It takes common sense to stay away from the excesses of mainstream social media. People that are in possession of that rare commodity already noticed a while ago what Fry so rightfully points out and have left or severely restricted their exposure (if they ever signed up in the first place). The others will continue to get exploited as the actual product and will get manipulated to serve the commercial interests best. I would not mind, if I did not have to live in the same world with these people and suffer from their stupidity via "democracy".
Indeed. A very old strategy, that is just as despicable today as it was throughout history. Machiavelli was probably just the first that described this well and who had his writing survive. Today, people could easily know better with all the access to information the average person has, but apparently the cave-man reflexes are stronger and so this obvious manipulation-technique keeps working.
In a police state, though, the police are not subject to the law and can ignore court orders and the law without ever suffering negative effects. They have devolved into a means of exercising power and keeping the general population in check. Which, to be fair, was probably the original role of armed thugs under government control anyways.
You are confusing storing money in bank account that us managed by a bank and storing data in a data-center most decidedly not managed by a bank. Here is a hint: The bank operates internationally and hence is subject to pressure in the US, for example.
The amount of concentrated stupid some people are spewing in response to this is really staggering. And they do it again and again. They will probably claim because it was "in a vacuum" that there can be no air effects, completely missing that no vacuum on earth is perfect and the one used here not even nearly so.
Oh, but religion has a point: Exercising power over people and telling them what to think. Rather obviously so.
As to all the claims about reality religion makes, these are all extraordinary claims and so any sane person will require extraordinary proof. Religion does not even have conventional proof. Frank Herbert's "Missionaria Protectiva" comes to mind (a synthetic religion, fully known to be bogus to those that spread it).
I do quite agree that not giving children sound sexual education is pretty bad. In fact, I firmly believe not educating children about important aspects of the real world is universally bad.
Porn is not education though, it is entertainment and I do not see it sharing any blame in this failure of the educators.
Doesn't that suggest that we should produce ideal porn that sends the messages that we want to send? Perhaps there could be government sponsered healthy porn.
You mean porn that is boring and no fun to watch at all? Somehow I cannot see that being a success....
Indeed. And even if some where "yes", it would not justify restrictions. In a free society, people make their own decisions and that includes the right to make bad decisions. In a religious society, that right is taken from them and decisions are made for them. Calling a group stupid that is actually stupid is neither "intellectually lazy" nor "bashing". It is called "pointing out the truth", but the strongly religious have traditionally rather severe problems with that.
Well, "misguided hypocrite" would certainly fit. I have started to use "evil" when people are willing to accept a lot of harm to others when pushing their personal goals though. Not that "evil" has a clear and consistent definition, so you do have a point.
Very much this. In addition, you will find very few bright, capable and educated people that will want to work for the government in the first place. The government is where ideas, enthusiasm and individual freedom goes to die and they pay badly in addition. It is a valid way out for the mediocre that just want a master to serve, but that is it.
Indeed. One of the last steps in this process is prevent citizens from leaving the country by use of mine-fields, electric fences, etc. to limit the brain-drain. That has never worked well either.
The NSA is not into getting convictions and keeping the prisons full. The NSA is into getting information. They will never expose a source unless there is an extremely good reason from _their_ POV. Incidentally, that is why no state with an intact rule-of-law ever allows information from a secret agency to be used by law-enforcement.
Slashdot Mirror
It takes common sense to stay away from the excesses of mainstream social media. People that are in possession of that rare commodity already noticed a while ago what Fry so rightfully points out and have left or severely restricted their exposure (if they ever signed up in the first place). The others will continue to get exploited as the actual product and will get manipulated to serve the commercial interests best. I would not mind, if I did not have to live in the same world with these people and suffer from their stupidity via "democracy".
Indeed. A very old strategy, that is just as despicable today as it was throughout history. Machiavelli was probably just the first that described this well and who had his writing survive. Today, people could easily know better with all the access to information the average person has, but apparently the cave-man reflexes are stronger and so this obvious manipulation-technique keeps working.
Infantile. And not even funny. Pathetic.
Completely agree.
In a police state, though, the police are not subject to the law and can ignore court orders and the law without ever suffering negative effects. They have devolved into a means of exercising power and keeping the general population in check. Which, to be fair, was probably the original role of armed thugs under government control anyways.
These people must be sanctioned personally when disregarding court orders, just the same as everybody else.
Depends on what you have arranged with them for this situation.
You are confusing storing money in bank account that us managed by a bank and storing data in a data-center most decidedly not managed by a bank. Here is a hint: The bank operates internationally and hence is subject to pressure in the US, for example.
You are confusing swiss banks with "the swiss". These days, swiss banks are international corporations.
P. T. Barnum's "law" of the con: "There's a sucker born every minute"
Guess which one is more relevant here.
The amount of concentrated stupid some people are spewing in response to this is really staggering. And they do it again and again. They will probably claim because it was "in a vacuum" that there can be no air effects, completely missing that no vacuum on earth is perfect and the one used here not even nearly so.
I read the original article on the "Exceptionally Magic" drive way back. I have not bothered to read anything else since.
You have a point.
Oh, but religion has a point: Exercising power over people and telling them what to think. Rather obviously so.
As to all the claims about reality religion makes, these are all extraordinary claims and so any sane person will require extraordinary proof. Religion does not even have conventional proof. Frank Herbert's "Missionaria Protectiva" comes to mind (a synthetic religion, fully known to be bogus to those that spread it).
I do quite agree that not giving children sound sexual education is pretty bad. In fact, I firmly believe not educating children about important aspects of the real world is universally bad.
Porn is not education though, it is entertainment and I do not see it sharing any blame in this failure of the educators.
Religion is the party with the extraordinary claims here. They would need to have extraordinary proof, but they have nothing at all.
Nice one! Quite accurate.
Just like the FBI with "terrorists": If you do not have enough to spread fear and advance your agenda, create some!
Doesn't that suggest that we should produce ideal porn that sends the messages that we want to send? Perhaps there could be government sponsered healthy porn.
You mean porn that is boring and no fun to watch at all? Somehow I cannot see that being a success....
Indeed. And even if some where "yes", it would not justify restrictions. In a free society, people make their own decisions and that includes the right to make bad decisions. In a religious society, that right is taken from them and decisions are made for them. Calling a group stupid that is actually stupid is neither "intellectually lazy" nor "bashing". It is called "pointing out the truth", but the strongly religious have traditionally rather severe problems with that.
Well, "misguided hypocrite" would certainly fit. I have started to use "evil" when people are willing to accept a lot of harm to others when pushing their personal goals though. Not that "evil" has a clear and consistent definition, so you do have a point.
As to lead, that is really nasty stuff.
Probably not. Strong religion does only not qualify as mental illness because that would not be PC.
Agreed.
Very much this. In addition, you will find very few bright, capable and educated people that will want to work for the government in the first place. The government is where ideas, enthusiasm and individual freedom goes to die and they pay badly in addition. It is a valid way out for the mediocre that just want a master to serve, but that is it.
Indeed. One of the last steps in this process is prevent citizens from leaving the country by use of mine-fields, electric fences, etc. to limit the brain-drain. That has never worked well either.
The NSA is not into getting convictions and keeping the prisons full. The NSA is into getting information. They will never expose a source unless there is an extremely good reason from _their_ POV. Incidentally, that is why no state with an intact rule-of-law ever allows information from a secret agency to be used by law-enforcement.