Yes those things are wrong, but should we stop talking about those things because they are wrong?
Should we outlaw all nazi material? should we arrest racists for thinking like a racist or for drawing a swastika? Look, I'm against certain acts, I have morals, but I don't think removing freedom of speech makes life better.
If we outlawed certain words so that people couldnt describe different races and we outlawed culture, and forced people to marry inter-racially, it might actually help the world but at the same time its removing peoples freedom to think and speak how they want to. How would your average nazi friend feel if they had to give up their pro-white religion because those kinds of thoughts are illegal? That only makes the problem worse, it makes them more likely to be violent when they cannot express themselves. Don't you get it?
This includes child rapists, adult rapists, prison rapists, or anyone who rapes anyone. Rape is just plain wrong and should never be done to another human. I'm not even talking about just physical rape, emotional and psychological rape is wrong also.
This is a fact most reasonable people can agree with, but if you are psycho then you might think that rape is okay and if you are aggressive and psycho then rape becomes something you are more capable of.
Most people, they wouldnt ever rape someone, they just don't have that in them. So, when we talk about stuff like childporn, which millions of people may view, do we really want to say that millions of people are potential rapists for viewing rape? I don't think you can connect the dots like that. A lot of people watch murder or watch violent stuff, and I can't say all of the people who think about murder are murderers or are going to commit murder.
I disagree with people who actually do these things, I don't disagree with people who think about these things. Its their mind, they have the freedom to think about whatever they want, just don't go out and do it.
Lets apply it to ourselves for a moment.
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 1
We all look at porn, but we arent all rapists, correct?
Child porn addicts who look at porn arent all going to rape children, its just the psychopath pedophiles who are rapists who do that.
Just because someone looks at pictures does not mean they have to do whats in the picture. Porn just does not work that way. This is like saying porn creates rape so all porn should be outlawed. I think its actually the other way around. I think with less porn there would be more rape.
It's impossible to do that. If you removed every child porn picture that exists in the world, then they'd just start talking about it and telling stories, and if you outlaw that then they'll draw pictures of it, and if you outlaw that they'll find some other way to express themselves. So ultimately people want free speech and to make this into a thought crime is limiting free speech, its not protecting children because look, even if no child porn picture ever existed, these people would still have their fantasies. You think their fantasies will go away just because theres no pictures? They'd start drawing child porn anime pictures and it would happen all over again. So whats the point of having thought crimes?
Look, should we do the same to the internet to stop child porn from being distributed on it? Should ISPs be sued when child pornographers upload porn to their web servers? Should we all give up the internet because theres terrorists on the internet?
Think for a moment, any of us who uses the internet right now is supporting a communications system which could aid bad people. Just because a few bad people put some bad information on the internet does not mean that the internet is only useful for bad information. If we use the internet we can put the good information on there too, thats freedom.
I just don't think we should try to control the internet, its not that type of entity which should be controlled by one group of people. The internet has to be free.
Don't run the internet either.
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
If you use the internet you are aiding terrorists who may be on the same ISP, You are aiding communists, you are aiding liberals or conservatives. You are aiding child pornographers who use the same ISP as you.
The freenet node isnt raping children and taking pictures of it. The node isnt creating child porn, its just distributing it. Thats what the internet does. There are nazi hate sites on the internet which are just as harmful to children and this is legal. There are sites on the internet which talk about communism and anarchy, how to make bombs, etc. Remember the starwars kid who has his video all over the internet and who became suicidal? Should we blame the internet for these things or should we blame the person who created the video and who put it on the net? Should this kid sue every person who ever distributed or looked at that video?
The government has no right to say child porn is a thought crime, because thats what they are saying. No one is endorsing the creation of kiddie porn, but what the government is saying is that it should be illegal to talk about it or think about it, this opens the door to thought crime. It could start with kiddie porn, but then it could move on to other things like politics, and religion. Think about the future for a moment and see where this leads. The pictures arent abusing the children, the abuser is abusing the children, so lets place the blame on the people who actually are abusing children instead of using childporn as a way to attack freenet and free speech.
Yeah but if China did this then we'd have a fit
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
China does this kinda stuff all the time. Free speech is free speech. Child porn may not be the speech I like, but I don't think we have a right to outlaw speech we don't like, otherwise theres a lot of political speech which could be outlawed as well. This can easily be taken too far and I think that there should be absolutely no possibility for thought crimes to exist. We should never even allow the laws to be configured in a way which allows for the possibility of thought crimes.
Look, I don't want children to be abused, but controlling speech wont stop children from being abused. This is equal to saying "It's illegal to think about or talk about kiddie porn". It should be illegal to CREATE kiddie porn. Thats wrong, because the child is being abused. Talking about it isnt abusing anyone, and a lot of people are more abused than the average child porn victim on the internet by internet bullies. Remember the star wars kid who become suicidal after his video was put all over the internet? Are we going to arrest everyone who ever downloaded or distributed that video?
Look, if terrorists use freenet to talk about stuff, everyone on freenet can see it. This actually helps the authorities. With the child porn, honestly the child porn being on freenet or on the internet isnt going to make a difference. People who create child porn are the problem, not the medium that its distributed on. This is like outlawing the english language to prevent people from talking about child porn. We need freedom of speech, child porn is wrong but stopping the distribution does not prevent the child from being abused, in fact it makes it more difficult to actually solve the crime if no one can analyze the pictures. If all childporn on the internet were forced onto freenet due to freenet being annonymous, we'd have a dabatase of victims which authorities could find, and any one of these victims could make a plea for help on the annonymous freenet or give hints, tips or whatever, anyone who sees the pictures could give hints or tips to catch the person who actually abused the child. However if you outlaw the speech entirely then you can't even talk about it, you can't even look at it, its so illegal that just thinking about it is outlawed so its almost impossible to solve it.
Now I know theres going to be millions of people who like to look at child porn for perverted reasons, but you have to understand that these people in general arent the ones creating the child porn, its generally small groups of hundreds of people who abuse thousands of kids. You'd be better off putting child porn defense systems into the digital cameras than trying to control speech on the internet. If they required everyone who uses a camera to have a digital signature or license it would solve this child porn problem quick. But instead the government wants to attack freedom of speech. Well duh.
Freedom of speech is absolute.
on
Revamping Freenet
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
There should be no restrictions on speech. Look, if someone puts child porn on the internet THEY are the ones who should be put in jail, the people who actually took the pictures and abused the child, put them in prison. People who just look at the pictures, this is putting people in jail for a thought crime. There is a difference.
Free speech does not have to be limited for law enforcement purposes, are we in China now? You should have the ability to annonymously say whatever you want as long as its not harming anyone. What you are saying is that by somehow stopping the distribution of childporn that you somehow cure the child of the abuse and thats BS. The child is already abused, so what you really mean is anyone who sees the abuse should go to jail? or do you mean anyone who talks about the abuse? you see where this can go? They could make it illegal just to describe child porn with text if you don't protect freedom of speech. If they can limit child porn speech then its easy to limit any other kinda speech and all freedom is lost.
So how much freedom is too much? It's not freedom to harm a child, its freedom of speech to talk about it. This means no child should ever be harmed, raped or any of that, but the moment you start putting people in jail for talking about it, then something is wrong. What would stop the government from putting people in jail for talking about communism?
Child porn is wrong to put on the internet, distributing it is what is called a thought crime. Free speech means that once someone creates something that is speech, no one has the right to tell you or anyone that they cannot spread that speech. I may disagree with child porn, but child porn is a ridiculous example of free speech because its choosing the one thing that most people in the USA would disagree with. Go to China and they'll disagree with our speech. Also what about political speech? What about the ability to complain about your boss? What if a child is being raped and wants to report it in an annonymous way on the internet? What if someone witnessed a murder or something?
There are all sorts of situations where annonymous free speech is important. You cannot give up free speech over one possible situation because thats like giving up democracy for security.
America has spoken. The American people do not want social programs, they support privitizing social security, this is what they elected their president and congress to do.
We need to reduce the value of workers. Look, the sky is falling, the environment simply cannot sustain 6 billion people living as we do in the USA. This means the population size is too big and as productivity increases the value of the worker will decrease, allowing us who have jobs to live like kings.
The reason the world is so competitive is because we have too many people and not enough machines. The more robots, machines and productivity we have, the less people we need. This means the only way for us all to be rich is to have population control. The best way to improve the economy is to get rid of social security. By removing social security theres less burden on the economy, we can reduce taxes. We can also get rid of public schools which cost billions per year and privatize the school system. This would save billions more.
Everyone is not equal. Equality was the dumbest idea man invented next to capitalism! There can never be equality just like there can never be fair capitalism, It's simple, our population is totally out of control and needs to shrink. The world simply isnt sustainable without population control. This means we need to stop spending money to help people survive by getting rid of social programs and welfare programs like social security.
We can all own our own businesses. Nothing stops you from taking advantage of outsourcing. No one is forcing you to work for the man when you can be the man. Now of course only some of us can be the man, this is why we need population control, we should support abortion, we should abolish social security, we should privatize healthcare and we need to make government much much smaller. If you want to survive in the brave new world you have to do it on your own.
We need to reduce the value of the American workforce as much as possible while at the same time reducing the value of any individual worker worldwide. The best way to do this is by increasing the size of the workforce, more competition for workers is good. Competition is essential to capitalism.
The best thing we can do right now is cut taxes, get rid of social security, and privatize medicare and the healthcare system. I think we also need to get rid of the drug laws and remove the requirement for labels on food products.
Hiring is obsolete. This is why we need enough wars, famines, diseases, and poverty to reduce the population sizes. We simply don't need new labor or new consumers.
Think for a moment, why should the government have the power to track everyone?
Any senator who supports this should be punished, how? Figure out which corporations back that senator and stop supporting those corporations.
Think about it, if the government says you are a terrorist then you are, the second you start making decisions based on fear is the moment its all over. The only reason we arent in a police state is because its not going to be easy to put a police state on hundreds of millions of fearless American people. If Americans start to fear the government that makes it much easier.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes those things are wrong, but should we stop talking about those things because they are wrong?
Should we outlaw all nazi material? should we arrest racists for thinking like a racist or for drawing a swastika? Look, I'm against certain acts, I have morals, but I don't think removing freedom of speech makes life better.
If we outlawed certain words so that people couldnt describe different races and we outlawed culture, and forced people to marry inter-racially, it might actually help the world but at the same time its removing peoples freedom to think and speak how they want to. How would your average nazi friend feel if they had to give up their pro-white religion because those kinds of thoughts are illegal? That only makes the problem worse, it makes them more likely to be violent when they cannot express themselves. Don't you get it?
This includes child rapists, adult rapists, prison rapists, or anyone who rapes anyone. Rape is just plain wrong and should never be done to another human. I'm not even talking about just physical rape, emotional and psychological rape is wrong also.
This is a fact most reasonable people can agree with, but if you are psycho then you might think that rape is okay and if you are aggressive and psycho then rape becomes something you are more capable of.
Most people, they wouldnt ever rape someone, they just don't have that in them. So, when we talk about stuff like childporn, which millions of people may view, do we really want to say that millions of people are potential rapists for viewing rape? I don't think you can connect the dots like that. A lot of people watch murder or watch violent stuff, and I can't say all of the people who think about murder are murderers or are going to commit murder.
I disagree with people who actually do these things, I don't disagree with people who think about these things. Its their mind, they have the freedom to think about whatever they want, just don't go out and do it.
We all look at porn, but we arent all rapists, correct?
Child porn addicts who look at porn arent all going to rape children, its just the psychopath pedophiles who are rapists who do that.
Just because someone looks at pictures does not mean they have to do whats in the picture. Porn just does not work that way. This is like saying porn creates rape so all porn should be outlawed. I think its actually the other way around. I think with less porn there would be more rape.
It's impossible to do that. If you removed every child porn picture that exists in the world, then they'd just start talking about it and telling stories, and if you outlaw that then they'll draw pictures of it, and if you outlaw that they'll find some other way to express themselves. So ultimately people want free speech and to make this into a thought crime is limiting free speech, its not protecting children because look, even if no child porn picture ever existed, these people would still have their fantasies. You think their fantasies will go away just because theres no pictures? They'd start drawing child porn anime pictures and it would happen all over again. So whats the point of having thought crimes?
Look, should we do the same to the internet to stop child porn from being distributed on it? Should ISPs be sued when child pornographers upload porn to their web servers? Should we all give up the internet because theres terrorists on the internet?
Think for a moment, any of us who uses the internet right now is supporting a communications system which could aid bad people. Just because a few bad people put some bad information on the internet does not mean that the internet is only useful for bad information. If we use the internet we can put the good information on there too, thats freedom.
I just don't think we should try to control the internet, its not that type of entity which should be controlled by one group of people. The internet has to be free.
If you use the internet you are aiding terrorists who may be on the same ISP, You are aiding communists, you are aiding liberals or conservatives. You are aiding child pornographers who use the same ISP as you.
The freenet node isnt raping children and taking pictures of it. The node isnt creating child porn, its just distributing it. Thats what the internet does. There are nazi hate sites on the internet which are just as harmful to children and this is legal. There are sites on the internet which talk about communism and anarchy, how to make bombs, etc. Remember the starwars kid who has his video all over the internet and who became suicidal? Should we blame the internet for these things or should we blame the person who created the video and who put it on the net? Should this kid sue every person who ever distributed or looked at that video?
The government has no right to say child porn is a thought crime, because thats what they are saying. No one is endorsing the creation of kiddie porn, but what the government is saying is that it should be illegal to talk about it or think about it, this opens the door to thought crime. It could start with kiddie porn, but then it could move on to other things like politics, and religion. Think about the future for a moment and see where this leads. The pictures arent abusing the children, the abuser is abusing the children, so lets place the blame on the people who actually are abusing children instead of using childporn as a way to attack freenet and free speech.
China does this kinda stuff all the time. Free speech is free speech. Child porn may not be the speech I like, but I don't think we have a right to outlaw speech we don't like, otherwise theres a lot of political speech which could be outlawed as well. This can easily be taken too far and I think that there should be absolutely no possibility for thought crimes to exist. We should never even allow the laws to be configured in a way which allows for the possibility of thought crimes.
Look, I don't want children to be abused, but controlling speech wont stop children from being abused. This is equal to saying "It's illegal to think about or talk about kiddie porn". It should be illegal to CREATE kiddie porn. Thats wrong, because the child is being abused. Talking about it isnt abusing anyone, and a lot of people are more abused than the average child porn victim on the internet by internet bullies. Remember the star wars kid who become suicidal after his video was put all over the internet? Are we going to arrest everyone who ever downloaded or distributed that video?
Look, if terrorists use freenet to talk about stuff, everyone on freenet can see it. This actually helps the authorities. With the child porn, honestly the child porn being on freenet or on the internet isnt going to make a difference. People who create child porn are the problem, not the medium that its distributed on. This is like outlawing the english language to prevent people from talking about child porn. We need freedom of speech, child porn is wrong but stopping the distribution does not prevent the child from being abused, in fact it makes it more difficult to actually solve the crime if no one can analyze the pictures. If all childporn on the internet were forced onto freenet due to freenet being annonymous, we'd have a dabatase of victims which authorities could find, and any one of these victims could make a plea for help on the annonymous freenet or give hints, tips or whatever, anyone who sees the pictures could give hints or tips to catch the person who actually abused the child. However if you outlaw the speech entirely then you can't even talk about it, you can't even look at it, its so illegal that just thinking about it is outlawed so its almost impossible to solve it.
Now I know theres going to be millions of people who like to look at child porn for perverted reasons, but you have to understand that these people in general arent the ones creating the child porn, its generally small groups of hundreds of people who abuse thousands of kids. You'd be better off putting child porn defense systems into the digital cameras than trying to control speech on the internet. If they required everyone who uses a camera to have a digital signature or license it would solve this child porn problem quick. But instead the government wants to attack freedom of speech. Well duh.
There should be no restrictions on speech. Look, if someone puts child porn on the internet THEY are the ones who should be put in jail, the people who actually took the pictures and abused the child, put them in prison. People who just look at the pictures, this is putting people in jail for a thought crime. There is a difference.
Free speech does not have to be limited for law enforcement purposes, are we in China now? You should have the ability to annonymously say whatever you want as long as its not harming anyone. What you are saying is that by somehow stopping the distribution of childporn that you somehow cure the child of the abuse and thats BS. The child is already abused, so what you really mean is anyone who sees the abuse should go to jail? or do you mean anyone who talks about the abuse? you see where this can go? They could make it illegal just to describe child porn with text if you don't protect freedom of speech. If they can limit child porn speech then its easy to limit any other kinda speech and all freedom is lost.
So how much freedom is too much? It's not freedom to harm a child, its freedom of speech to talk about it. This means no child should ever be harmed, raped or any of that, but the moment you start putting people in jail for talking about it, then something is wrong. What would stop the government from putting people in jail for talking about communism?
Child porn is wrong to put on the internet, distributing it is what is called a thought crime. Free speech means that once someone creates something that is speech, no one has the right to tell you or anyone that they cannot spread that speech. I may disagree with child porn, but child porn is a ridiculous example of free speech because its choosing the one thing that most people in the USA would disagree with. Go to China and they'll disagree with our speech. Also what about political speech? What about the ability to complain about your boss? What if a child is being raped and wants to report it in an annonymous way on the internet? What if someone witnessed a murder or something?
There are all sorts of situations where annonymous free speech is important. You cannot give up free speech over one possible situation because thats like giving up democracy for security.
If they can make it as powerful as the PS3 and Xbox360 and also make it small enough to be a portable, they win.
America has spoken. The American people do not want social programs, they support privitizing social security, this is what they elected their president and congress to do.
Do you want to pay for the people who don't have jobs? The majority of people wont have jobs.
So connect the dots, how much money would you gain if we had no taxes to pay?
We need to reduce the value of workers. Look, the sky is falling, the environment simply cannot sustain 6 billion people living as we do in the USA. This means the population size is too big and as productivity increases the value of the worker will decrease, allowing us who have jobs to live like kings.
The reason the world is so competitive is because we have too many people and not enough machines. The more robots, machines and productivity we have, the less people we need. This means the only way for us all to be rich is to have population control. The best way to improve the economy is to get rid of social security. By removing social security theres less burden on the economy, we can reduce taxes. We can also get rid of public schools which cost billions per year and privatize the school system. This would save billions more.
Everyone is not equal. Equality was the dumbest idea man invented next to capitalism! There can never be equality just like there can never be fair capitalism, It's simple, our population is totally out of control and needs to shrink. The world simply isnt sustainable without population control. This means we need to stop spending money to help people survive by getting rid of social programs and welfare programs like social security.
We can all own our own businesses. Nothing stops you from taking advantage of outsourcing. No one is forcing you to work for the man when you can be the man. Now of course only some of us can be the man, this is why we need population control, we should support abortion, we should abolish social security, we should privatize healthcare and we need to make government much much smaller. If you want to survive in the brave new world you have to do it on your own.
We need to reduce the value of the American workforce as much as possible while at the same time reducing the value of any individual worker worldwide. The best way to do this is by increasing the size of the workforce, more competition for workers is good. Competition is essential to capitalism.
The best thing we can do right now is cut taxes, get rid of social security, and privatize medicare and the healthcare system. I think we also need to get rid of the drug laws and remove the requirement for labels on food products.
Hiring is obsolete. This is why we need enough wars, famines, diseases, and poverty to reduce the population sizes. We simply don't need new labor or new consumers.
How do you rank intelligence? Social intelligence is important but its not the only important intelligence.
Think for a moment, why should the government have the power to track everyone? Any senator who supports this should be punished, how? Figure out which corporations back that senator and stop supporting those corporations.
Think about it, if the government says you are a terrorist then you are, the second you start making decisions based on fear is the moment its all over. The only reason we arent in a police state is because its not going to be easy to put a police state on hundreds of millions of fearless American people. If Americans start to fear the government that makes it much easier.
But most people are too old to care. Young people might care.
Now that we are getting rid of social security, have as many children as you can.