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 - Cadenza has moved on
Pages: 1 ... 151617 181920
481
« on: October 16, 2015, 04:02:37 AM »
I'm still trying to get a feel for how to talk to all the different people here. You all seem to be good friends with eachother so it's a bit hard to jump right in.
482
« on: October 16, 2015, 03:38:31 AM »
I don't understand why people argue with Verbatim. He's never been able to make any valid counter arguments. All he says is "fuck your argument, I personally don't care so it objectively doesn't matter".
If Verbatim and his arguments are legitimately stupid, then it should be easy to counter them and demonstrate why he's wrong. If it isn't easy to do so then there is the very real possibility that he may be right, or that the statement isn't one that can be disproven.
483
« on: October 16, 2015, 03:13:49 AM »
I think it's a good way to remind us that even when you're trying to be serious on the internet, it's still just the internet.
When did I say we should make it a serious banner?
I think using your brain is a good way to remind you to not make stupid assumptions.
I never said you did. Even if being sensible about it is the most obvious thing in the world, you should know that internet arguments can easily cause people to stop thinking, so it really doesn't hurt to have a reminder.
484
« on: October 16, 2015, 03:11:07 AM »
However they goddamn well please since they're the ones in control of the system meant to stop them; did you really just ask how a human being could possibly commit a crime? ...Criminals are in control of the system? Uhhh, okay. Meanwhile, in reality...
Wait, do you actually think it's impossible for government officials to be traitors? Are you actually saying that there is not a single government in the world that is not in even slightly corrupt? Are you honestly telling me that you do not see how a spying system could ever be used for purposes other than stopping crime? I can't tell if you're uninformed or simply naive.
If they didn't give a fuck then they wouldn't be spying on me, yet I haven't committed a crime. Why are they spying on me, and doing so with taxpayers money? To deter you from committing crimes.
God, you really are an idiot.
Are you dense? The very existence of the police force, the defense, force, and the legal system; as well as their presence in the country's culture, and the moral character that is meant to be instilled in everyone raised in such a society, THAT, is your deterrence. Now answer the goddamn question, WHY IS TAXPAYER MONEY BEING SPENT TO SPY ON INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING TO WARRANT BEING SPIED ON? "RIGOROUS MATHEMATICALLY LOGICAL PERSPECTIVE" I have never once claimed on this site, or anyone else on the internet, that my opinions have mathematical rigor; what I have claimed is that I structure my arguments in a logically valid way, instead of making huge assumptions and arguing from something I can't prove. All you've done is shown a lack of reading comprehension, real fucking intelligent there. Furthermore I quite enjoy being able to isolate myself from every other human every now and then, I do not appreciate that being taken away from me. It wouldn't be taken away from you.
BUT WHAT IF I'M COMMITTING A CRIME? HOW WILL THE GOVERNMENT BE ABLE TO TRUST THAT I WONT DO SOMETHING ILLEGAL WHEN THEY'RE NOT WATCHING? CLEARLY A QUIET WALK IN A PARK IS JUST CODE FOR MAKING A BOMB AND PLANNING A TERRORIST PLOT.
]Exactly, I am legally innocent until proven guilty, yet the act of spying on me says that I am guilty indefinitely despite having done NOTHING AT ALL. ...No. It doesn't say that at all, Mr. Rigorous Mathematically Logical Perspective.
They're just keeping an eye on you in case you DO commit a crime. Fucktard.
And they would only be justified in doing so if they already considered me guilty and were simply gathering evidence, but simply being alive and a citizen of a country is not a reasonable cause for suspicion. Gladly, provided I could trust the people who programmed them. Then there is no problem, you crazy insane paranoid fuck.
No, it simply changes the problem from "Can I trust the people spying on me" to "Can I trust the people who built the machine that spies on me" However that second question is far easier for me to say yes to than the first one is.
485
« on: October 16, 2015, 02:48:01 AM »
I'm registered, but I haven't voted for anything yet
Might vote for our new flag, I dunno
There isn't even a reason for us to change the flag, it's just John Key doing his best to divide people and distract from any actual issues.
Whoa, you're from NZ too?
And yeah, I don't see much of a point in changing our flag, if there's an option to vote to keep the current one then I'll do that most likely
Pretty sure the second referendum is the one where we get to choose whether or not we keep the current one, though I'm really not surprised that National hasn't made it crystal clear to everyone how the process works. And I'm pretty sure you're "A Stolen Fruit" right? If you are then I remember talking to you a few times. Maybe this emblem and the name DarkJet7 rings a bell:  It's because everyone always gets the NZ and Australian flags confused, they're practically the same.
Be that as it may, why now of all times? I don't people outside of NZ to keep track of our politics, and even I struggle to keep up with it all, but I can guarantee you that the National party isn't doing this out of a genuine desire to give us a flag that better represents us, they haven't even asked if we wanted to change it, that comes after they piss away several million on the process of choosing a replacement flag.
486
« on: October 15, 2015, 01:50:39 AM »
I'm registered, but I haven't voted for anything yet
Might vote for our new flag, I dunno
There isn't even a reason for us to change the flag, it's just John Key doing his best to divide people and distract from any actual issues.
Nah, you guys should change it. Fuck the Union Jack and fuck the UK.
If there was some cultural event that gave it a good reason, and if it wasn't a fucking traitor pushing for it, then I would happily consider a new flag. But as it currently stands there is no justification at all for changing the flag, especially considering the character of the party pushing for it.
487
« on: October 15, 2015, 01:46:46 AM »
Because then they could commit any crime they want to. HOW would they.
However they goddamn well please since they're the ones in control of the system meant to stop them; did you really just ask how a human being could possibly commit a crime? If I was left alone then I wouldn't be spied on. "For all intents and purposes."
No one would give a fuck what you're doing if you're not committing a crime.
If they didn't give a fuck then they wouldn't be spying on me, yet I haven't committed a crime. Why are they spying on me, and doing so with taxpayers money? This is why if you care about your privacy, you're just a scared child. I am a person who has no faith in my government's ability to make productive use of intelligence gathered from spying on people, even if they have committed a crime. Furthermore I quite enjoy being able to isolate myself from every other human every now and then, I do not appreciate that being taken away from me. And if I already have no intention of committing a crime what purpose does it serve then? They don't know that. You can't prove that.
Exactly, I am legally innocent until proven guilty, yet the act of spying on me says that I am guilty indefinitely despite having done NOTHING AT ALL. Money, hate, enjoyment, greed...you are literally asking me why any human would ever commit a crime, there's an infinity of possible reasons why. Then let's have robots instead of humans, then.
Gladly, provided I could trust the people who programmed them.
488
« on: October 15, 2015, 01:12:23 AM »
I'm registered, but I haven't voted for anything yet
Might vote for our new flag, I dunno
There isn't even a reason for us to change the flag, it's just John Key doing his best to divide people and distract from any actual issues.
489
« on: October 15, 2015, 01:07:38 AM »
In the event that the criminals are the ones who are behind the cameras, this system fails to achieve it's purpose. Why would they be behind the cameras? Ignoring for the moment that they wouldn't be.
Because then they could commit any crime they want to. You do not have to be a criminal to want to be left alone. You are left alone, for all intents and purposes.
If I was left alone then I wouldn't be spied on. And unless you are part of the spy agencies yourself, you don't even know to what extent we're being spied on. If I have nothing to worry about, why am I being spied on? furthermore, why is the taxpayer's dollars being spent on spying on people who aren't committing any crimes? To deter you from committing crimes.
...Duh.
And if I already have no intention of committing a crime what purpose does it serve then? if the vast majority of people have no intention of ever committing a crime then what purpose does it serve then? Also, why use such a roundabout method of deterrence? At this point I have to ask, why do you have so much faith that your government would NEVER overstep their authority/corrupt the system for ulterior purposes? Because why would they.
Money, hate, enjoyment, greed...you are literally asking me why any human would ever commit a crime, there's an infinity of possible reasons why.
490
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:57:42 AM »
I approve but at the same time I'm confused.
491
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:48:43 AM »
I'm not sure if you can draw much of a line between being serious or not on the internet.
492
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:43:06 AM »
If by "have sex" you mean "don't have sex" then yes, I would have sex with you.
493
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:41:46 AM »
It's been quite a while since I read the book and my opinions have changed, so I'm not going to defend it in any way. However I have a few problems with your logic: Sorry, but fuck privacy. To this day, I still want government cameras everywhere, watching everything and everyone, at all times. That sounds like an excellent idea to me. No criminal, none at all, would ever be able to get away with any sort of crime ever again--it would just be a matter of catching them. In the event that the criminals are the ones who are behind the cameras, this system fails to achieve it's purpose. Don't like being watched? Stop breaking the fucking law, then. You do not have to be a criminal to want to be left alone. You're not breaking the law? Then you have nothing to worry about. If I have nothing to worry about, why am I being spied on? furthermore, why is the taxpayer's dollars being spent on spying on people who aren't committing any crimes? If you care about your privacy in the sense that you'd have a problem with the government watching you everywhere, it's hard for me to think of you as a rational person, instead of a frightened little child. At this point I have to ask, why do you have so much faith that your government would NEVER overstep their authority/corrupt the system for ulterior purposes?
494
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:13:57 AM »
Isn't the purpose of having a defense force to defend your country? you need women for your country to continue existing, so sending them off to die rather defeats the point, no? Ignoring for the moment that having children is wrong, you need men to create children as well, genius.
So much for your "rigorous, mathematically logical perspective".
You're the second person to make that misunderstanding. I am in no way saying that we do not need men, we need both men and women to survive. However, men and women are not equally expendable, men have evolved to be protectors hence our physical capabilities, so if you absolutely have to send people out to the front lines, it's them who are the best option.
You only get to be justifiably snarky once you've actually read someone's posts.
And i would hardly call this a rigorous opinion, I've left far too many things undefined.
Men's value in being soldier's doesn't reduce their value in being fathers.
I never claimed otherwise, sending good men off to die is always a loss for everyone.
495
« on: October 15, 2015, 12:10:37 AM »
Is that good value for money? I'm not well informed on gun logistics.
496
« on: October 14, 2015, 11:59:07 PM »
Isn't the purpose of having a defense force to defend your country? you need women for your country to continue existing, so sending them off to die rather defeats the point, no? Ignoring for the moment that having children is wrong, you need men to create children as well, genius.
So much for your "rigorous, mathematically logical perspective".
You're the second person to make that misunderstanding. I am in no way saying that we do not need men, we need both men and women to survive. However, men and women are not equally expendable, men have evolved to be protectors hence our physical capabilities, so if you absolutely have to send people out to the front lines, it's them who are the best option. You only get to be justifiably snarky once you've actually read someone's posts. And i would hardly call this a rigorous opinion, I've left far too many things undefined.
497
« on: October 14, 2015, 11:58:32 PM »
You're thinking of people too literally. Think about what's in their minds instead. Their ambitions are defined by their ideals; as long as they are alive, their ideal survives. If some rational thought causes their ideals to change, their ideals have died prematurely. Thus, it depends entirely on their commitment to their ideals and what those ideals are. Survival may be part of that equation, and prioritizing survival may be done to allow those ideals to survive longer IF that is relevant to the substance of that ideal, but there are more than enough counterexamples to demonstrate that it does not always come first.
Of course I'm thinking literally, I wouldn't have any confidence in my opinion if I didn't do so. I don't think it is a radical idea to say "you must be alive in order to do anything", and "an idea can only survive if people are alive to follow it". If you do not survive then you are dead; if you're dead then it doesn't matter what ideals you had; if everyone else who follows your ideals winds up dead, then your ideals cannot carry on unless someone who isn't dead picks them up.
498
« on: October 14, 2015, 05:27:51 AM »
I think it's a good way to remind us that even when you're trying to be serious on the internet, it's still just the internet.
499
« on: October 14, 2015, 05:00:36 AM »
Thread title had me expecting this kind of straightedge, and now I'm disappointed. 
500
« on: October 14, 2015, 04:51:17 AM »
Personally, I'm for this. Europeans didn't discover the Americas. People were already here.
Discuss
I figure the purpose of such a holiday as Columbus Day would be to celebrate the achievements of your ancestors, not to twist them into a means of white guilting everyone.
It's not about making you feel guilty. It's about stopping the whitewash of history that paints a monster as a great man. Columbus was as bad as Hitler or Stalin. Read up on what he did. He ordered the rape, murder and enslavement of an entire people. He committed genocide and got a national holiday out of it.
You go ahead and repeat that to every America you meet, every little kid and young impressionable person you meet, and you tell me how they respond to it. There's nothing wrong with coming to terms of your people's history, in fact I'd consider it the duty of every citizen to know their country's past, my country New Zealand has a similar story; But what your asking for is nothing short of self flagellation, and that is not going to achieve anything beneficial to anybody.
Several states already feel as I do
Even if everybody in the entire world missed the point, then the only thing that implies, is that everybody has missed the point. Do you honestly not understand the kind of message that you'd be conveying, that those states are conveying, by spreading this message?
Or just you missed the point
I was including myself when I said everyone: Even if I'm wrong with everyone else, then the only thing that implies is that we are all wrong together. Please try not to avoid the discussion we're having.
It's not "everyone" else.
4 states have already made the switch. The rest need to follow suit
I think you misunderstand, that was a very general statement I made that could be applied to literally any proposition you could conceive of.
To clarify, consider a person who thinks that:
7*2 = -3246843
This is wrong and can be proven so. Now if instead of one person who wrongly believed in that, you had a thousand, a million, the entire world, or any arbitrary amount of people who believe in that, then it would still be false. A statement's truth does not depend in any way shape or from upon how many people believe in it.
The reason why I'm explaining this is because you seem to think that "multiple states have already replaced Columbus day" somehow implies "replacing Columbus day is a good thing" which is just as ludicrous as the equation above.
——-
Now please just answer the question that you keep avoiding, Do you honestly not understand the kind of message that you'd be conveying, that those states are conveying, by spreading this message? Do you not see how you are simply trying to guilt trip people?
Your logic cuts both ways. As I see it, everyone has been wrong, and a few right are changing things.
Now, this isn't about making anyone feel guilty. It's about ending a holiday named for a man who was as bad as any monster you can name.
And what I am trying to say is that regardless of what you believe you're doing, regardless of what wrongs you're trying to right, the only thin you'll achieve by making this replacement is creating a white guilt day.
And while I'm at it, could you show me exactly what his crimes are? we don't get taught that kind of thing outside of America.
Look earlier in the thread. Someone already posted it.
Speak to me here Charlie, I want to hear the words and explanations of the person I'm talking to.
501
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:54:33 AM »
Damn fine work this is.
502
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:34:44 AM »
Mate I already mentioned that in my post right at the endt, I bolded it just now.
I think you're missing my point if you think that addresses it, when what you mentioned is itself the issue. People don't have to live for an end. They can hold an ideal for something and live their life in pursuit of that ideal. Whether or not that ideal is held beyond them in life or death is irrelevant to them. You say survival is the most important pursuit of any entity, but some entities may exploit others for survival, yes? In the case of these people, their ideals, their ideas, survive because the person adhering to them does not discard them in favor of their own survival. Whether the ideal can perpetuate itself to another being to survive one host's death is irrelevant, as even if it were made "pointless" by the lone host's inevitable death, the full life of that person has greater value than the part of the life it would get if the ideal were weak enough to allow itself to be discarded under your reasoning.
You only have to look around you to see this effect at play. You even describe it in your own post. But you are mistaking a human for tabula rasa when it is already affected by the ideals that define it.
Um, duh? But me dying of thirst isn't a likely reality. America getting taken over by a foreign power because we let women join the military isn't a likely reality.
Sexual discrimination? That's a reality. It's here. And it won't go away unless we do something.
Perhaps I haven't explained this well enough, what I'm trying to say is that before you can do literally any action that you care to live, you must meet the requirement of being alive, you must be capable of survival, there is no way of circumventing this. This in no way means that you have to dedicate your entire existence to surviving, but that you don't even get to exist without surviving. Now if the goals you wish to achieve puts the survival of you and everyone else who shares those goals at risk, then you are simply shooting your own ambitions in the foot. And I'm not sure Carsonogen, if you feel that the value of equality is self evident, but I just don't understand where you're coming from.
503
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:30:32 AM »
It really is quite nice that we all get to be here together and enjoy eachother's company.
In some form at least. I might argue that unfortunately, it feels hollow. You come on here and spend some time away with whoever it is you feel like, but at the end of the road, you've gotta get up and go about your shit day. It's a shame. There's times that I've listend to people talk about what's happening on their end.
And, I try to say something decent. But I know they're going to have to leave and face whatever trouble they have on their own. I don't like it too much.
You could call me attatched, maybe. But there are people here who I'd stand by, if I could.
And I would argue that you have it backwards, that no matter how shit life gets, we're still able to wring some enjoyment out of it all. Even if it's only temporary and with people that you don't know beyond a picture and some text, it's still something worth treasuring. And I feel the same way about wanting to help everyone, that's what makes us human.
504
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:07:52 AM »
It really is quite nice that we all get to be here together and enjoy eachother's company.
505
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:04:16 AM »
I once tried cutting a hole in an apple and...don't try cutting a hole in an apple.
506
« on: October 14, 2015, 02:00:48 AM »
You are a human.
You are surrounded by other humans.
Interacting with other humans is inevitable.
Being proficient at interacting with humans is beneficial.
Empathy can be used to improve your capacity to interact with humans.
Therefore empathy is sometimes beneficial.
507
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:51:54 AM »
And if we don't need millitaries, why would we want more women to join them?
Even if it's not needed, if we're going to have a military, there should be equality in it. As with everything.
I don't think I understand where you're coming from, why is equality so important that any other metric can be sacrificed in favor of it?
Gender/racial equality is one of the most important things in a society. It's only seconded by rule of consent in terms of importance.
No I mean why is it so important?
For reference, I believe survival to be the most important thing for any entity, and my reasoning is quite simple. If you cannot survive, then you are dead, and incapable of doing anything. So if you wish to do anything, then you need to be capable of survival. This logic applies to any living organism, and anything that is even vaguely similar to one (like a business, or a country). Even if you hold those two ideals in high regard, they mean nothing if you're dead, so you need to put your survival, or the survival of others that can carry on those ideals, first.
Because we're already surviving. We live in a huge, powerful first world nation. There's practically no chance the US will have a problem with survival anytime within the next 1,000 years. We've already made it. Now isn't the time to focus on something that's already been achieved, it's time to focus on making sure we deserve it.
Can you live without eating food? without drinking water? without breathing air? Survival is not something that you can acquire once and then move on from, it is a constant process that only stops when you're dead. The entire reason I started this discussion is because you said something that goes against everything I understand about human nature, and I'm no closer to understanding your point of view despite very much wanting to do so. For reference, I believe survival to be the most important thing for any entity, and my reasoning is quite simple. If you cannot survive, then you are dead, and incapable of doing anything. So if you wish to do anything, then you need to be capable of survival. This logic applies to any living organism, and anything that is even vaguely similar to one (like a business, or a country). Even if you hold those two ideals in high regard, they mean nothing if you're dead, so you need to put your survival, or the survival of others that can carry on those ideals, first.
Surely you realize this is not an argument you can apply to others, right? The simplest contrary notion I can think of, for instance, is that held by someone who believes their ideals and will are what must survive, before their bodies. Regardless of the extent to which you prize survival as a human, they prize the survival of the organism that is their will, and they will sacrifice their body before their will out of the belief that the sacrifice of their will may as well render them dead bodily.
Mate I already mentioned that in my post right at the endt, I bolded it just now.
508
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:32:09 AM »
And if we don't need millitaries, why would we want more women to join them?
Even if it's not needed, if we're going to have a military, there should be equality in it. As with everything.
I don't think I understand where you're coming from, why is equality so important that any other metric can be sacrificed in favor of it?
Gender/racial equality is one of the most important things in a society. It's only seconded by rule of consent in terms of importance.
No I mean why is it so important? For reference, I believe survival to be the most important thing for any entity, and my reasoning is quite simple. If you cannot survive, then you are dead, and incapable of doing anything. So if you wish to do anything, then you need to be capable of survival. This logic applies to any living organism, and anything that is even vaguely similar to one (like a business, or a country). Even if you hold those two ideals in high regard, they mean nothing if you're dead, so you need to put your survival, or the survival of others that can carry on those ideals, first.
509
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:16:14 AM »
That people will forever find mathematics boring and so I will never not have to find a way to justify my passion to people. It's quite an odd feeling being able to share something with long dead historical figures and only them.
510
« on: October 14, 2015, 01:10:10 AM »
I'll take your micro thong and raise you my micro bikini.
Pages: 1 ... 151617 181920
|
Show Posts