Threatening to rape or kill someone isn't "being offensive" it's fucking illegal, you worthless clown.
As always, there are a large number of people on slashdot and elsewhere who seem to think there is something magically different about an act if it is done via the internet, rather than face to face.
Your "free speech" has consequences, only children would believe otherwise.
"All basic necessities of life will be for free and accessible to all members of said society + a few extras brought up by civilization. The list went --> basic necessities are air, water, food, shelter, warmth [energy] and clothing. The extras were child-care, education and medicine."
And yet that's very much what exists in the social welfare systems of most western countries today, with a few exceptions.
Yes, luckily we live in a society that isn't organised purely on laissez faire lines, but has incorporated some elements of socialism. It's why life is better today for 99% of people (in Europe at least) than it was a hundred years ago.
you can tell very quickly you can't escape your marxist ideology, even when you are denying it; you still have this need for the collective. Now you are calling it humanity
If it's marxist to believe in something other than people as purely selfish economic worker drone units, then I'm a Marxist.
You are putting a slightly different spin on the mad right wing calamity that was Margaret Thatcher saying "there is no such thing as society".
Individuals are close to powerless in an individualistic society, unless they are one of the lucky ones at the top of the heap.
People are greedy. It's like gravity; hold up a rock and you'll expect it to fall.
I disagree. Most people I know aren't that interested in money, or there'd be a lot more people with a couple of businesses, working eighteen hours a day and raking in the money.
What people are is lazy, and that is the start of all good ideas.
The Guardian? The British version of Pravda? Too bad the Guardian's editorial staff can't share a shallow mass grave with some of the many victims of the Soviet Union.
The Guardian is on the extremely moderate UK left: at the last general election it came out in favour of voting for the LibDems (who are now in coalition with the Tories, and have reneged on essentially all their manifesto pledges).
To consider it as extreme left wing, you would need to be some sort of neo Nazi, in which case you can fuck off and die in a box of shit.
Unfortunately, you failed to use one of the five approved slashdot "humor" templates, and so it has not been recognised as a joke by the literal minded wombats here.
Zuckerberg could announce he's just found the cure for cancer, and people on slashdot would still just be bitching about how facebook has somehow destroyed their right to privacy.
Anyone inclined to become a "space tourist" is, pretty much by definition, rich.
As far as I'm aware, VG is intending to charge around $200,000 a ticket. Plenty of people could afford that without being considered rich. That would barely buy you the cheapest house around here.
Answers like this are why the term "space nutter" exists.
Our brains were made for the 4 F's: fighting, fleeing, foraging and reproducing. Understanding of quantum mechanics was not a driving factor, so we just have to accept that we don't understand.
It's okay to say "fuck" on the internet, you know.
Your question presumes that time and causality as we experience them in this universe are applicable outside of them and I don't know that that's is a reasonable presumption. If something we can call God exists (personally I think it's not likely) then it is external to this universe and therefore not subject to its constraints.
"This universe" is everything that exists. If God exists, He must exist in this universe or else we could have no awareness of Him.
I think they would have said that about bittorrent, tor, and bitcoins years ago. Most of the world's more repressive governments have already banned one or all of those.
As for this one itself, I would think communist governments would ban this as well as trade itself is the biggest ideological enemy of communism.
Score one for communism then.
There are few things in life more tedious than the obsession with making money.
In a lot of the tech world, the algorithm would be pretty much exactly as the GP listed, at least for talented people who are desired by employers.
Ah yes, we're all precious snowflakes, nothing like those sheeple out there.
Then, too, there's a lot of employees who won't ever leave their existing job because they can't do any better anywhere else. Sadly, many of those people are the ones that you might want to encourage to leave.
Yes, let me guess, they're only in work because of evil government interference in the free market of employment which makes it impossible to ever fire someone. Since the whole world is some sort of communist paradise for workers nowadays.
Murderers murder people. It's not pretty, but it's reality.
What an amazing defense.
Soldiers kill people. It's not pretty, but it's reality.
There is a difference between a soldier and a criminal. There is also a difference betweeen a spy and a criminal.
Both soldiers and spies are ultimately accountable to the law. Just as a soldier can't just shoot anyone he feels like for the sake of it, so a spy has to be able to justify his actions.
Well no, feudalism is a) not necessarily really a thing but more an attempt to describe systems ex post facto and b) a form of oligarchy or monarchy, in which power is concentrated at the top and/or resides with a single individual. The power structures of the day tended to be hereditary.
"Socialism" on slashdot is just a general term of abuse, not a meaningful political description.
Slashdot Mirror
As always, there are a large number of people on slashdot and elsewhere who seem to think there is something magically different about an act if it is done via the internet, rather than face to face.
Your "free speech" has consequences, only children would believe otherwise.
Men-hating feminazis is not some random term
No, but anyone using it is helpfully signposting the fact that they're a pathetic fucking idiot.
Yup, straight white males -- the oprressed minority.
I don't think they're oppressed, but I don't think "straight white females" are either.
Well that's all totally spiffing then, no one's oppressed at all, and anyone who says otherwise is just a whiny bitch, yes?
"All basic necessities of life will be for free and accessible to all members of said society + a few extras brought up by civilization. The list went --> basic necessities are air, water, food, shelter, warmth [energy] and clothing. The extras were child-care, education and medicine."
And yet that's very much what exists in the social welfare systems of most western countries today, with a few exceptions.
Yes, luckily we live in a society that isn't organised purely on laissez faire lines, but has incorporated some elements of socialism. It's why life is better today for 99% of people (in Europe at least) than it was a hundred years ago.
you can tell very quickly you can't escape your marxist ideology, even when you are denying it; you still have this need for the collective. Now you are calling it humanity
If it's marxist to believe in something other than people as purely selfish economic worker drone units, then I'm a Marxist.
You are putting a slightly different spin on the mad right wing calamity that was Margaret Thatcher saying "there is no such thing as society".
Individuals are close to powerless in an individualistic society, unless they are one of the lucky ones at the top of the heap.
People are greedy. It's like gravity; hold up a rock and you'll expect it to fall.
I disagree. Most people I know aren't that interested in money, or there'd be a lot more people with a couple of businesses, working eighteen hours a day and raking in the money.
What people are is lazy, and that is the start of all good ideas.
The Guardian? The British version of Pravda? Too bad the Guardian's editorial staff can't share a shallow mass grave with some of the many victims of the Soviet Union.
The Guardian is on the extremely moderate UK left: at the last general election it came out in favour of voting for the LibDems (who are now in coalition with the Tories, and have reneged on essentially all their manifesto pledges).
To consider it as extreme left wing, you would need to be some sort of neo Nazi, in which case you can fuck off and die in a box of shit.
They never committed "international piracy" you dingbat. They created a search engine.
If I published a "how to" guide to real Somali-style piracy, with handy links to the latest ship locations, wouldn't this be considered a crime?
And yes, I know downloading a film isn't the same as leading an armed boarding party on a boat.
Someone (like his lawyer) should have explained this to him.
It's strange that no-one has come up with a FB clone, along the same lines but with privacy intact and no ads
They have, it's just that no one joins in.
It's not a technical problem, it's a marketing one.
(gritted teeth) It. Was. A. Joke.
Unfortunately, you failed to use one of the five approved slashdot "humor" templates, and so it has not been recognised as a joke by the literal minded wombats here.
Zuckerberg could announce he's just found the cure for cancer, and people on slashdot would still just be bitching about how facebook has somehow destroyed their right to privacy.
All it takes for facebook to fail is for ordinary users walking away in sufficient numbers.
Well, yes.
In other news, the Pope's a Catholic.
Anyone inclined to become a "space tourist" is, pretty much by definition, rich.
As far as I'm aware, VG is intending to charge around $200,000 a ticket. Plenty of people could afford that without being considered rich. That would barely buy you the cheapest house around here.
Answers like this are why the term "space nutter" exists.
Totally divorced from reality.
Our brains were made for the 4 F's: fighting, fleeing, foraging and reproducing. Understanding of quantum mechanics was not a driving factor, so we just have to accept that we don't understand.
It's okay to say "fuck" on the internet, you know.
Your question presumes that time and causality as we experience them in this universe are applicable outside of them and I don't know that that's is a reasonable presumption. If something we can call God exists (personally I think it's not likely) then it is external to this universe and therefore not subject to its constraints.
"This universe" is everything that exists. If God exists, He must exist in this universe or else we could have no awareness of Him.
I think you and the Time Cube guy could have some fun chats.
I think they would have said that about bittorrent, tor, and bitcoins years ago. Most of the world's more repressive governments have already banned one or all of those.
As for this one itself, I would think communist governments would ban this as well as trade itself is the biggest ideological enemy of communism.
Score one for communism then.
There are few things in life more tedious than the obsession with making money.
In a lot of the tech world, the algorithm would be pretty much exactly as the GP listed, at least for talented people who are desired by employers.
Ah yes, we're all precious snowflakes, nothing like those sheeple out there.
Then, too, there's a lot of employees who won't ever leave their existing job because they can't do any better anywhere else. Sadly, many of those people are the ones that you might want to encourage to leave.
Yes, let me guess, they're only in work because of evil government interference in the free market of employment which makes it impossible to ever fire someone. Since the whole world is some sort of communist paradise for workers nowadays.
Please.
No, they don't know which burger I want at McDonalds because I prefer another chain.
That's fooled the NSA all right.
Murderers murder people. It's not pretty, but it's reality.
What an amazing defense.
Soldiers kill people. It's not pretty, but it's reality.
There is a difference between a soldier and a criminal. There is also a difference betweeen a spy and a criminal.
Both soldiers and spies are ultimately accountable to the law. Just as a soldier can't just shoot anyone he feels like for the sake of it, so a spy has to be able to justify his actions.
It is difficult not to see these revelations as the last gasp of privacy for the once proud British people.
When the law is compromised to it's very roots as it now appears, then the only law that matters is that of breaking down and rebuilding...
You forgot to mention that we can't even do a proper revolution now because the government took all our guns away.
Oh, and literally Nineteen Eighty Four!
feudalism = socialism
Well no, feudalism is a) not necessarily really a thing but more an attempt to describe systems ex post facto and b) a form of oligarchy or monarchy, in which power is concentrated at the top and/or resides with a single individual. The power structures of the day tended to be hereditary.
"Socialism" on slashdot is just a general term of abuse, not a meaningful political description.
"Douchebeard" is my nomination for word of the year.
If something is unfalsifiable, it may be brilliant, witty and elegant, but it's not a scientific theory: it's a good concept for a sci fi novel.