You realize you're identifying with "some immature fuckwhippet in the corner disrupting the conversation because he doesn't like how gay/black/straight/white/Muslim/Christian some other participants are", don't you?
No, they're not. They're expressing their belief that dave420 wishes to violate immature fuckwhippet's ability to exercise his right to free speech with the specific aim of silencing opinions dave420 disagrees with. This is worrisome, because it's essentially killing off the soul of the democratic process - the public arguments about various ideas which allow the public to judge them - and keeping only the now-empty shell of elections, which become a circus battle between competing troupes.
The idea of flushing down the toilet the entire Western civilization just so you don't have to tolerate random interruptions from an annoying kid is insane.
It's not really a freedom of speech issue, surely? Reddit is a privately owned and operated forum and it's entirely up to them which users they want to ban and which posts they want to delete.
Reddit being privately owned means Reddit imposing censorship doesn't violate the First Amendment. However, I'm becoming more and more convinced it should. It's not exactly a secret that companies own the US government. When those very same companies claim all places where people gather as their private property, then it seems to me that the de facto rulers get to decide what can and cannot be discussed. That's a problem for functioning democracy.
Maybe he'll realize why it's a horrendously idiotic idea. Probably not though, people who envision draconian laws always do it believing that they'll never become a victim of their own fuckery.
And are usually right too. Draconian laws aren't used to maintain order, they're used to maintain social hierarchy - they're basically tools for the powerful to hide their oppression behind the appearance of law. Where ever you find draconian laws, you find a tyrant. And where ever you find someone pushing for draconian laws, you've found someone wishing to become a tyrant.
Now, what class does "the fourth most-cited law professor in the U.S." probably think he belongs? In his mind is he a lord or is he a serf? That's all there is to this.
Anyone working for a for-profit business with more than 50 employees should be embarrassed if they didn't know what M&A stood for. It means that you're paying no attention to the business climate or the sector your employer is in and it's relative health to its competitors. People like you get blindsided by layoffs
And you don't see any problems in a system that forces employees to keep one eye on the market - and thus off their work - since they're the ones who're carrying the risk?
The countries not participating will see huge economic benefits as other countries lose their industries and jobs and move to the less-regulated counties.
So don't let them. Don't let capital leave the country. Establish a border between participating and non-participating countries and assing a heavy tariff for trade moving across it.
But in general it tends to be the other way around, so the major party has to make their policies more extreme to get the votes of the far-right or far-left coalition partners.
So the government's policy will be a compromise between positions people voted for, rather than dictated solely by the biggest interest group? How's that bad?
They are trying to legitimize a form of global fascism with another sky fairy tale.
Communism. Fascism is inherently a national movement, communism - or socialism in general - international. Furthermore, there's no clear charismatic leader but faceless bureaucracy associated with this deal, although I suppose that's also compatible with the Illuminati. Then there's the religious possibilities to consider - which you should had considered beyond a vague reference to "sky fairy" - perhaps the Vatican is trying to cause hardship in hopes people will seek salvation? Or you could simply blame this on lizard men from Regulus trying to de-industrialize the world in preparation for their occupation.
Seriously, put some effort into your conspiracy theories. Don't just post the first buzzword that comes to your mind. That's neither a good smokescreen nor entertaining.
He already appears to be clueless; that doesn't matter to his supporters, who are mostly uneducated themselves.
Uneducated, and thus in desperate straits. So what do they got to lose? Their chains? Voting for the candidate that's most likely to cause serious disruption is a perfectly logical choice for more and more Americans. And, frankly, to people elsewhere too.
I'm disappointed that the party I tend to support also has so many uninformed people who support Trump.
The party you tend to support has driven things to the point where voting for Trump is starting to look like a good idea. Don't try to shift the blame on "uninformed people" seeking to survive what you had a hand in making.
Indeed. It'll be interesting to see how our anti-government types turn this into something bad. Perhaps the public works guy was "an entrepreneur at heart"?
I also don't believe in equality of outcome. Not everyone has equal ability. Giving trophies to everyone just devalues the trophies. There is only one Wimbledon Trophy, only one Heisman. It is what makes those valuable. It is also not possible for everyone to win one.
Clothes aren't trophies: they let me walk on the street without being causing lusty riots. Food isn't trophy: it fuel for my body. Education is not a trophy: it's a way to updating my abilities. A vacation is not a trophy: it's a way to unwind and see the world while I'm at it.
Most things in life aren't tennis championships.
Taxes are not a reward for success, it is a way for socialists to punish those that they think achieved unfairly.
No, taxes are a way of funding the machinery of society, while redistribution is a way of flattening the pyramid of power, both of which make the world a better place for most of its inhabitants.
I just don't buy into that form of jealousy.
No, you buy into a much worse form of jealousy where someone else getting something good is a bad thing because it means that whatever good things you got don't mark you as special anymore. In other words, you're an authoritarian.
So, the question is, which is worse, the killing of 14 people or being a racist? Finely nuanced positions are useless. Directions need to be clear and simple for all the simple people out there.
I think it's extremely ironic that you whine about "statists" when your own post reads like a Nazi propaganda guide.
Well, of course no one cares about the irrelevant ramblings of paranoid people. But what if one took to the Internet to expose the crimes of the powerful? Do you think they would just be permitted to do so? Have you heard of Gary Webb? How about Thomas Drake and William Binney? Susan Lindauer? When people start talking about things the government is trying to hide they find out just how free their speech really is.
Fair enough. So, have the Men in Black visited you yet? Do you think they will? Or, perhaps, will the powerful sleep their nights peacefully, safe in the knowledge that you're busy fighting windmills?
"Intel debuted its new Core i9 CPU today. This seems remarkably ill-timed, given recent attacks on Tokyo and LA by giant killer robots sporting intel inside stickers."
"Intel debuted its new giant robot shopping channel today. This seems remarkably ill-timed, given recent attacks on Tokyo and LA by giant killer robots sporting Intel Inside stickers."
With the advent of broadcast communication, radicals were able to start reaching their diasporas and Muslims outside of the normal stomping grounds of the radical schools based in the Middle East. The Internet not only enables that broadcasting, but enables dialogue. It's now possible for radical imams and jurists in the Middle East to do more than a fire-side chat with young Muslims across the world, they can actually engage them as pupils and groom them personally.
And those same conduits also let those who had lived their whole lives under the shadow of those very same fundamentalists know that there's a better way, hear of freedom and democracy. And shutting the Internet down, closing down mass media, cutting the telephones and burning every letter still won't stop ideas from spreading. Should fundamentalism be a stronger idea than democracy, we can't stop it any more than kings of old could stop democracy. I don't think it is, but there's nothing we can do either way, so let's open all channels and get this over with.
I absolutely do not support Trump's proposal, but guys like you are precisely the sort of idealists that he will steamroll over without any effort in the public spotlight.
Steamroll why, exactly speaking? Because fear, hate and racism are stronger than any "higher" ideal? In that case we're dead, so it doesn't matter one way or another.
Are you willing to sacrifice freedom to make laws easier enforceable?
When it comes to cars, absolutely. Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins, especially when that fist is made of steel, weights a ton or more, and is traveling at a significant fraction of the speed of sound.
I dont get why people care what others do with their own money
Because it's a threat. The pattern of behaviours, relationships, and values - in short the system - known as capitalism is ultimately just one option amongst many. A highly visible and succesful capitalist - a role model for peons to look up to and dream of being - doing anything that could be interpreted as going against its values risks reminding people of that fact. And that, in turn, risks another wave of disobedience and rebellion, just like the one in the previous century.
Sure, it's an overreaction, but then again, continuing insecurity for the common man has always been fertile ground for upheavals in worldviews.
It's now so onerous to run an organization the IRS considers a "real" charity that lots of big money that actually cares about accomplishing something, will soon be taking similar steps.
Money that cares about accomplishing something can bloody well pay its taxes for it, whether someone thinks its cause is just or not. The whole concept of tax exemption is just asking for tax evasion, which in turn will of course result in regulation. The same goes for religious exemptions.
If the smart people are your enemy, it's because you're doing something stupid. Or at least evil.
Or simply something that's against their interests of the specific smart people who oppose you. That might be evil, or neutral, or even in the best interests of public at large. Being smart does not imply being ethical.
Smart people can never abide policies of stupidity.
Of course they can. Smart people are just as capable of self-deception as anyone else. They'll simply use their intelligence to hide the flaws in their logic under elaborate fantasies.
You could harness that brainpower to create the most effective PR campaigns against ISIS in the history of the world, and instead you're making it your enemy by pretending that an Orwellian surveillance state is a good thing.
Which is an excellent example of a smart person actively promoting stupid - even malevolent - policies.
And no, I wouldn't have gotten addicted, because I'm not the type of person who does so, because I've seen other people with addiction problems and I've learned the easy way by watching them learn the hard way.
If your brain chemistry is such that you're not prone to addiction, that's wonderful for you, but it has nothing to do with what type of person you are or what you've learned. I recommend against finding this out the hard way.
Anybody with aging parents or an ill family member needs to educate themselves about hospice, and advocate fiercely for their loved ones.
Or, more realistically, help those relatives acquire a guaranteed-lethal dose of heroine from black markets. Or, since this is an American site, a gun. Death is a tough enough thing to face without having to be at the mercy of random strangers and various twisted agendas, too.
Slashdot Mirror
No, they're not. They're expressing their belief that dave420 wishes to violate immature fuckwhippet's ability to exercise his right to free speech with the specific aim of silencing opinions dave420 disagrees with. This is worrisome, because it's essentially killing off the soul of the democratic process - the public arguments about various ideas which allow the public to judge them - and keeping only the now-empty shell of elections, which become a circus battle between competing troupes.
The idea of flushing down the toilet the entire Western civilization just so you don't have to tolerate random interruptions from an annoying kid is insane.
Reddit being privately owned means Reddit imposing censorship doesn't violate the First Amendment. However, I'm becoming more and more convinced it should. It's not exactly a secret that companies own the US government. When those very same companies claim all places where people gather as their private property, then it seems to me that the de facto rulers get to decide what can and cannot be discussed. That's a problem for functioning democracy.
And are usually right too. Draconian laws aren't used to maintain order, they're used to maintain social hierarchy - they're basically tools for the powerful to hide their oppression behind the appearance of law. Where ever you find draconian laws, you find a tyrant. And where ever you find someone pushing for draconian laws, you've found someone wishing to become a tyrant.
Now, what class does "the fourth most-cited law professor in the U.S." probably think he belongs? In his mind is he a lord or is he a serf? That's all there is to this.
That's pretty unlikely, seeing how they're long dead.
And you don't see any problems in a system that forces employees to keep one eye on the market - and thus off their work - since they're the ones who're carrying the risk?
So don't let them. Don't let capital leave the country. Establish a border between participating and non-participating countries and assing a heavy tariff for trade moving across it.
"John Wayne" was very much a character. The actor playing him was named Marion Morrison. I suspect it's this way for most stars.
So the government's policy will be a compromise between positions people voted for, rather than dictated solely by the biggest interest group? How's that bad?
Communism. Fascism is inherently a national movement, communism - or socialism in general - international. Furthermore, there's no clear charismatic leader but faceless bureaucracy associated with this deal, although I suppose that's also compatible with the Illuminati. Then there's the religious possibilities to consider - which you should had considered beyond a vague reference to "sky fairy" - perhaps the Vatican is trying to cause hardship in hopes people will seek salvation? Or you could simply blame this on lizard men from Regulus trying to de-industrialize the world in preparation for their occupation.
Seriously, put some effort into your conspiracy theories. Don't just post the first buzzword that comes to your mind. That's neither a good smokescreen nor entertaining.
If a couple of witches have just murdered over a dozen people with magic missiles, then a witch hunt is not a witch hunt.
Uneducated, and thus in desperate straits. So what do they got to lose? Their chains? Voting for the candidate that's most likely to cause serious disruption is a perfectly logical choice for more and more Americans. And, frankly, to people elsewhere too.
The party you tend to support has driven things to the point where voting for Trump is starting to look like a good idea. Don't try to shift the blame on "uninformed people" seeking to survive what you had a hand in making.
Indeed. It'll be interesting to see how our anti-government types turn this into something bad. Perhaps the public works guy was "an entrepreneur at heart"?
Clothes aren't trophies: they let me walk on the street without being causing lusty riots. Food isn't trophy: it fuel for my body. Education is not a trophy: it's a way to updating my abilities. A vacation is not a trophy: it's a way to unwind and see the world while I'm at it.
Most things in life aren't tennis championships.
No, taxes are a way of funding the machinery of society, while redistribution is a way of flattening the pyramid of power, both of which make the world a better place for most of its inhabitants.
No, you buy into a much worse form of jealousy where someone else getting something good is a bad thing because it means that whatever good things you got don't mark you as special anymore. In other words, you're an authoritarian.
"Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law."
No, it's like TV stations keeping their front doors locked: just a sensible precaution.
I think it's extremely ironic that you whine about "statists" when your own post reads like a Nazi propaganda guide.
Fair enough. So, have the Men in Black visited you yet? Do you think they will? Or, perhaps, will the powerful sleep their nights peacefully, safe in the knowledge that you're busy fighting windmills?
And most things which won't fade will be called mere fads by people who don't like them for whatever reason. So why do you think Bitcoin will fade?
"Intel debuted its new giant robot shopping channel today. This seems remarkably ill-timed, given recent attacks on Tokyo and LA by giant killer robots sporting Intel Inside stickers."
And those same conduits also let those who had lived their whole lives under the shadow of those very same fundamentalists know that there's a better way, hear of freedom and democracy. And shutting the Internet down, closing down mass media, cutting the telephones and burning every letter still won't stop ideas from spreading. Should fundamentalism be a stronger idea than democracy, we can't stop it any more than kings of old could stop democracy. I don't think it is, but there's nothing we can do either way, so let's open all channels and get this over with.
Steamroll why, exactly speaking? Because fear, hate and racism are stronger than any "higher" ideal? In that case we're dead, so it doesn't matter one way or another.
When it comes to cars, absolutely. Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins, especially when that fist is made of steel, weights a ton or more, and is traveling at a significant fraction of the speed of sound.
Because it's a threat. The pattern of behaviours, relationships, and values - in short the system - known as capitalism is ultimately just one option amongst many. A highly visible and succesful capitalist - a role model for peons to look up to and dream of being - doing anything that could be interpreted as going against its values risks reminding people of that fact. And that, in turn, risks another wave of disobedience and rebellion, just like the one in the previous century.
Sure, it's an overreaction, but then again, continuing insecurity for the common man has always been fertile ground for upheavals in worldviews.
Money that cares about accomplishing something can bloody well pay its taxes for it, whether someone thinks its cause is just or not. The whole concept of tax exemption is just asking for tax evasion, which in turn will of course result in regulation. The same goes for religious exemptions.
Or simply something that's against their interests of the specific smart people who oppose you. That might be evil, or neutral, or even in the best interests of public at large. Being smart does not imply being ethical.
Of course they can. Smart people are just as capable of self-deception as anyone else. They'll simply use their intelligence to hide the flaws in their logic under elaborate fantasies.
Which is an excellent example of a smart person actively promoting stupid - even malevolent - policies.
If your brain chemistry is such that you're not prone to addiction, that's wonderful for you, but it has nothing to do with what type of person you are or what you've learned. I recommend against finding this out the hard way.
Or, more realistically, help those relatives acquire a guaranteed-lethal dose of heroine from black markets. Or, since this is an American site, a gun. Death is a tough enough thing to face without having to be at the mercy of random strangers and various twisted agendas, too.