If the victim deserves it, then you mean that they are morally culpable. Which can only mean that the other party - which is solely responsible for taking the action in question, and absent taking that action nothing would happen - is morally in the right in taking that action.
Your own weasle words ("most likely" on a matter of logic?) show you're just another spineless moral relativist.
Where do you get the idea that only one party can be at fault?
Because nobody is talking about attacking NK, while NK talks non-stop about attacking everybody else. And people here are pre-emptively saying that it's SK's fault... not for being some degree of able or not to deflect attacks, but SK's fault for being attacked in the first place
Your analogy makes no sense. What mine is it that you think SK is stepping on, exactly? Are you actually persuaded by NK's rhetoric, and think that the very existence of SK as a non-communist, non-totalitarian state is grounds to attack it? Is going about their business the stepping-on-the-mine part? Do you have some vision in your head of SK crossing the DMZ into NK?
There's one party, here, that is sinking ships, shelling civilians, and the rest, on a regular basis. That's where I get the idea that one party not only can be, but is at fault.
And it's the victims' fault that it is a hostile place, right? The people actually acting out the hostility are never to blame, because that might hurt their feelings, I guess.
It will, indeed, if they were able to make that powerful magic force field AND they did not enable it.
So SK is not the victim of an attack if NK launches a missle and it bounces off SK's magic shield. And SK is at fault for the attack if NK's missile isn't stopped by SK's defenses. But NK is not at fault for launching the missile in the first place. Are you even listening to yourself?
Uh huh. And if NK decides to shell another island or sink another boat, it will be entirely SK's fault for not making a powerful magic force field that can deflect artillery shells and torpedoes. Victims are always to blame, because they definitely cause their attackers to attack them, because of their weakness, right?
What, is your junior high school out on lunch break right now? Go outside and get some exercise, and quit wasting time building up an interior justification for the future bad shit you're going to do to other people when you get your own computer and stuff.
It costs $1 to shoot it. If Captain Ahmed is driving a small boat at your battleship, you can light it up with one of these for a lot cheaper, and with better results, than letting loose with a hundred grand worth of depleted uranium belt-fed minigun ammo from the Phalanx or something similar. You can use these just to smoke the outboard on Captain A's launch and then do with him what you will.
you're there because it's the closest to China you can be without starting a war.
No, we're there because China started a war. And their proxy in that war (North Korea) insists its still on.
Oh yes, the usual "world's saviours and protectors" rethoric...
So, what has your country done to prevent NK from rolling into SK? What did it do when they first tried, and what has it done since? If the US is just faking it, in terms of protecting SK from the north, there must be someone else doing the actual work. That would be you, I guess?
And since missile systems are corporate welfare programmes with no actual military purpose, maybe it would be a good idea not to have a test that could go badly and provide the wrong kind of encouragement.
Spoken just like someone who's never had a SCUD come sailing over their border to land indiscriminately in the middle of the town where you live and work. But of course your assertion is iron-clad here on Slashdot, because you used the magic root password: "corporate." Yes! If it takes a group of people to form a business to make or do something bigger than running a dog grooming operation out of Mom's basement, it must be Eeeevil. I realize that you make your game playing money by putting flyers for that dog grooming company under people's windshield wipers, and that you make your own paper for those flyers from crushed dandelion leaves so that don't buy them from Corporate Paper Goons... so, you definitely get street cred for that.
You seem to underestimate 60+ years of uninterrupted regime propaganda.
And you seem to underestimate the inertia of centuries of culture. And to really underestimate the power of getting some nutritious food and knowing that some of your family is no longer spending the rest of their miserable lives in one of NK's versions of a Stalinist death/labor camp.
SK would have to dig deep, just like West Germany did. But the long term benefits would be huge for them, financially, culturally, and morally. Just like it was for a re-unified Germany.
None of this will happen, of course. Because China doesn't want what amounts to a prosperous Germany right next door.
Who is that supposed to be buying votes from, Fisker employees and investors?
No, it's using taxpayers to pay the interest on money borrowed from China in order to make a very big press-friendly affair of showing how he's all about imaginary green wonder cars made by wonder kids from California, imported from Sweden - the land run with a government after which his core constituency would love to model at least California, and ideally the entire US. It's a big pandering display meant to solidify support from a particular block of voters. Those are the votes he's throwing away tax money to secure.
(Also, “teleprompters?” Fox News called from 2009, seems you’re infringing on their bullshit talking point)
Nah, I just get tired of him doing an awful job of pretending he's speaking extemporaneously from a factory floor or a kindergarten classroom when he's just standing there reading from the crutches powered by his speech writers. Fox talking points? Fox didn't invent his need to use them when standing in front of a room full of kids or while he's standing with a bunch of factory workers arranged as props so that he can appear to be engaged in the way they're blowing through tax money before going bankrupt. If you don't like people besmirching his Smartest Guy In The World image, write to his handlers and ask them to encourage him to give a few talks without the teleprompter equipment and the crew that manages them for him.
It's worse than that. Because it was done entirely to buy votes. It was done so that Obama could stand with his teleprompters on a factory floor of yet another (soon to fail) company and proclaim what a visionary he is in advance of an election. So glad I could help pay for that, for him.
What exactly is it that you think has to be burned to make the electricity to charge up electric cars, when nobody wants anybody to drill locally, frak, use more coal, or put up new nukes? Yeah, oil. The Fisker and its ilk are still pretty much an oil-powered cars.
If you don't like that, focus on energy production. Not which way the energy is used to make the on the car wheels turn.
This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad.
And when Fisker first started talking about their cars and got all sorts of drooling interest here... that's because it was Eeevil Republicans playing long ball and setting up slashdot users for a clever smackdown later when Fisker inevitably failed? Wow those guys are sinister geniuses!
Here's why Fisker is associated with Democrats: because a Democrat decided to hand them half a billion dollars borrowed from other places like China in a vain attempt to pander to the Greener Than Thou voting block. Yes, it was pure politics. You can't make Obama's political decision to give them other people's money (and the interest we'll be paying on that money for decades) go away.
But that has nothing to do with the fact that a theoretically promising and sexy-looking tech product company has badly fumbled something that an endless parade of people keep saying is the Super Sexy Green Future of driving around.
One of my customers invested a pile of money into becoming a Fisker dealer. They have been completely, royally screwed by the engineering, sales, and financial incompetence of that company - as well as bad luck over things like cars getting flooded in storage in storms, and more. Why is this "on the front page?" Because it's a classic tale of a tech venture gone sideways. And you doth protest way too much about the politics. Basically, you're using the opportunity to start a thread that bashes people you don't like. The hypocrisy is delicious.
They want more control and regulation over the parts of peoples lives that are explicitly used to infringe on the liberty, equality and justice of others
Hilarious (because if that was true, they'd want to regulate their own agenda, liberty-killing world view that it explicitly is). Regardless... so if we see a pattern of people dying in accidents because of bad drivers, Progressives would seek the same sort of liberty-reducing actions with respect to cars that they are seeking with respect to firearms, right? After all, "if just one life can be saved," right? Obviously nobody under 25 should be allowed to drive. For the sake of the children. The same sort of paternalistic nanny-statism Progressives exhibit when they limit the size of drink cups one can buy. Equal justice man, yeah!
The slippery and sinister central core of your typical lib/prog position is that everything can be considered a possible impact on equality. Your paycheck (evil! it's bigger than someone else's!), for example. Or a car. Or a type of butter. Progressives use their deliberately racist identity politics to put people into artificial groups so they can make spurious claims about unequal outcomes in everything from elementary school sports activity to hiring firefighters. The progressive fetish about equal outcomes never seems to trouble itself with equal commitment to the work that produces a given outcome. That's not "equal justice," it's exactly the opposite. It's punishing the people who work harder so that people who don't can still get the same stuff. That Orwellian BS is so transparent that you'd think any lefty with a decent IQ and some self respect would be completely embarrassed to trot it out - but there it is, always on display.
The only way it works at all is that the craven, cynical elite types that spew it can bank on the "useful idiot" types to regurgitate it without deploying any critical thinking whatsoever. That sort of condescension and scorn for the very people you bank on to provide votes and money for the agenda is... right in keeping with the Progressive world view. I guess that makes sense, considering that the birth of the Progressive movement included a strong embrace of eugenics and equally odious ways to insure "equal justice." How do you sleep at night?
You are astoundingly unable to grapple with a rhetorical device that points out the GP's absurd proposition. It doesn't matter if it's rape of ripping off the entertainment that five hundred people just spent half a year making. Every "it's OK because the victim was asking for it" excuse is just as slimy as the next, ethically. You're pretending to be too obtuse to understand that basic point so that you can trot out some faux outrage to distract from the fact that you'd like to preserve your ability to rip things off when it suits you.
And, of course, you're still not even attempting to explain why someone has a "natural right" to be known as the author of what they create. Are you saying it's a natural right, but just not one (unlike freedom of speech and assembly) that government should protect? What mechanism is it you're proposing by which an author's "natural right" to having his name on the books he writes is preserved even as the work is being ripped off by people who would no longer be bound by the copyright laws you consider irrational?
Are you of the opinion that a woman *can't* make herself more inclined to be raped? It's always wrong to rape someone, but only focusing on punishing rapists instead of also looking at institutional problems is a big mistake.
So, you're all for burkas because it just makes more sense, right? The institution of not covering a woman's entire body is clearly part of the problem. Big mistake, right? Are you even listening to yourself?
Piracy is no different. How easy or hard it is to do doesn't change the pirate's actions, ethically.
So if you're not entitled to it, and don't feel entitled to it, and you won't pay for it (or, if you can't get HBO, won't just wait to buy the material when they put it up for sale for you), what is your justification for ripping it off? See, if you felt entitled to it, we could talk about the philosophical flaw in your world view that leads you to believe you're entitled to it. But since you say you're not within your rights to have it, you're basically signing up for the "it's just me ripping off something small, and I'll let the chumps pay for it for me."
HBO doesn't become poorer if I see an episode of their show without paying for the privilege.
So... there's really no point in anyone paying HBO for what they produce, right? After all, if people who want to see the show but who find a way to rip it off don't cost them anything, then everybody should rip it off. Right? Because, no harm done. Somebody else will come up with the millions of bucks it costs to make what they all want. No need for the audience to pay for it.
The only thing that is an actual natural right is to be identified as the creator of a work.
,Br>
Why is that a natural right, but not being ripped off isn't? Why do you have a natural right to someone knowing you created something? Specifically.
And be careful of the logical minefield you're about to step into.
Slashdot Mirror
Most likely you fail at logic forever
Why, because he pointed out the truth?
victim deserves it == perpetrator is innocent
If the victim deserves it, then you mean that they are morally culpable. Which can only mean that the other party - which is solely responsible for taking the action in question, and absent taking that action nothing would happen - is morally in the right in taking that action.
Your own weasle words ("most likely" on a matter of logic?) show you're just another spineless moral relativist.
Where do you get the idea that only one party can be at fault?
Because nobody is talking about attacking NK, while NK talks non-stop about attacking everybody else. And people here are pre-emptively saying that it's SK's fault ... not for being some degree of able or not to deflect attacks, but SK's fault for being attacked in the first place
Your analogy makes no sense. What mine is it that you think SK is stepping on, exactly? Are you actually persuaded by NK's rhetoric, and think that the very existence of SK as a non-communist, non-totalitarian state is grounds to attack it? Is going about their business the stepping-on-the-mine part? Do you have some vision in your head of SK crossing the DMZ into NK?
There's one party, here, that is sinking ships, shelling civilians, and the rest, on a regular basis. That's where I get the idea that one party not only can be, but is at fault.
the internet is a hostile place
And it's the victims' fault that it is a hostile place, right? The people actually acting out the hostility are never to blame, because that might hurt their feelings, I guess.
It will, indeed, if they were able to make that powerful magic force field AND they did not enable it.
So SK is not the victim of an attack if NK launches a missle and it bounces off SK's magic shield. And SK is at fault for the attack if NK's missile isn't stopped by SK's defenses. But NK is not at fault for launching the missile in the first place. Are you even listening to yourself?
victims deserved it
Uh huh. And if NK decides to shell another island or sink another boat, it will be entirely SK's fault for not making a powerful magic force field that can deflect artillery shells and torpedoes. Victims are always to blame, because they definitely cause their attackers to attack them, because of their weakness, right?
What, is your junior high school out on lunch break right now? Go outside and get some exercise, and quit wasting time building up an interior justification for the future bad shit you're going to do to other people when you get your own computer and stuff.
It costs $1 to shoot it. If Captain Ahmed is driving a small boat at your battleship, you can light it up with one of these for a lot cheaper, and with better results, than letting loose with a hundred grand worth of depleted uranium belt-fed minigun ammo from the Phalanx or something similar. You can use these just to smoke the outboard on Captain A's launch and then do with him what you will.
you're there because it's the closest to China you can be without starting a war.
No, we're there because China started a war. And their proxy in that war (North Korea) insists its still on.
Oh yes, the usual "world's saviours and protectors" rethoric...
So, what has your country done to prevent NK from rolling into SK? What did it do when they first tried, and what has it done since? If the US is just faking it, in terms of protecting SK from the north, there must be someone else doing the actual work. That would be you, I guess?
And since missile systems are corporate welfare programmes with no actual military purpose, maybe it would be a good idea not to have a test that could go badly and provide the wrong kind of encouragement.
Spoken just like someone who's never had a SCUD come sailing over their border to land indiscriminately in the middle of the town where you live and work. But of course your assertion is iron-clad here on Slashdot, because you used the magic root password: "corporate." Yes! If it takes a group of people to form a business to make or do something bigger than running a dog grooming operation out of Mom's basement, it must be Eeeevil. I realize that you make your game playing money by putting flyers for that dog grooming company under people's windshield wipers, and that you make your own paper for those flyers from crushed dandelion leaves so that don't buy them from Corporate Paper Goons ... so, you definitely get street cred for that.
You seem to underestimate 60+ years of uninterrupted regime propaganda.
And you seem to underestimate the inertia of centuries of culture. And to really underestimate the power of getting some nutritious food and knowing that some of your family is no longer spending the rest of their miserable lives in one of NK's versions of a Stalinist death/labor camp.
SK would have to dig deep, just like West Germany did. But the long term benefits would be huge for them, financially, culturally, and morally. Just like it was for a re-unified Germany.
None of this will happen, of course. Because China doesn't want what amounts to a prosperous Germany right next door.
Who is that supposed to be buying votes from, Fisker employees and investors?
No, it's using taxpayers to pay the interest on money borrowed from China in order to make a very big press-friendly affair of showing how he's all about imaginary green wonder cars made by wonder kids from California, imported from Sweden - the land run with a government after which his core constituency would love to model at least California, and ideally the entire US. It's a big pandering display meant to solidify support from a particular block of voters. Those are the votes he's throwing away tax money to secure.
(Also, “teleprompters?” Fox News called from 2009, seems you’re infringing on their bullshit talking point)
Nah, I just get tired of him doing an awful job of pretending he's speaking extemporaneously from a factory floor or a kindergarten classroom when he's just standing there reading from the crutches powered by his speech writers. Fox talking points? Fox didn't invent his need to use them when standing in front of a room full of kids or while he's standing with a bunch of factory workers arranged as props so that he can appear to be engaged in the way they're blowing through tax money before going bankrupt. If you don't like people besmirching his Smartest Guy In The World image, write to his handlers and ask them to encourage him to give a few talks without the teleprompter equipment and the crew that manages them for him.
It's just another taxpayer rip-off
It's worse than that. Because it was done entirely to buy votes. It was done so that Obama could stand with his teleprompters on a factory floor of yet another (soon to fail) company and proclaim what a visionary he is in advance of an election. So glad I could help pay for that, for him.
people are just too cheap
It's true. Most people can't afford $100,000 worth of solar arrays and rechargeable cars that can only get them on a short errand. Damn cheapskates!
What exactly is it that you think has to be burned to make the electricity to charge up electric cars, when nobody wants anybody to drill locally, frak, use more coal, or put up new nukes? Yeah, oil. The Fisker and its ilk are still pretty much an oil-powered cars.
If you don't like that, focus on energy production. Not which way the energy is used to make the on the car wheels turn.
This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad.
And when Fisker first started talking about their cars and got all sorts of drooling interest here ... that's because it was Eeevil Republicans playing long ball and setting up slashdot users for a clever smackdown later when Fisker inevitably failed? Wow those guys are sinister geniuses!
Here's why Fisker is associated with Democrats: because a Democrat decided to hand them half a billion dollars borrowed from other places like China in a vain attempt to pander to the Greener Than Thou voting block. Yes, it was pure politics. You can't make Obama's political decision to give them other people's money (and the interest we'll be paying on that money for decades) go away.
But that has nothing to do with the fact that a theoretically promising and sexy-looking tech product company has badly fumbled something that an endless parade of people keep saying is the Super Sexy Green Future of driving around.
One of my customers invested a pile of money into becoming a Fisker dealer. They have been completely, royally screwed by the engineering, sales, and financial incompetence of that company - as well as bad luck over things like cars getting flooded in storage in storms, and more. Why is this "on the front page?" Because it's a classic tale of a tech venture gone sideways. And you doth protest way too much about the politics. Basically, you're using the opportunity to start a thread that bashes people you don't like. The hypocrisy is delicious.
They want more control and regulation over the parts of peoples lives that are explicitly used to infringe on the liberty, equality and justice of others
Hilarious (because if that was true, they'd want to regulate their own agenda, liberty-killing world view that it explicitly is). Regardless ... so if we see a pattern of people dying in accidents because of bad drivers, Progressives would seek the same sort of liberty-reducing actions with respect to cars that they are seeking with respect to firearms, right? After all, "if just one life can be saved," right? Obviously nobody under 25 should be allowed to drive. For the sake of the children. The same sort of paternalistic nanny-statism Progressives exhibit when they limit the size of drink cups one can buy. Equal justice man, yeah!
... right in keeping with the Progressive world view. I guess that makes sense, considering that the birth of the Progressive movement included a strong embrace of eugenics and equally odious ways to insure "equal justice." How do you sleep at night?
The slippery and sinister central core of your typical lib/prog position is that everything can be considered a possible impact on equality. Your paycheck (evil! it's bigger than someone else's!), for example. Or a car. Or a type of butter. Progressives use their deliberately racist identity politics to put people into artificial groups so they can make spurious claims about unequal outcomes in everything from elementary school sports activity to hiring firefighters. The progressive fetish about equal outcomes never seems to trouble itself with equal commitment to the work that produces a given outcome. That's not "equal justice," it's exactly the opposite. It's punishing the people who work harder so that people who don't can still get the same stuff. That Orwellian BS is so transparent that you'd think any lefty with a decent IQ and some self respect would be completely embarrassed to trot it out - but there it is, always on display.
The only way it works at all is that the craven, cynical elite types that spew it can bank on the "useful idiot" types to regurgitate it without deploying any critical thinking whatsoever. That sort of condescension and scorn for the very people you bank on to provide votes and money for the agenda is
You are astoundingly unable to grapple with a rhetorical device that points out the GP's absurd proposition. It doesn't matter if it's rape of ripping off the entertainment that five hundred people just spent half a year making. Every "it's OK because the victim was asking for it" excuse is just as slimy as the next, ethically. You're pretending to be too obtuse to understand that basic point so that you can trot out some faux outrage to distract from the fact that you'd like to preserve your ability to rip things off when it suits you.
And, of course, you're still not even attempting to explain why someone has a "natural right" to be known as the author of what they create. Are you saying it's a natural right, but just not one (unlike freedom of speech and assembly) that government should protect? What mechanism is it you're proposing by which an author's "natural right" to having his name on the books he writes is preserved even as the work is being ripped off by people who would no longer be bound by the copyright laws you consider irrational?
In other words, you don't want to answer the actual question.
Are you of the opinion that a woman *can't* make herself more inclined to be raped? It's always wrong to rape someone, but only focusing on punishing rapists instead of also looking at institutional problems is a big mistake.
So, you're all for burkas because it just makes more sense, right? The institution of not covering a woman's entire body is clearly part of the problem. Big mistake, right? Are you even listening to yourself?
Piracy is no different. How easy or hard it is to do doesn't change the pirate's actions, ethically.
Did you really just compare copyright infringement to rape?
No, I'm pointing out the GP's obnoxious proposition that HBO is causing people to rip off their work.
No, we don't feel "entitled" to it.
So if you're not entitled to it, and don't feel entitled to it, and you won't pay for it (or, if you can't get HBO, won't just wait to buy the material when they put it up for sale for you), what is your justification for ripping it off? See, if you felt entitled to it, we could talk about the philosophical flaw in your world view that leads you to believe you're entitled to it. But since you say you're not within your rights to have it, you're basically signing up for the "it's just me ripping off something small, and I'll let the chumps pay for it for me."
Eight.
HBO doesn't become poorer if I see an episode of their show without paying for the privilege.
So... there's really no point in anyone paying HBO for what they produce, right? After all, if people who want to see the show but who find a way to rip it off don't cost them anything, then everybody should rip it off. Right? Because, no harm done. Somebody else will come up with the millions of bucks it costs to make what they all want. No need for the audience to pay for it.
Are you even listening to yourself?
The only thing that is an actual natural right is to be identified as the creator of a work.
,Br> Why is that a natural right, but not being ripped off isn't? Why do you have a natural right to someone knowing you created something? Specifically.
And be careful of the logical minefield you're about to step into.
Honestly, if it weren't for downloading, I don't think I would have even heard of the show.
You are lying.