Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - V3X

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 250
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Random News Stories
« on: January 16, 2014, 03:38:01 pm »
Like with any head of state, the Pope's power isn't absolute. The Pope is the leader of the RCC, and has quite a bit of power and influence, but is still smaller than the organization he leads. The Church is very capable of removing "heretical" Popes from office, and has done so in the past. The people believe in the Pope and support him (usually) as long as the Pope serves to reinforce their higher belief and faith in the Church as an institution. He can lead the way to change, but he can't just declare it to be so, especially these days when it's more or less considered bad manners to have his vocal opponents beheaded. If his reforms are to have any lasting effect at all, he has to avoid crossing the line between "reformer" and "radical." Like that time some guy in Egypt wiped out all the references to the old gods and forced everyone to become monotheists - soon as he was dead, they erased him from their history.

Everybody wants everything done yesterday, and in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, I agree that it's a few centuries behind schedule when it comes to generally not being a force for shittiness. But let's not forget this is the Roman Catholic Church. These assholes took four centuries to finally apologize to Galileo. Things being what they are, I think Francis has done what he can do at this point -- and he's already in hot water with half of his congregation. Pushing things to far will probably just get the rest of the Catholic establishment to put up with him while blocking his reforms from taking root, and then quickly undoing everything he's done once he's out of office (one way or another). One promising thing to note is that he has been reorganizing many of the top posts among the cardinals, removing some of the most vocal proponents of the Culture War. His overall strategy seems to be one of softening the tone and removing some of the hateful elements of the establishment, paving the way for deeper reforms after he's gone.

Or, he's just an asshat trying to stop the Church hemorrhaging membership by pretending a put a happy face on the whole thing.

Something is amiss when processed dinosaur carcasses are cheaper than sheep fur...

Aneristic Illusions / Re: Net Neutrality shut down
« on: January 15, 2014, 05:49:46 pm »
“Without broadband provider market power, consumers, of course, have options,” the court writes. “They can go to another broadband provider if they want to reach particular edge providers or if their connections to particular edge providers have been degraded.”
“To be sure, some difficulty switching broadband providers is certainly a factor that might contribute to a firm’s having market power, but that itself is not market power,” the court asserts. “There are many industries in which switching between competitors is not instantly achieved, but those industries may still be heavily disciplined by competitive forces because consumers will switch unless there are real barriers.”

Citing Google fiber?  WTF?

The court has no fucking idea about technology.

It's time for Kevin Mitnick to whistle into a telephone.

This is the thing about the whole net neutrality deal. It's like it based around this idea that it's somehow possible for ISP's to prevent access to specific websites via their networks. Now a bunch of clueless dinosaurs like Govt Inc and the Church of Copyright I can understand but there's a counter movement of people who ought to know better, actively campaigning against this ridiculous fiction.

I'm sick of hearing about it. "OMG - your government want to block your access to torrent sites!" Good for them, I want an unlimited supply of solid gold Lamborghini's, so it looks like me and the gestapo are in the same boat. Actually, come to think about it a solid gold Lambo isn't outside the realms of possibility. How to shift the focus of Net neutrality campaigners to something plausible?  :evil:

Actually and ISP can block or limit your access to sites and services it has decided to restrict access to. When you connect to the "Internet," you're really connecting to a private network owned by your service provider. The only reason you're allowed to go anywhere online is because your ISP allows your device a network route through its network and out one of its exit nodes. They have complete control over the information your device receives while it is connected to their network, including the routing information to services and sites outside of their network. There are numerous ways they can poison that information to prevent you accessing said services or sites, or they can just limit the bandwidth your connection is allowed to use. This is the entire point of the Network Neutrality debate: ISPs claim that they have the right (and the duty, in some cases) to do exactly that - because you're not on the public Internet anyway, you're on their private network, which they own and should be allowed to manage in whatever way they deem best, including limiting your access to things inside and outside of that private network.

No such thing as coffee too strong to drink.

There is only coffee that people are too weak to handle.

brushing with troofpaste.

The yuppies at my place of employment drive me up the fucking wall with their "light blend" coffees. Might as well be drinking tap water.

Techmology and Scientism / Re: 'kay, so, this singularity thing...
« on: January 15, 2014, 03:05:31 pm »
It's sort of interesting that the science fiction genre is fueled by fear of science and technology.

We're evolved to pay more attention to fears than hopes. Fear sells.
Not a new development.

Aneristic Illusions / Re: UNLIMITED Arizona Hilarity thread
« on: January 15, 2014, 05:48:59 am »
Our illustrious governor has abolished Child Protective Services.

Not that I entirely disagree with this, after all they did fail to investigate 6,000 reports of possible child abuse. Can't tell yet if this makes sense or of it's a baby vs. bathwater situation.

Aneristic Illusions / Re: Net Neutrality shut down
« on: January 14, 2014, 11:20:06 pm »
We didn't really want this whole Internet thing to be a multi-way communication system anyway. One-way is more than enough. Back in my day, we didn't get to talk to each other over the teevee. We used it for getting the evening Truth and watching Beaver Knows Best, and that's it, and we got along just fine. I don't see why we'd want the Internet to be anything other than that. Too many options is bad for Freedom.

my father-in-law: If I was president, I'd just march the Army down there and kick all their asses. That would shut'em up. 'Murrica! But you don't see that lily-livered pansy Obama doing it.
me: Yeah that's a great idea. We could totally take those guys out.
F-I-L: No kidding! I dunno why they let that low-level civil war just go on forever down there. 'Murrica to the rescue!
me: Seriously. I bet we'd kick at least as much ass as we did in Korea and Vietnam, and it's right next door! What could go wrong?
F-I-L: Shut up.

Or Kill Me / Re: Letter to Horab (or, why don't we all just settle down)
« on: January 14, 2014, 10:08:24 pm »
I see her on FB.  There's apparently no end of drama and bad shit going on for her right now.

There will never be an end to drama and bad shit for her, because she actively pursues and/or creates it.

This is a thing that I really really wish the human race would learn about. You don't have to be a crystal-worshiping hippie to understand this law of human experience. You will receive what you expect to receive, because if you don't receive it, you'll find a way to believe you did anyway. There's no escaping this fact. So why do so many people decide to receive drama and bad shit?

I understand the woes of company budgeting myself, having just had a run-in with the Suits. Late last year I was told to FIND A SOLUTION TO PROBLEM X RIGHT NOW AND WE DON'T CARE WHAT IT COSTS. So I found the perfect solution, and it cost $107,000 up front with a recurring annual cost of $72k. This, I was assured, was Small Potatoes given the gravity of Problem X, and the budget would be rushed through immediately. Well, two months later, they FINALLY returned the budget and guess which solution had been left to fend for itself on the cutting room floor? Attached to the budged was a note that read BY THE WAY, WHY IS PROBLEM X NOT SOLVED YET?

I called the sales people and got them to drop the price from $107,000 up front to $50,000, and from $72,000 recurring annually to ZERO. I am currently awaiting round THREE of the budget negotiations, which at this company apparently are run by two Iranians, two Israelis, and the Pope, and the budget is item #2 on the list, right after World Peace.

Ah!  Then you want more like Carmina Burana.  I thought that might be slightly too modern for your tastes.
Well, there's no good reason why that guy didn't write that as a proper metal song to begin with, but in this case he can be forgiven.

Is Karl Orff off limits?  Because Although there is dissonance, much of it is aggressively minor keys, which Metal has in spades.
oh! That music has a name and a composer!? Srsly, yes this is the good stuff.

I wonder how long it will be until "POT IS A GATEWAY DRUG" just completely devolves into "DON'T SMOKE POT, YOU'LL TURN BLACK."

Having to explain to my mother that Real Housewives of Orange County is scripted, when I should be reading a paper for my tutorial tonight.

Kill me now.  Please.


Or Kill Me / Re: Scare City
« on: January 13, 2014, 04:30:37 pm »
You could have capitalism without money, but only until some asshole on wall street invented it.

Money is a way to "prove" you deserve to own the things you buy. In theory, you get money by virtue of being productive; therefore, if you have money it can be reasonably expected that you have contributed enough to society to warrant your ownership of whatever it is you're buying. This of course has nothing to do with capitalism, because money has functioned this way forever, and it works the same way under capitalism as under socialism or any other economic system.

Of all the economic systems I am familiar with, capitalism would probably be the easiest system under which to eliminate (or fundamentally change) money. Not that that would be a good thing. It's actually been done many times in the past - the "company store" model where you are paid not in universally recognized money but in credit which you can use to subsist on things the Company provides at a Company-endorsed outlet. It's still technically money in that it limits your consumption to a level justified by your labor, but it isn't really money because you're not free to use it to buy anything anywhere with it. Also you can't go to heaven, because you end up owing your soul to the company store. There's a song about that.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 250