring someday (or even just put food on my plate), but I'm going to waste my bargaining power (what little there may be unless, again, I'm the biggest act around) on making sure the few legitimate users out there who need to circumvent copy protection can do so?
Slashdot Mirror
The Taliban murdered people who didn't toe the puritanical line. That's an entirely different ballgame.
So it's okay to punish people and criminalize them if they don't adhere to the puritanical ideals of one group as long as they stop short of murder?
So it's totally okay to give someone 50 lashes in the public square for cheating on their husband, as long as they aren't killed and it's okay to fine or imprison someone for sodomy? Great.
Who cares what the community standards are?
That everyone on my block is a whitebread Joe-Christian Jesus-Juicer that spends their weekends prostelatizing across town and has little pink flamingos in their front yard and say "gosh darn" when they're angry is irrelevant to who I'm fucking, how I'm fucking them or what kind of videos of other people fucking I'm watching in my own home.
The entire point of "community standards" for something that is not accessible to children is ridiculous.
Because Rob Malda is a tyrant and a thief.
Well, any kind of sex that isn't for procreation, I guess. Which would probably mean that all sex, sexual acts and sexual content intended to entertain rather than procreate is deviant and, thus, illegal in this new christian government.
Isn't this the sort of thing the Taliban did - only to a more restrictive degree?
I guess since we've won the "war on terror", it's we can finally start to devote resources to fighting the war on free speech, expression and personal liberties.
It doesn't make sense to say "let the market decide" when there is no limit to the supply. I mean, when you download a track, you're not reducing the quantity of available tracks out there in the world. So regardless of the DEMAND, the supply (and thus the price) is the same. Any notion otherwise is an artificial limitation - exploiting popularity by saying "this band is more popular and, thus, you should pay $1.50 per song".
Star Trek: Terms of Service?!
Well, the difference is that it's possible to sit through an episode of Vampire Slayer. It's not possible to sit through and episode of Wonder Woman, Batman, Superman, Hulk, etc.
I mean, seriously, have you ever *tried* to watch a whole episode? It's as painful as trying to watch an episode of Night Rider. Bad acting, bad sets, bad special effects, bad costumes, bad plot and ugly people. Just incredibly lame. It's like until some time in the late 1970s, people didn't really even know how to act unless they were overly dramatic and uninteresting.
The only good Star Trek was TNG - and that's only in comparison to the other Star Trek spinoffs. Otherwise, comparing Star Trek series is like comparing the color of different shits. Yes, there are slight differences, but they're all still steaming turds.
It was already going hill and that's why John Rhys Davies left. He wanted Sliders to continue to be good science fiction and venture into more solid, hard science fiction whereas the rest of the powers that be wanted the show to be more light and fluffy and typical crap that qualifies, these days, as scifi. So, he left.
I've always liked him, but after that decision, I gained a lot of respect for him as a professional. And the fact that they couldn't keep a solid cast stringed together afterward just shows how important he actually was to the series. I mean, every week it was a different person out of the cast and another in. Including the two O'Connell brothers.
But at least the show had the super hot military chick. Yum.
Actually, what I don't understand is this:
It's okay to do business in communist China where they have plenty of nukes and seem quite willing to go nuts on us at any moment and we decry their terrible human rights record. But it's not alright to do business in communist Cuba where they couldn't realistically harm a fly without foreign help.
And yeah, the same thing is often done in the states that happened in China (which doesn't justify what happened in China as Yahoo! should have some base set of ethics and morals for their company to run by and those shouldn't be given up just because it's the way things are in a certain region) - but the difference is that the Chinese are godless communists. It's okay of an (all but officially) Christian Republic democracy does so.
Remember, only a country that pledges their allegiance to a flag and god can be trusted with safely ignoring your freedom!
Greatest American Hero, Lois & Clark, Batman, Adventures of Superman, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Wonder Woman, Tales from the Crypt, Xena, Lost and Twilight Zone have nothing to do with science fiction. Not even in the most remote and lax sense of the word or genre. Since when is adventure, horror or comedy science fiction? Vampires are not scifi. Superheros in tights are not scifi. Xena and Hercules are not scifi characters or stories. Shows with a unique twist at the end (Twilight Zone, Crypt) are not scifi - hell, we usually call things that have unexpected twists at the end MYSTERIES.
And how is 3rd rock from the Sun or My Favorite Martian a scifi show? They're comedies that just happen to have an alien there. The alien/scifi part is almost entirely non-existant. ALF is more scifi than either of those two.
And considering the crap they have on here (Wonderwoman, but no Hulk?!) they couldn't at least be bothered to include Farscape, Lexx or First Wave?!
And yes, it also pisses me off when the Sci-Fi channel has Chucky or Wishmaster on. What do those have to do with sci-fi? Those are horror flicks. And bad ones at that.
PSP already has worms.
From the comments I've heard people make in the last month, it doesn't matter what a company does in another country - (even if the company is American) - as long as it's legal or is required, demanded, condoned by the government of the country they are doing it in.
In other words, if it's legal to have seven year old kids sewing shoes for your company to sell, locked in a basement with no ventilation or breaks - that's fine. If it's required that you turn over documents and inform on every employee you have and report the gay employees and non-(insert religion here) employees for government extermination - fine. If it means keeping tabs on office romances so that adulterers (women only of course) can be stoned to death, then so be it! It's just the cost of doing business and who are we to judge whether stoning a woman to death for cheating or executing non-believers or putting toddlers to work in a sweatshop is wrong?! It's called moral and ethical relativism and it rules the day now. Right or wrong only applies in the context of what others say is right or wrong in your specific part of the world and that's that.
But don't take my word for it. Just search for past comments from people on slashdot related to the Yahoo! incident in China.
Exactly. Blogging is writing personal crap that nobody (or less than a few) people in the entire world could possibly give a shit about in a public forum and hoping to boost your ego by having a lot of people read it like they gave a fuck, when it would all be best off written in a personal journal on your computer and never put on the web in the first place.
Just because a thought or a problem or complaint is in your head doesn't mean it deserves a web page.
a major overhaul of management in June
Should be read as "bonuses for management, layoffs for everyone else".
So excuse the fuck out of me. 18 year old girls instead of 12 year olds.
It's still just a 3D chat room for people who like to spend time dressing up their characters and playing house. And no, I haven't played it. And yes, I've seen plenty of video of it and all the articles over the last couple of years.
It doesn't even seem to have any actual gameplay, other than "making stuff" and then selling it to other people ingame. *yawn*.
Responsible enough not to breed, that is.
Of course I don't think that. I just think that ugly people should be responsible enough to breed. Rather than cosmetically hiding their ugliness so that they can sucker a partner into procreating with them and continuing the chain of ugly people.
Frankly, why would you want to produce ugly children in a world where it's as detrimental to be ugly as it is to have any other serious affliction, disability or malady?
The problem with Second Life's business model is that there are only so many twelve year old girls with computers, so your potential for growth is limited by that market - unless you can some how convince older people and boys to get off dressing up virtual dolls and chatting in a 3D AOL environment.
I think this is pretty cool, as long as it isn't used for cosmetic reasons (reconstructive is another thing altogether).
Actually, let me clarify - I don't have a problem with cosmetic surgery whatsoever - as long as people who have cosmetic (non-reconstructive) surgery don't have children.
Nobody wants to be with an ugly person. It's a biological and evolutionary thing. It's wrong to take an ugly person and cosmetically make them beautiful so that someone will procreate with them in the long run, continuing to propagate bad genetic material in the species. It's dishonest and dangerous to society.
I don't have anything against ugly people. I'm a very ugly person myself. It's not like I think we should be executed or anything. I just don't think we should breed.
Because nothing will show Sony the error of their DMCA/DRM ways like skyrocketing sales of their DRM CDs...
I just skip the whole ordeal and buy my music from mp3search.ru for a dollar an album. No DRM. High quality MP3s. Huge selection. Works on all my hardware. Even for music I already owned, it was cheaper to go through that place than waste my time popping the disks in and out of my drive and waiting for the songs to burn.
Sure, nobody involved in the making, promoting or distribution of the music gets a dime of it, but what the fuck do I care? The pushers of music don't get a fuck about me except as something to suck cash from. So why should I give a shit about them? And, luckily, I don't.
Maybe I'll go to hell for it. I don't really care. I still buy CDs from really good indie bands who deserve it. But you're fucked if you think I'm going to stick $16 in the hands of some assholes still profiting off of music from an artist dead long ago.
Most bands really worth thinking about don't play christian (insert today's popular music genre here). Christian rock is offensive in the same way that rock music in the 60s praising the government and encouraging young men to go die for their country would be wrong. The same way rapping about how wonder "the white man" is would be. It goes against everything these forms of music stand for in the first place.
So really, these douchebags can go sit on it.
Hah. Unless I'm in the Rolling Stones, I'm probably having a hard enough time negotiating a contract that allows me to own a home and consider retiring someday (or even just put food on my plate), but I'm going to waste my bargaining power (what little there may be unless, again, I'm the biggest act around) on making sure the few legitimate users out there who need to circumvent copy protection can do so?
Not bloody likely.