In societies under duress people have to be ready to sacrifice in order for society to survive - this works better if there is a set of reasons and (possibly false) promises that can justify the sacrifice.
Absolutely.
So having religious society is not necessarily harming.
Sorry, that's a non-sequitur. How do you go from "religion can help motivate people" to "religion is not necessarily harmful"? Cocaine addiction can also help motivate people, but is usually quite harmful.
Hell, a government-orchestrated brainwashing program combined with a a carefully designed drug regime can make people not only willing to sacrifice themselves, but make them much more capable of doing so. Would you say that such a program would also be "not necessarily bad"?
I agree - if you're just looking to create mindless automatons who are willing to martyr themselves "for the greater good", religion is a great tool. I'm just not sure how you can consider that a good thing.
Making general claims about how harmful a religion can be is not justified however.
Pure economics aside, there is the air quality argument..... You can't necessarily put a price on it, but you can bet that for something like the olympics people notice.
Actually, you CAN put a price on it. Or, at least you can for year-round facilities. When you use propane powered machines, you have to ventilate the arena. In the winter that's not a big deal, but in the summer it means a significant increase in air-conditioning costs.
In reply to your sig. What about Zionism and Islam? Are you just a religion basher or do you just descriminate against Christians?
As others have pointed out, BR would not have had much exposure to Islam, nor would he have considered them important. From a more modern perspective, though, Zionism doesn't count since it's not a religion, and Islam is currently floundering around, trying to re-fight the battles which Christianity lost centuries ago. Islam isn't "the principal enemy of moral progress" because it's so ass-backwards that they don't even get counted in discussions about morality. Kinda like how the Quakers aren't "enemies of technological progress" because they're such complete luddites that nobody cares what they think.
As for Christianity, the situation's changed a bit since Russel's time, but not enough. The brand of Christianity practiced in most of the western world is generally benign, with the obvious exception of the US. On the other hand, the brand of Christianity being practiced in developing nations is just as regressive as Islam, and even the benign varieties tend to cause harm by teaching people to blindly accept dogmatic statements.
"Sargeant, you got a lot a damn gall to ask me if I've rehabilitated myself, I mean, I mean, I mean that just, I'm sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin here on the Group W bench 'cause you want to know if I'm moral enough to join the army, burn women, kids, houses and villages after bein' a litterbug."
You forgot the rest of it:
"He looked at me and said, 'Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington.'"
'nuff said. Anyone who thinks that way is too stupid for the army. Ship him off to McDonalds, and hope he doesn't end up killing himself with the deep-fryer.
Yes, but they were not getting no-bid contracts under Clinton. In my opinion, that's a huge significant difference.
The military didn't have the same requirements under Clinton.
Here in Canada, the military has been seeking multiple bids on every contract for decades. After becoming involved in Afghanistan, however, some purchases were made without bothering to accept bids. If Haliburton had started getting no-bid contracts during a time of normal operational tempo, then you'd have a valid point to make - as it is, you're going to have a hell of a time trying to prove that these contracts had anything to do with Cheney.
That's what the prison sentence was for.. I find it extremely unfair that even after you get out, the only job you can get with a felony like that is gas station attendant. I think equal opportunity laws should cover people with criminal records for this very reason.
Awesome. You got any kids, and are you looking for a nanny? If so, let me know - I'm sure I can find plenty of recently paroled child-molesters to help you test that theory.
Heh, that's exactly what I was thinking while reading his comment. I wholeheartedly agree with his sentiment, but he's created a false dichotomy - it's quite possible that the individual whom he's addressing gave birth to quadruplets.
So the Saudis can treat women as inferiors or slaves, but the western world can't?
You're comparing a regressive action to the status-quo. Obviously neither situation is acceptable, but it's only natural that people will protest more strongly against a progressive nation slipping into tyranny than they will against a regressive nation maintaining policies which are hundreds or thousands of years old.
Yeah well, before you start a revolution make sure it's something you're really willing to sacrifice your life for, because you might. In this case, I would be willing to wait it out until I could vote some sane people into office.
I'll bet German dissenters felt the same way.
"Eh. How bad can this Adolph guy be? Let's just wait until the next election."
Securing the media and controlling speech are the first steps in ensuring that there are no more elections.
Well, I was going for the "funny" mod, but if you want to be serious for a minute then I should probably tell you to go read the friggin' wiki article. The US wanted to put a stop to the program, yes - because they were worried about unstable nations getting their hands on missile technology. The French and the Soviets also opposed it - because they didn't want Germany developing long-range missiles. So yeah, there was plenty of opposition to the program, but writing it off as "NASA not wanting competition" is asinine.
They were just worried about having Nazis on the moon:) Considering the Sci-Fi stories they would have been reading as kids, can you really blame them?
I think your response to me was very well thought out, and I'm sorry to see that you got modded "troll". With that said, I disagree with pretty much everything:)
Imagine somebody turned up at your front door and say.. And you say, wait, didn't I read about you being found guilty of something, and he says "yes but don't worry, I'm appealing!" - is that going to reassure you?
I'd take the trouble of finding out what he was convicted of. If he was an American citizen convicted of legally obtaining a handgun, I'd call the ruling preposterous and would disregard it. Likewise, a Swedish citizen found guilty of violating a law which does not exist is more likely to receive my business BECAUSE of his bullshit conviction.
The Pirate Bay deliberately antagonized the people he is now trying to help. He ignored DMCA takedowns and told anyone who would listen why he was right and the rest of the world was wrong.
Why is that a problem? He WAS right, and they were wrong.
If some twit from Saudi Arabia insisted that I take down a picture of Mohammed because it violates Sharia Law, I'd tell him to get fucked. The Pirates Bay folks did exactly the same thing.
And his business partners have a history of harassment, like the "ddo$" scheme against the opposition law firm.
Their "DDOS scheme" was perfectly legal, unlike the DDOS attack which "The Biz" was planning on using on them. Last I checked, there was no law prohibiting people from giving money to a law firm, while there certainly are laws which prohibit hiring hackers to flood someones servers.
Of course, they're walking a fine line there, and if I were them I certainly wouldn't have stooped to that. On the other hand, considering what they've had to put up with, I can certainly understand their response.
Like all the of the guys who ran the pirate bay, they have spent the last few years proving the world that they're stupid and untrustworthy.
That's your opinion. As far as I'm concerned, they've shown themselves to be a lot more reasonable and intelligent than anyone at the MPAA or RIA.
Under Swedish law, the verdict means absolutely nothing while they're going through the appeals process. In other words, they're still "innocent until proven guilty". Judging by the obvious bias of the judge in the initial case, I'd say they have a pretty good chance to get a better verdict the second time around.
It's cute how you hijacked the issue to try and prop-up your favorite cause, but c'mon.. really? You're going to try and argue that an abolition of IP laws would eliminate child pornography? Let's not be silly here.
Slashdot Mirror
As soon as we need to build a pipeline through either of those places, we'll get right on that mine-clearing effort.
In societies under duress people have to be ready to sacrifice in order for society to survive - this works better if there is a set of reasons and (possibly false) promises that can justify the sacrifice.
Absolutely.
So having religious society is not necessarily harming.
Sorry, that's a non-sequitur. How do you go from "religion can help motivate people" to "religion is not necessarily harmful"? Cocaine addiction can also help motivate people, but is usually quite harmful.
Hell, a government-orchestrated brainwashing program combined with a a carefully designed drug regime can make people not only willing to sacrifice themselves, but make them much more capable of doing so. Would you say that such a program would also be "not necessarily bad"?
I agree - if you're just looking to create mindless automatons who are willing to martyr themselves "for the greater good", religion is a great tool. I'm just not sure how you can consider that a good thing.
Making general claims about how harmful a religion can be is not justified however.
Why?
Pure economics aside, there is the air quality argument. .... You can't necessarily put a price on it, but you can bet that for something like the olympics people notice.
Actually, you CAN put a price on it. Or, at least you can for year-round facilities. When you use propane powered machines, you have to ventilate the arena. In the winter that's not a big deal, but in the summer it means a significant increase in air-conditioning costs.
It's the irrational fear that somebody somewhere is getting something that they didn't earn or deserve.
No, we weren't talking about gitmo ...
In reply to your sig. What about Zionism and Islam? Are you just a religion basher or do you just descriminate against Christians?
As others have pointed out, BR would not have had much exposure to Islam, nor would he have considered them important. From a more modern perspective, though, Zionism doesn't count since it's not a religion, and Islam is currently floundering around, trying to re-fight the battles which Christianity lost centuries ago. Islam isn't "the principal enemy of moral progress" because it's so ass-backwards that they don't even get counted in discussions about morality. Kinda like how the Quakers aren't "enemies of technological progress" because they're such complete luddites that nobody cares what they think.
As for Christianity, the situation's changed a bit since Russel's time, but not enough. The brand of Christianity practiced in most of the western world is generally benign, with the obvious exception of the US. On the other hand, the brand of Christianity being practiced in developing nations is just as regressive as Islam, and even the benign varieties tend to cause harm by teaching people to blindly accept dogmatic statements.
And come on! It's BadAnalogyGuy!!! The analogy is as advertised.
I'd like to request that a new moderation category be added: "-1 BadAnalogyGuy"
"Sargeant, you got a lot a damn gall to ask me if I've rehabilitated myself, I mean, I mean, I mean that just, I'm sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin here on the Group W bench 'cause you want to know if I'm moral enough to join the army, burn women, kids, houses and villages after bein' a litterbug."
You forgot the rest of it:
"He looked at me and said, 'Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send your fingerprints off to Washington.'"
'nuff said. Anyone who thinks that way is too stupid for the army. Ship him off to McDonalds, and hope he doesn't end up killing himself with the deep-fryer.
Yes, but they were not getting no-bid contracts under Clinton. In my opinion, that's a huge significant difference.
The military didn't have the same requirements under Clinton.
Here in Canada, the military has been seeking multiple bids on every contract for decades. After becoming involved in Afghanistan, however, some purchases were made without bothering to accept bids. If Haliburton had started getting no-bid contracts during a time of normal operational tempo, then you'd have a valid point to make - as it is, you're going to have a hell of a time trying to prove that these contracts had anything to do with Cheney.
Yes, he should have done something moral like working as a defense contractor.
Hardly - he would have never passed the background check.
That's what the prison sentence was for.. I find it extremely unfair that even after you get out, the only job you can get with a felony like that is gas station attendant. I think equal opportunity laws should cover people with criminal records for this very reason.
Awesome. You got any kids, and are you looking for a nanny? If so, let me know - I'm sure I can find plenty of recently paroled child-molesters to help you test that theory.
Just like alcoholics push for alcohol to be illegal and drug addicts push to have drugs illegal.
Obviously you didn't party much while you were in college ...
Heh, that's exactly what I was thinking while reading his comment. I wholeheartedly agree with his sentiment, but he's created a false dichotomy - it's quite possible that the individual whom he's addressing gave birth to quadruplets.
So Australia can't filter but China can?
So the Saudis can treat women as inferiors or slaves, but the western world can't?
You're comparing a regressive action to the status-quo. Obviously neither situation is acceptable, but it's only natural that people will protest more strongly against a progressive nation slipping into tyranny than they will against a regressive nation maintaining policies which are hundreds or thousands of years old.
But considering you are female and a geek
I dunno about you, but I always thought that the name "girl in training" suggested a pre-op transvestite rather than an actual female ...
Yeah well, before you start a revolution make sure it's something you're really willing to sacrifice your life for, because you might. In this case, I would be willing to wait it out until I could vote some sane people into office.
I'll bet German dissenters felt the same way.
"Eh. How bad can this Adolph guy be? Let's just wait until the next election."
Securing the media and controlling speech are the first steps in ensuring that there are no more elections.
Yeah, you're right - it really would be nice if the Aussie government would shut YOU up.
How is that relevant to what was being discussed?
Well, I was going for the "funny" mod, but if you want to be serious for a minute then I should probably tell you to go read the friggin' wiki article. The US wanted to put a stop to the program, yes - because they were worried about unstable nations getting their hands on missile technology. The French and the Soviets also opposed it - because they didn't want Germany developing long-range missiles. So yeah, there was plenty of opposition to the program, but writing it off as "NASA not wanting competition" is asinine.
Computers don't come with those any more.
http://thepiratebay.org/
Problem solved!
Canada exporting cold (in whatever form) to California.
But we already sent you Celine Dion ...
They were just worried about having Nazis on the moon :) Considering the Sci-Fi stories they would have been reading as kids, can you really blame them?
I think your response to me was very well thought out, and I'm sorry to see that you got modded "troll". With that said, I disagree with pretty much everything :)
Imagine somebody turned up at your front door and say .. And you say, wait, didn't I read about you being found guilty of something, and he says "yes but don't worry, I'm appealing!" - is that going to reassure you?
I'd take the trouble of finding out what he was convicted of. If he was an American citizen convicted of legally obtaining a handgun, I'd call the ruling preposterous and would disregard it. Likewise, a Swedish citizen found guilty of violating a law which does not exist is more likely to receive my business BECAUSE of his bullshit conviction.
The Pirate Bay deliberately antagonized the people he is now trying to help. He ignored DMCA takedowns and told anyone who would listen why he was right and the rest of the world was wrong.
Why is that a problem? He WAS right, and they were wrong.
If some twit from Saudi Arabia insisted that I take down a picture of Mohammed because it violates Sharia Law, I'd tell him to get fucked. The Pirates Bay folks did exactly the same thing.
And his business partners have a history of harassment, like the "ddo$" scheme against the opposition law firm.
Their "DDOS scheme" was perfectly legal, unlike the DDOS attack which "The Biz" was planning on using on them. Last I checked, there was no law prohibiting people from giving money to a law firm, while there certainly are laws which prohibit hiring hackers to flood someones servers.
Of course, they're walking a fine line there, and if I were them I certainly wouldn't have stooped to that. On the other hand, considering what they've had to put up with, I can certainly understand their response.
Like all the of the guys who ran the pirate bay, they have spent the last few years proving the world that they're stupid and untrustworthy.
That's your opinion. As far as I'm concerned, they've shown themselves to be a lot more reasonable and intelligent than anyone at the MPAA or RIA.
Under Swedish law, the verdict means absolutely nothing while they're going through the appeals process. In other words, they're still "innocent until proven guilty". Judging by the obvious bias of the judge in the initial case, I'd say they have a pretty good chance to get a better verdict the second time around.
LRAD wasn't developed by the brits. Cool vids, though. Always nice to see some cops earning their pay.
It's cute how you hijacked the issue to try and prop-up your favorite cause, but c'mon .. really? You're going to try and argue that an abolition of IP laws would eliminate child pornography? Let's not be silly here.