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 - LuciferX

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 113
I have not had any sleep in days, and last night my significant other's dog bit me on the eye-brow.  See what I mean...


So...if God had been more equality minded, original sin and hell wouldn't exist?

I'm not convinced they entirely thought through the implications of that.

Well, like many people, they've conflated Satan with Lucifer.

Lucifer didn't demand equal rights for the rest of the angels -- only for himself. So, it sort of misunderstands or misrepresents the position of rights movements. I'm unfamiliar with any rights movement that doesn't demand equality between two classes of people. When a single person demands rights equal to that of their superior, that's not usually called an equal rights movement -- that's usually called a coup, and the former superior gets executed or demoted pretty quickly afterward.
Thank you for clarifying that, I can't tell you how incensed I get having to always shoot down the disparagingly petty indignities hurled at me, over and over again.

Once upon a time, I may have misunderstood the ontology of my request, for which I paid dearly.  I did my time.  Now, no one really wants that lesson recapitulated, I think.

« on: June 28, 2015, 02:23:08 am »
They're all tied-up anyways, so why not squeeze them?

Still novel for me, re: QG Pennyworth, thanks for sharing!

Inverted Pork Rectum: What Western Medicine Doesn't Want You to Know

"Rectum?" I hear some of my more squeamish readers shrieking. Yes, this is real and no, you shouldn't be freaking out about it. The fact is that traditional societies have always known how vital it is to consume the whole animal, not just the "choice" cuts preferred by colonial invaders. Picky consumers refusing the "icky" bits of an animal account for literally billions of pounds of wasted flesh, as much as fifty percent of an animal raised in captivity solely for human consumption will go to waste for our vanity! Consciously choosing less desirable cuts enables the wise consumer to reap the benefits of limited meat consumption without contributing to the death toll in factory farms.

But pork rectums (yes, I said it again) aren't just an ethical issue. Rectal tissue is unique in its structure compared to both regular muscle tissue and plant tissue. In the upper digestive system, it acts like a specialized scrubber, removing small pockets of undigested (rotting) foods, bacterial colonies, and accumulated toxins. In villages where rectum is a routine part the diet, stomach and esophageal cancers are all but unheard of!

Ah, yes, the delicacy of the fith quarter, further finishing behind the end. :lulz:

I got one for my top 10, what's up with XX3 (re: Placid Dingos awesome derive' project)?

Recently landed on the front page and read about some of the Cabals worldwide, then was thinking about how I may be attending a summit at the Vatican next month...  Anyway, the shadow of a spark flitted across my gangled noodle, that there may be a connection?

Anyone got the scoop?

[scratch that, wrong continent, I think]

i'm just trying to digest all this.

it makes sense to separate gender and sex.  that is, a male can choose to identify as man or woman (or, perhaps - certain degrees of man-ness or woman-ness) and a female can also choose to identify as woman or man (again, to certain degrees).

a male (or female) choosing to identify as anything other than man (or woman) is considered to be transgendered.

(i now realize that it might not be appropriate to use the word "choose" as the individual may not really have a choice).

since gender is a social construct, identifying as the "non-socially acceptable" gender should not be considered a medical disorder (although I think you could argue it may be a psychological disorder??  is there such a thing as a sociological disorder??)

also, a male can identify as a female and a female can identify as a male.  this would be considered to be transexual.

again, the individual may or may not have a choice.

given that the mind is an emergent property of the body (a notion i'm not sure I fully agree with  . . .) I would think there is a connection between the body's natural hormone production and the mind's (brain's?) reaction and development.

i guess what i'm having a hard time with is how, in this context, transexualism is still not a disorder.

as Nigel stated, and others agreed with -

2. No, I don't think it's a disorder, outside of the social sense. In other words, it is not a pathology.
3. Yes, I think it is probably biological.

how can it be biological without a pathology?


i haven't read any Jenner interviews, but I imagine the following hypothetical:

Suppose Jenner, being an athlete under tremendous pressure to perform well, began to take large amounts of steroids.
The steroid abuse then caused his body to simultaneously stop producing testosterone and increase it's estrogen production (I believe this is a side effect of steroid abuse).
Olympics are over and steroid abuse stops, however the body never fully resumes "normal" hormone production.
Jenner begins to feel more and more female... transexual.

is this not a disorder?
Just jumping in here, clearly, got some thoughts that may or not be applicable.

I heard about the bolded above, in different contexts, however, when regarding professionals, any steroid cycle is followed by appropriate PCT (post cycle therapy) including SERMs (Selective Esteogen Reuptake Modulators).  If not for safety alone, PCT remains nescesary to avoid secondary signs of doping.

That being said, the point is that there seems to be a systemic problem of identity manifesting itself quite determinately now.  Instead of dealing with it, we are putting it up on display, like the feature of a freak show.

Not meaning to pontificate, just throwing my hat in the ring.

Fortunately he's already demonstrated that he's woefully underprepared for getting away with crime, so we don't have that to worry about.

Whatever happened to the good old days of redteaming an adversary at least as smart as you and throwing in generalised paranoia?
I guess it must have something to do with how everyone is already overflowing with hilarious attempts at having a novel thought?


[Re: Pidgeon malfunction]

The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Spagbook
« on: June 05, 2015, 10:20:16 pm »
sky pirates?

Pirates in the Cloud, stealin' yr bitcoins.

:lulz: :lulz:

taken a few days ago from Hotel window
was response to RMB's UFO post

So, I accidentally photographed a UFO today...

The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Spagbook
« on: June 05, 2015, 10:02:33 am »

The Richard Nixon school of ballet and the arts / Re: Swingers
« on: June 05, 2015, 06:21:35 am »
Is LuciferX a non-native English speaker? Because I don't want to shit on somebody for having a poor grasp of a second or third language, I just really really cannot understand what the fuck he's on about.

No, he just takes statements he can't understand as insults, or denigration, because he has ego issues. He also neglects to state his personal views and opinions as views or opinions, and instead, states them as universal facts. This is also because of ego issues.

After everyone takes the opposing side, he remembers to throw in the fact that his statements were, in-fact, views and opinions. He does this, without realizing it, because of the ego issues. You can't have an incorrect opinion or view, so his ego re-writes his paragraphs for him in E-Prime and with extra (Yet, twisted) pedantry.

How do I know this? Because I used to do the same shit. Maybe I still do the same shit. But admitting that you do it and seeing it in yourself and others is the first step to solving the problem. Believe it or not (This is at LuciferX) you don't need other people to help you with that problem, because I know you probably wouldn't let anyone try to fix that problem because you're so hateful towards the idea of someone who isn't you (Because everyone is lesser than you, right?) fixing you.

EDIT: Basically, this makes it seem as though Lucifer is disagreeing one moment, and switching directions the next. And when you're under attack when you have ego issues, you tend to kick your pedantry machine too hard, causing it to spit out the sludge you read by LuciferX half of the time. You start re-reading pieces of what you write, as you write it, and you throw different ideas into it in every cycle, causing loops of concept shittery. It's just what happens when your ego is desperate and you have a decent intelligence. Yeah, I said it, I have no doubt that he's intelligent. He just has some issues he needs to deal with before he'll start making sense.

Whoa, that was pretty incisive.

Thanks for the insight.

Thanks. When you spend years breaking your own tendencies down into a science, you start to recognize the patterns in others as well.

When you have the background that I do, and the years of experience in putting others down (As a small child, until about the age of 14, I was an awful bully.), it gets hard to look at yourself on any realistic level without feeling terrible. I have no doubt that he was also bullied and became a bully out of spite. But, the moment you realize your shit stinks just like everyone else's, and you're not actually enlightened beyond any of these "mere mortals," life gets sooooo much easier. And people get so much easier to deal with.

Another thing I realized eventually:

You gotta love the shithead that you actually are, not the one you imagine yourself to be. You got some baggage? You got some dirt? Oh well. No one is perfect. Forgive yourself, and move on. Nothing is irredeemable. I watched my mom tell my child molesting grandfather, that she forgives him for everything he did to her, just before he died. Ignoring your flaws is not a valid method of redemption.

TLDR: If you were ever interested in the process by which a Pathological Narcissist fixes itself, read above.
So, I tried looking that up in the V'th DSM and found myself quite nonplussed, what's the problem again?

Literally everything in there is bad advice, even the AES thing is contentious, with most people saying don't use standards the three letter agencies were involved with, the one I see that seems to be the most popular at the moment is PGP.

Yea, PGP.

Also, I think most AES implementations are symmetric block-cyphers, so not as robust as public key for communication.  IIRC, RSA used to be good, and then I heard some things about DES possibly being compromised, but I always get the two mixed-up, and, I forget why, but I don't use Elgamal.

If anyone remembers, long, long ago, when Veronica was bigger than the Web, domestic PGP releases had more options for the cypher, and, it was illegal to export certain keys.  Being caught abroad with said cyphers amounted to international weapons trafficking; fun stuff, the good 'ol days.

Seems like I'm due for a little refresher course. 

Currently, my view of the case is that a man was sentenced to life with a crime for which he was never charged.  Outstanding work.

I'm no expert, however, since when do people get life for meta-attempted murder?

It's not really meta-attempted murder he was charged for, it was Conspiracy to commit a crime, which in this case its pretty clear cut, they had back and forth records with a number of parties.

I'm afraid I exaggerated the figure as Junkenstien says, it was 3 times he attempted to arrange the hits.

I've been racking my head trying to figure out why he was keeping the bitcoin wallet details on his machine instead of some kind of disposable machine located elsewhere and all I can come up with is paranoia that his wealth would be stolen from him if someone managed to get access to said disposable machine, in short greed.
With proper risk reward balancing the worst that would have happened is he loses his fortune and has to start over, instead, he gambled his freedom to protect that fortune and lost it all.

But then no one is accusing bitcoin users of prudent investment.

I agree with your conclusion, yet it does not validate the premise.  It seems unreasonable that One persons OPSEC would fail so miserably, given all the precautions taken.  The lead seems contrived so I keep defaulting to thinking he just took the fall.

Then, recently, I skimmed some of DPR's posts that indicate a type of maniacal thinking, perhaps lending itself to lapses of reason, and subsequent security breach(es).

So, to summarize, I don't have a clear picture, yet.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 113