So if I tell somebody "go fuck yourself" and he ends up dying due to his tearing up his rectum fisting himself, I should go to jail for murder? if I tell somebody "blow me", he should be able to file a sexual harrassment lawsuit against me? where in hell do you live so I can avoid going near for the rest of my life?
Context, bitches, context. Within it, his statement made perfect sense as a rhetorical one, even if it wasn't particularly mature of him.
First, that's not an ad hominem attack. Please people, if you're going to try to use classical rhetorical references, read a book first.
Ahh, yes, because nobody would ever think being called a "sociopath" would be an insult.
Second, If you decide to experiment on prisoners and murder people who have never harmed you, you are fitting into the textbook definition of "sociopath". Most people feel empathy for fellow human beings, picture themselves in the place of others, recognize the emotions of pain and fear and have a built in aversion to them. If your only reason for not murdering people is religion, you have a mental illness and should seek help.
Murder is simply far too extreme a case. Try something milder, then: would you call a guy who hits his best friend for sleeping with his girlfriend a sociopath? he is, after all, intentionally causing pain and suffering onto somebody else, yet I believe most people would consider it an understandable action even if they wouldn't do it themselves.
"Vice versa" is two words and your comment doesn't make any sense. Who thinks experimenting on prisoners is "overreacting over trivialities" and what makes you think that person is not mentally ill?
Again with the borderline cases. But hey, anything as long as it keeps the religion hate going, right?
Morality is inherently subjective, and the GGP's point on religion providing a 'baseline standard' of sorts for many people is spot-on, even if the examples he picked weren't the best. Stop making wild generalizations just because you love to hate on religion, you give the rest of us atheists a bad name.
Ahh, yes. I wonder, then, which religion drove these guys to conduct such a suicidal and strategically-meaningless attack? Particularly telling is that if you replace "Japanese" with "Americans" in Doolittle's justification for the raid you'd get almost a word-for-word match with Osama's stated reasoning for the Sept. 11 attack.
Far more people have died trying to make their comrades' deaths be "worth something" (in spite of them being, y'know, dead already and so beyond caring) than those trying to get their own personal harem in the afterlife. Problem is, most of us know we'd be susceptible to such an ideology given the right conditions, so we're not as ready to accept its idiocy and meaninglessness as we are with dumb, "evil" religion. After all, "they are idiots" is a lot easier to say than "we are idiots".
there are like some facts that go this way and some facts that go that way: It's a fact that I'm typing on a keyboard now, just like it's a fact I was speeding yesterday, get what I mean?
Yeah.
So definitely ignore this media release and don't believe a thing WikiLeaks puts out or Assange says. Make sense?
No.
If there are two sides of a story, the best way to find out what really happened is not to ignore both parties and make something up in your head.
Which, in the music store department, provide even less competition than MacOS and its ilk did to Microsoft back in the day.
Apple has absolutely ZERO monopolies.
Technically, and only because they've yet to be investigated over anti-trust regulations. But I guess it'll be just like Intel, with the fanboys declaring "they're not a monopoly!" until the very day the veredict is made public.
Look at yourself. You're basically calling me an Apple hater because I reject your notion of OSX' alleged greatness and brilliance, and its dominance quality-wise over other Operating Systems.
Hate can be crippling, but nowhere near as much as fervor.
On the other hand, almost the entire NES library seems to be filled with examples that are just as fun today as they were back in the day without having to put on rose-tinted glasses of saying that this game was fun for its time.
True, but only because for most NES games "as fun as they were back in the day" means "not at all". I'll give the NES that one at least: all its horrid trash were at least readily recognizable as such, there were no Crysis back then that turned into generic crap only around the halfway mark.
If the Swedish government is in the US's pocket like plenty of people seem to believe, you'd think that they would strongly favor Assange living there (all the better to trump up fake rape charges, of course.)
Assuming, of course, that the US government has any sort of long-term planning. Given the way they've handled the whole Iraq and Afghanistan invasions and the PR circus around them, I highly doubt it.
Alternatively, you could go with the more mundane but rational-seeming explanation, which is that Sweden doesn't want Assange because he draws a lot of attention to himself and gets complaints from the local women.
You forgot to mention that the complains were withdrawn shortly after being made.
You seem to be confused about my point. I was not trying to say that OS X can "look" like any other OS. Why would anyone want that? There's very little utility in making one OS "look" like another.
Unless you particularly like the look and feel of said OS, of course. Besides, it's simply a small test, BeOS' interface for instance may be hard to replicate entirely due to its many quirks and its relative obscurity in today's age, but Win2K's is so simple and widespread that copying should not represent a significant problem on any UI that calls itself customizable.
Mac OS X has all of the flexibility and configurability of linux (I'm going to assume you know what that implies).
Yeah. Among other things, it implies that if I want to have my computer use a tiling WM and a transparent toolbar with two separate "Start"-like menus, I'll be able to get it without overwritting the goddamned OS with another one. In terms of true customizability OSX is not only far behind Linux and the BSDs, it's decades away from even Windows. It's Steve's way or the highway, and the fact that you may like it doesn't mean it's "customizable". But hey! at least you have a weather plugin, huh?
the number 1 reason that we like Macs is that Mac OS X is unix and the number 2 reason is that Mac OS X is the most flexible, configurable, programmable OS available - bar none.
Most flexible and configurable, really? care, then, to describe the steps required to make OSX' look and feel similar to that of Windows 2K? preferably ones that don't involve VMs in them.
1. Updates break things. You'll finally get video and sound working the way you like (which can be a pain in the butt to start with); in comes a kernel update and it breaks. I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me.
I can't tell you either, because it's never happened to me. Broken Flash? sure, but Flash works like shit on Linux, Windows, OSX and every other OS that piece of trash has been ported to, no surprises there.
Fact: many of these manufacturers will at least, grudgingly, provide a "binary blob" that allows me to use their stuff under Linux... but THIS is why the stuff breaks after a kernel update.
That, and the fact that most of those "binary blobs" were written in a week by an unpaid intern working on the company basement with no other documentation than the 3-years-old Windows binary driver.
Oh, and it doesn't help that, instead of THANKING these manufacturers for bothering to provide at least that "binary blob" to the Linux community, the manufacturer is excoriated and called names by the True Believers In Free Software for not agreeing to provide all of the intimate details of their hardware, without NDAs or other encumbrances, so that the community can develop the driver.
Thanking them would make them believe that a) we appreciate such "gestures" and b) they are sufficient to keep us satisfied. Fact is, not only most of those blobs still suck when they're (allegedly) running properly, but they're a pain in the arse to get to run in the first place. Different architecture? sucks to be you. Patched kernel? sucks to be you. Different version of the library their l337 (and completely unnecessary) GUI config utility was compiled against? sucks to be you. And for all those problems you can do nothing but beg the manufacturer to get another intern to fix the problem sometime during the next century *because* it's a goddamned blob.
The stigma of closed-source drivers on Linux isn't because of some religious zeal or anything of the sorts (if it were, we'd see the same for closed apps such as Oracle, don't you think?) but rather of simple practicality: being unable to port, debug and modify the OS' drivers creates far more problems than it solves, and makes you dependant on a company that, chances are, doesn't give a fuck about you and any problem you may have. So hell yeah I want the documentation instead.
I am also scolded by the Purists because I prefer Adobe's Acrobat Reader to all of the free alternatives. How DARE I, say the purists?
That's not because it's closed source, that's because it sucks. You'd face the same stigma on Windows for not using Foxit, in spite of it being closed-source payware. It's like somebody using IE5.5 to browse the web: anything, *anything* would be far better than that attrocity, so you using it out of your own, free will is... perplexing, to say the least.
Ahh, yes. I predict that by 2020, there'll only be 6 PCs in the whole world, with everybody else connected by a simple iOS or Android device to one of them.
Face it, you're not the first nor the last to predict the death of the PC in favor of some locked-down alternative, and so far your record has been pretty lousy.
You're forgetting that the "innocent third parties" aren't at risk from the information on the crack but rather from the crack itself being there in the first place, and you not knowing about it won't make the crack on the dam magically dissapear.
Calling WoW's launch the most stable and polished out of all MMOs is a lot like calling IE9 the most stable and polished out of all Microsoft browsers: just because it sucks marginally less than the trash before doesn't mean it doesn't still suck.
The problem isn't with the games per se, it's just you aren't 14 anymore. Play FFVII again one of these days and you'll be surprised at its incredibly strict linearity, its terrible writing (thanks in no small part to its awful, awful translation) and, overall, how little many of the characters' choices throughout the story make any sense were it not for "Rule of Cool" and "Rule of Drama". Good game? sure. Great, even. But certainly not perfect, and without the rose-colored glasses I don't think the newer installments have anything to envy from it.
Small correction: they tell you more about how they view themselves. And I, for one, would easily prefer a cop that feels he's got an undeservedly large level of influence over the lives of others, over some sociopathic jackass that believes he's a hero deserving nothing but gratitude from their fellow men. Far easier to convince the former of his mistakes than the latter, and far less apt to abuse their authority for their own gain.
Ideas are cheap, implementation is everything. Besides, it's a lot easier to profit from an idea when you don't have a dozen large corporations suing the crap out of you, as per TFA.
This is the best way to build a microtransaction system. Once again, Valve legitimizes a system loathed and reviled rabidly by slashdot posters and the OSS community at large. Bravo, Mr. Newell.
You forgot the Apple zealots, Java haters, rabid atheists and Amiga fanboys. Oh, wait, they've got nothing to do with implementing microtransactions on a Valve game, and neither does the OSS crowd.
Ahhh, yes, serial numbers. Of the kind that EA used on my as-of-now unplayable copy of LotR:BfME2.
If you think Steam, Impulse et al hold no advantage over a "simple" serial number, you must be a neat freak with no children, or have eidetic memory. Sadly, most people don't fall into either category (myself included), which is why Steam is enjoying such success.
And please save the "highly competitive" talk for games that do this kind of thing *cough*MMOs*cough* for items that are not purely cosmetical.
Everyone is part of some minority or another. People who went to the same school you did are a tiny minority in the sea of the US educational system, people who like the same flavor of ice cream are a minority among the greater universe of ice-cream lovers, and so on. Your ideology ultimately boils down to "do not offend anyone, ever". The problem being, of course, when your own attempts at being politically correct ends up offending others, as this thread shows.
The reason society has determined 'hate speech' to be wrong isn't because they're a minority, but rather because we've deemed it wrong to offend others on those grounds. Saying "death to all heterosexuals!" is still wrong in spite of being the majority, but you're still free to say I'm a moron for liking strawberry ice-cream over chocolate, and I'm still free to say you're a moron for trampling over Freedom of Speech just because some guys signed up to go kill some Iraquis and ended up getting shot themselves instead.
How does your hypothetical children "finish the job"? either he leaves the other bully alive so he can take revenge another day, or he kills another children over some freaking sand.
Wars are fought over clear objectives, because when they aren't, the only path to victory is wholesale genocide. Think about that for a minute.
Slashdot Mirror
So if I tell somebody "go fuck yourself" and he ends up dying due to his tearing up his rectum fisting himself, I should go to jail for murder? if I tell somebody "blow me", he should be able to file a sexual harrassment lawsuit against me? where in hell do you live so I can avoid going near for the rest of my life?
Context, bitches, context. Within it, his statement made perfect sense as a rhetorical one, even if it wasn't particularly mature of him.
First, that's not an ad hominem attack. Please people, if you're going to try to use classical rhetorical references, read a book first.
Ahh, yes, because nobody would ever think being called a "sociopath" would be an insult.
Second, If you decide to experiment on prisoners and murder people who have never harmed you, you are fitting into the textbook definition of "sociopath". Most people feel empathy for fellow human beings, picture themselves in the place of others, recognize the emotions of pain and fear and have a built in aversion to them. If your only reason for not murdering people is religion, you have a mental illness and should seek help.
Murder is simply far too extreme a case. Try something milder, then: would you call a guy who hits his best friend for sleeping with his girlfriend a sociopath? he is, after all, intentionally causing pain and suffering onto somebody else, yet I believe most people would consider it an understandable action even if they wouldn't do it themselves.
"Vice versa" is two words and your comment doesn't make any sense. Who thinks experimenting on prisoners is "overreacting over trivialities" and what makes you think that person is not mentally ill?
Again with the borderline cases. But hey, anything as long as it keeps the religion hate going, right?
Morality is inherently subjective, and the GGP's point on religion providing a 'baseline standard' of sorts for many people is spot-on, even if the examples he picked weren't the best. Stop making wild generalizations just because you love to hate on religion, you give the rest of us atheists a bad name.
Ahh, yes. I wonder, then, which religion drove these guys to conduct such a suicidal and strategically-meaningless attack? Particularly telling is that if you replace "Japanese" with "Americans" in Doolittle's justification for the raid you'd get almost a word-for-word match with Osama's stated reasoning for the Sept. 11 attack.
Far more people have died trying to make their comrades' deaths be "worth something" (in spite of them being, y'know, dead already and so beyond caring) than those trying to get their own personal harem in the afterlife. Problem is, most of us know we'd be susceptible to such an ideology given the right conditions, so we're not as ready to accept its idiocy and meaninglessness as we are with dumb, "evil" religion. After all, "they are idiots" is a lot easier to say than "we are idiots".
Ahh, yes, good old "anyone whose morals disagree with mine is a sociopath" fallacy, one of the most common forms of Ad Hominem in current use.
Always remember that your "inflict pain and suffering upon others" is another person's "overreacting over trivialities" and viceversa.
there are like some facts that go this way and some facts that go that way: It's a fact that I'm typing on a keyboard now, just like it's a fact I was speeding yesterday, get what I mean?
Yeah.
So definitely ignore this media release and don't believe a thing WikiLeaks puts out or Assange says. Make sense?
No.
If there are two sides of a story, the best way to find out what really happened is not to ignore both parties and make something up in your head.
Oh yes, yes it is.
Itunes has many competitors
Which, in the music store department, provide even less competition than MacOS and its ilk did to Microsoft back in the day.
Apple has absolutely ZERO monopolies.
Technically, and only because they've yet to be investigated over anti-trust regulations. But I guess it'll be just like Intel, with the fanboys declaring "they're not a monopoly!" until the very day the veredict is made public.
Look at yourself. You're basically calling me an Apple hater because I reject your notion of OSX' alleged greatness and brilliance, and its dominance quality-wise over other Operating Systems.
Hate can be crippling, but nowhere near as much as fervor.
On the other hand, almost the entire NES library seems to be filled with examples that are just as fun today as they were back in the day without having to put on rose-tinted glasses of saying that this game was fun for its time.
True, but only because for most NES games "as fun as they were back in the day" means "not at all". I'll give the NES that one at least: all its horrid trash were at least readily recognizable as such, there were no Crysis back then that turned into generic crap only around the halfway mark.
If the Swedish government is in the US's pocket like plenty of people seem to believe, you'd think that they would strongly favor Assange living there (all the better to trump up fake rape charges, of course.)
Assuming, of course, that the US government has any sort of long-term planning. Given the way they've handled the whole Iraq and Afghanistan invasions and the PR circus around them, I highly doubt it.
Alternatively, you could go with the more mundane but rational-seeming explanation, which is that Sweden doesn't want Assange because he draws a lot of attention to himself and gets complaints from the local women.
You forgot to mention that the complains were withdrawn shortly after being made.
You seem to be confused about my point. I was not trying to say that OS X can "look" like any other OS. Why would anyone want that? There's very little utility in making one OS "look" like another.
Unless you particularly like the look and feel of said OS, of course. Besides, it's simply a small test, BeOS' interface for instance may be hard to replicate entirely due to its many quirks and its relative obscurity in today's age, but Win2K's is so simple and widespread that copying should not represent a significant problem on any UI that calls itself customizable.
Mac OS X has all of the flexibility and configurability of linux (I'm going to assume you know what that implies).
Yeah. Among other things, it implies that if I want to have my computer use a tiling WM and a transparent toolbar with two separate "Start"-like menus, I'll be able to get it without overwritting the goddamned OS with another one. In terms of true customizability OSX is not only far behind Linux and the BSDs, it's decades away from even Windows. It's Steve's way or the highway, and the fact that you may like it doesn't mean it's "customizable". But hey! at least you have a weather plugin, huh?
the number 1 reason that we like Macs is that Mac OS X is unix and the number 2 reason is that Mac OS X is the most flexible, configurable, programmable OS available - bar none.
Most flexible and configurable, really? care, then, to describe the steps required to make OSX' look and feel similar to that of Windows 2K? preferably ones that don't involve VMs in them.
1. Updates break things. You'll finally get video and sound working the way you like (which can be a pain in the butt to start with); in comes a kernel update and it breaks. I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me.
I can't tell you either, because it's never happened to me. Broken Flash? sure, but Flash works like shit on Linux, Windows, OSX and every other OS that piece of trash has been ported to, no surprises there.
Fact: many of these manufacturers will at least, grudgingly, provide a "binary blob" that allows me to use their stuff under Linux ... but THIS is why the stuff breaks after a kernel update.
That, and the fact that most of those "binary blobs" were written in a week by an unpaid intern working on the company basement with no other documentation than the 3-years-old Windows binary driver.
Oh, and it doesn't help that, instead of THANKING these manufacturers for bothering to provide at least that "binary blob" to the Linux community, the manufacturer is excoriated and called names by the True Believers In Free Software for not agreeing to provide all of the intimate details of their hardware, without NDAs or other encumbrances, so that the community can develop the driver.
Thanking them would make them believe that a) we appreciate such "gestures" and b) they are sufficient to keep us satisfied. Fact is, not only most of those blobs still suck when they're (allegedly) running properly, but they're a pain in the arse to get to run in the first place. Different architecture? sucks to be you. Patched kernel? sucks to be you. Different version of the library their l337 (and completely unnecessary) GUI config utility was compiled against? sucks to be you. And for all those problems you can do nothing but beg the manufacturer to get another intern to fix the problem sometime during the next century *because* it's a goddamned blob.
The stigma of closed-source drivers on Linux isn't because of some religious zeal or anything of the sorts (if it were, we'd see the same for closed apps such as Oracle, don't you think?) but rather of simple practicality: being unable to port, debug and modify the OS' drivers creates far more problems than it solves, and makes you dependant on a company that, chances are, doesn't give a fuck about you and any problem you may have. So hell yeah I want the documentation instead.
I am also scolded by the Purists because I prefer Adobe's Acrobat Reader to all of the free alternatives. How DARE I, say the purists?
That's not because it's closed source, that's because it sucks. You'd face the same stigma on Windows for not using Foxit, in spite of it being closed-source payware. It's like somebody using IE5.5 to browse the web: anything, *anything* would be far better than that attrocity, so you using it out of your own, free will is... perplexing, to say the least.
Ahh, yes. I predict that by 2020, there'll only be 6 PCs in the whole world, with everybody else connected by a simple iOS or Android device to one of them.
Face it, you're not the first nor the last to predict the death of the PC in favor of some locked-down alternative, and so far your record has been pretty lousy.
You're forgetting that the "innocent third parties" aren't at risk from the information on the crack but rather from the crack itself being there in the first place, and you not knowing about it won't make the crack on the dam magically dissapear.
Calling WoW's launch the most stable and polished out of all MMOs is a lot like calling IE9 the most stable and polished out of all Microsoft browsers: just because it sucks marginally less than the trash before doesn't mean it doesn't still suck.
The problem isn't with the games per se, it's just you aren't 14 anymore. Play FFVII again one of these days and you'll be surprised at its incredibly strict linearity, its terrible writing (thanks in no small part to its awful, awful translation) and, overall, how little many of the characters' choices throughout the story make any sense were it not for "Rule of Cool" and "Rule of Drama". Good game? sure. Great, even. But certainly not perfect, and without the rose-colored glasses I don't think the newer installments have anything to envy from it.
Or just get the hell out of that police state while you still can, which is what any sane man would do in that situation.
Small correction: they tell you more about how they view themselves. And I, for one, would easily prefer a cop that feels he's got an undeservedly large level of influence over the lives of others, over some sociopathic jackass that believes he's a hero deserving nothing but gratitude from their fellow men. Far easier to convince the former of his mistakes than the latter, and far less apt to abuse their authority for their own gain.
Ideas are cheap, implementation is everything. Besides, it's a lot easier to profit from an idea when you don't have a dozen large corporations suing the crap out of you, as per TFA.
This is the best way to build a microtransaction system. Once again, Valve legitimizes a system loathed and reviled rabidly by slashdot posters and the OSS community at large. Bravo, Mr. Newell.
You forgot the Apple zealots, Java haters, rabid atheists and Amiga fanboys. Oh, wait, they've got nothing to do with implementing microtransactions on a Valve game, and neither does the OSS crowd.
Ahhh, yes, serial numbers. Of the kind that EA used on my as-of-now unplayable copy of LotR:BfME2.
If you think Steam, Impulse et al hold no advantage over a "simple" serial number, you must be a neat freak with no children, or have eidetic memory. Sadly, most people don't fall into either category (myself included), which is why Steam is enjoying such success.
And please save the "highly competitive" talk for games that do this kind of thing *cough*MMOs*cough* for items that are not purely cosmetical.
Everyone is part of some minority or another. People who went to the same school you did are a tiny minority in the sea of the US educational system, people who like the same flavor of ice cream are a minority among the greater universe of ice-cream lovers, and so on. Your ideology ultimately boils down to "do not offend anyone, ever". The problem being, of course, when your own attempts at being politically correct ends up offending others, as this thread shows.
The reason society has determined 'hate speech' to be wrong isn't because they're a minority, but rather because we've deemed it wrong to offend others on those grounds. Saying "death to all heterosexuals!" is still wrong in spite of being the majority, but you're still free to say I'm a moron for liking strawberry ice-cream over chocolate, and I'm still free to say you're a moron for trampling over Freedom of Speech just because some guys signed up to go kill some Iraquis and ended up getting shot themselves instead.
How does your hypothetical children "finish the job"? either he leaves the other bully alive so he can take revenge another day, or he kills another children over some freaking sand.
Wars are fought over clear objectives, because when they aren't, the only path to victory is wholesale genocide. Think about that for a minute.
Well, depending on your particular country of origin you may still can.