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 - Flee
Pages: 1 ... 107108109 110111 ... 520
3241
« on: December 23, 2016, 11:09:21 AM »
His route to Italy.
Europe security services are pathetic.
In their defense, that is slightly misleading in American terms. It seems further than it is because he crossed several countries, but the distance between Berlin and Milan easily fits in just the state of Texas or California (it's about half of the distance from North to South California, for example). Not that it's excusable, but they initially had no clue who was responsible and it's not as if there haven't already been manhunts for mass shooters lasting several days in the US either. Still a major fail on their behalf, but gotta put the distance between Berlin and Spain into perspective as well.
3242
« on: December 23, 2016, 04:44:36 AM »
Definitely. I can always hide behind pretending to be an innocent foreigner who doesn't fully grasp the context.
Still, I think it's pretty ridiculous that a word is being treated like this. There's nothing like it where I live. Of course, calling someone a nigger is a pretty terrible insult, but to tiptoe around a word and avoid saying it even when it's in a completely innocent, descriptive and non-malicious context? I don't really agree with that.
3243
« on: December 23, 2016, 03:53:59 AM »
You're definitely exaggerating a lot when it comes to vaccinations and evolution. Other than that, you're mostly correct.
I wish I was. The evolution thread I was referring to has been removed to disciplinary action and the vaccination one was a few weeks ago and I didn't post in it so I'm not going to be bothered finding it again. Maybe I did put it a bit strong, but there's definitely a whole bunch of people who don't believe in either. I vividly remember several people talking about why herd immunity is flawed and how multiple vaccinations are bad for children, while "the missing link" and "different breeds of dogs" were used to try and counter evolution. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's like that for a majority of people on there. It just seems to me that these unscientific and fringe opinions were once held only by the occasional troll or borderline batshit shitposter, and that they're a lot more common now. B.net is still not even close to becoming an anti-science, but I feel like I have definitely noticed an increase in people holding those views.
3244
« on: December 22, 2016, 01:28:21 PM »
Brexit and Trump legitimately have me worried about the direction we are moving towards as a Western society.
People underestimate the capacity for aged institutions--especially ones belonging to liberal Western democracies--to weather even the worst of storms. Sure, there are absolutely reasons for concern; but it's not like these concerns didn't exist prior to the election of Trump or Brexit, nor that different concerns wouldn't have cropped up had neither of those events happened.
It will take a lot more than Trump, Farage, Le Pen, Wilders, AfD etc. to take down the greatest countries on the planet.
I don't doubt we will survive. I also don't mean that the sole fact of Brexit (as in leaving the EU) is my main concern. It's the way people look at things and treat each other. How rejecting intellectualism is noble and truth and scepticism are afterthoughts when largely inaccurate and horribly biased notions resonate in echo chambers and speak more to our guts than minds. Maybe it has always been that way and I just haven't noticed or been exposed to it enough. But I honestly am worried and deeply saddened by the direction we appear to have been heading in.
3245
« on: December 22, 2016, 01:15:13 PM »
It seems to be a growing trend in many communities, not just Bnet.
What's his genetics argument? I agree with the media decentralization, but I'm not going to watch the entire video.
3246
« on: December 22, 2016, 01:14:43 PM »
Where's the issue?
Stupid people saying stupid things, as usual.
3247
« on: December 22, 2016, 01:12:47 PM »
Sounds like nothing changed tbh.
I haven't viewed the forums there for about two or three years. Ever since Bunchoffucks has locked people who didn't waste money on their Destishit game, I just left.
Eh, I gotta disagree. What used to be the extremist opinions from one, maybe two, people a thread who were rightfully dismissed and often just blatantly trolling is now dozens of people holding these views. And because you can't post on B.net without having your profile linked to a gamertag / PSN that actually played Destiny, we're not dealing with a few trolls upvoting themselves using an alt account. There are large and growing numbers of people who don't just fall on the absurds of politics, but genuinely believe that vaccinations cause autism or that evolution is a lie because "we haven't found the missing link". I think it's very disturbing, as many of them are probably still youths.
3248
« on: December 22, 2016, 01:03:38 PM »
Is this a copy pasta? Feels like one.
It isn't. I just recently started going back on B.net when bored and I'm surprised at the state the community is in. What used to be the extreme and very fringe opinions are now commonplace. And I'm not even talking about politics, but even things like evolution, climate change and the benefits of vaccinations are regularly challenged as being false by large amounts of people.
3249
« on: December 22, 2016, 12:45:37 PM »
I know, I know. Bungie.net was never good. Been there around 9 years at this point, so that much is clear. But can anyone explain to me what has happened to the community there? Is it Destiny doing this?
What I'm getting at is how people's opinions seem to have changed quite a bit. There always were the more right wing and libertarian types, sure, but things are really quite different now. Topics about contentious issues virtually always lean either towards the extreme right or what I would consider a pretty significant degree of ignorance. Vaccinations are bad and cause diseases. Abortion is genocide and should be completely banned unless it'll kill the mother. Euthanasia should never be allowed. Immigration should be completely stopped and foreigners kicked out. Anti-discrimination laws should all be repealed. Transgenders don't deserve support and should just come to terms with their mental illness. Social security and welfare should be stopped entirely. Global warming and climate change is a lie. Guns should not be regulated in the slighest. Evolution is a sham. And so on and so forth.
And the thing is that it's not just one or two people trolling or some random extremist here and there. There's actually frightening amounts of people saying and believing these things in many threads. Does anyone know why this is happening?
3250
« on: December 22, 2016, 12:26:42 PM »
On a similar note. Also a good read. There was an article with one of these historians in the Financial and Economic Times yesterday which talked about the dangers of populism, anti-intellectualism and the normalization of rage against "the other". Brexit and Trump legitimately have me worried about the direction we are moving towards as a Western society.
3251
« on: December 21, 2016, 05:47:21 PM »
but he appears to be a good pick for Brexit minister.
Did you hear the news on him supposedly backing 'soft' Brexit? An interesting twist, given he an arch-Brexiteer.
I only wish Davis were Tory leader, and Hillary Benn Labour leader. Maybe then our politics wouldn't be such a joke.
Honestly, I think that every British politician who's reasonable about this backs a soft Brexit. It's what I said from the start. I think that little is going to change in reality while Brexit is going to be sold as both a win for leave and remain at the same time to appease both sides. The UK is really not in the strongest negotiating position here (I say that without the slighest sense of boasting or anything) while the EU leaders have shown pretty remarkable solidarity and resolve following the referendum. Both sides know that they're better off working together and both are probably just talking tough for the media and general population. I reckon we'll see access to the common market for the UK, virtually unchanged free movement for the EU and the UK still abiding by a majority of relevant EU legislation and rules. As with Trump, there was a lot of talking tough during the campaign, but now that it's over and done with, we're probably going to see a much more moderate approach as I assume most politicians realize that hard Brexit would be a pretty bad idea for both. If I had to guess, I'd say the current British approach is something along the lines of "how can we be somewhat more indepedent from the Union, particularly in name and technical terms, while keeping most things as much the same as they are now while also being able to sell it as if we're hardcore breaking ties with the EU". Not that anyone would ever admit to that, obviously, but it's what I'd bet my money on. Would you consider voting Labour if things were as you described?
3252
« on: December 21, 2016, 02:23:10 PM »
Youtube comments are a goldmine. The B.net forums are retarded, but then you see Youtube discussions and realize just how much worse it can be. My favorite is seeing a completely innocent comment on a video that has nothing to do with anything serious ("I love this song, my dad used to play it all the time"), and then have it somehow turn into something along the lines of "technically Hitler wasn't even socialist and fascism is completely left wing while anarchism is extreme right you fucking dumb piece of shit, tell me where the fuck you live and I'll murder your family" in under 10 comments.
3253
« on: December 21, 2016, 02:17:25 PM »
(some of which I think are entirely unfounded while others are sound).
Care to elaborate?
Sound: need of practical reform for the easier dismissal of unimportant cases (which it has since succeeded in by the implementation of protocol 14) and need for more attention to avoid judicial activism. Unfounded: interpreting the Convention only as perceived by its creators in the 50's, opposition to a number of specific cases (especially in cases concerning criminals). Still, he seems like a good guy. My opinion on Brexit hasn't changed and I still consider it regrettable, unfortunate and an awful turn of events for both the UK and EU, but he appears to be a good pick for Brexit minister.
3254
« on: December 21, 2016, 01:56:54 PM »
Merely because Davis is a Brexiteer and I know you're not a massive fan of him from what you know (and I want to hear you admit it): you must respect him in bringing this challenge against the British government, right?
The obvious and completely true answer of "no Brexiteer deserves any respect" aside? Sure. I don't know all that much about him, but this was admirable. He's a strong defender of civil rights, which is always a plus, and thankfully opposed the UK's withdrawal from the ECHR despite his criticisms (some of which I think are entirely unfounded while others are sound). Now I'm just curious if he would've done the same thing in 2016 after the referendum.
3255
« on: December 21, 2016, 11:23:52 AM »
Also, for anyone interested in reading more about this (because it's pretty damn neat): The CJEU press release: "EU law precludes a general and indiscriminate retention of traffic data and location data, but it is open to Members States to make provision, as a preventive measure, for targeted retention of that data solely for the purpose of fighting serious crime, provided that such retention is, with respect to the categories of data to be retained, the means of communication affected, the persons concerned and the chosen duration of retention, limited to what is strictly necessary. Access of the national authorities to the retained data must be subject to conditions, including prior review by an independent authority and the data being retained within the EU." And here's the full judgement. Only 40 pages, so still pretty short and readable.
3256
« on: December 21, 2016, 11:18:02 AM »
Based EU still got your back.
Were it not for David Davis (+ Tom Watson) and the British High Court, the ECJ never would've made this ruling.
It's also illegal under the ECHR, to my understanding.
Of course, for the ECJ to give a preliminary ruling in a case it needs to be dealt with in a national court first. With all the complaints about sovereignty, imagine the (deserved) outrage if it could act independently and proactively like that. Can't give the High Court too much credit though. It's under an obligation to refer these questions and cannot refuse to do so when they're raised (art. 267 TFEU). Whether it's illegal under the ECHR is a bit more contentious. There's two recent cases (Zakharov v Russia and Szabo & Vissy v Hungary) in which the court said that those specific instances of mass surveillance were illegal because they were not individualized enough. So while it definitely suggests that indiscriminate mass surveillance wouldn't fly, it's never explicitly condemned it as a whole and has always maintained that it's just specific instances in which it's a violation of human rights due to a lack of safeguards, necessity or proportionality. That's what so special about this case. The ECJ directly condemns mass indiscriminate surveillance of all citizens so that the information can be kept "just in case" it needs to be used at one point. It's a pretty big deal and great victory for privacy and data protection.
3257
« on: December 21, 2016, 09:56:46 AM »
Damn, I was going to make a thread about this. Big news for my work. One of my friends working at Privacy International (which is quoted in the article) was quite happy about it too.
Also, it's not technically against the Snooper's Charter. It's against its predecessor which now no longer applies, but because they're almost identical in many ways, the judgement can serve as a precedent of sorts enabling further legal challenges against Snooper's in the UK.
You're welcome, Britain. Based EU still got your back.
3258
« on: December 21, 2016, 09:50:33 AM »
this game is like riding a bike.
Unless this is a really weird insult
Spoiler I'll take that apology for the tutorial spergout any time
while i still hold that my grievances at the time were legitimate, my reasons for quitting then and there were very illegitimate 
UNLESS this "second half is bad" meme is true, of course
everything seems to be in order where i'm at, but we'll see what happens
For what it's worth, I disagree with the meme. The second half is different, but not bad by any means. The game is structured like a hand. You start in the palm where everything is in close proximity, dense and entirely connected. But as you progress, you end in the fingers which stand alone and don't allow you to just jump from one to the other. You can still return to the palm at any time and go into another finger, but there's no direct connections. And I can't say I really mind that. The Lordvessel lets you teleport between select bonfires anyways, and keeping connections between the fingers could disrupt the game's flow and let you miss out on key parts of the final areas which are all very memorable and distinct in their setting. There's definitely some valid complaints about it, but I don't see the increased linearity as such a bad thing. The second half is, in my opinion, still fantastic (and so is the DLC).
3259
« on: December 21, 2016, 03:04:13 AM »
Moonlight Butterfly: 1
I must fucking suck because moonlight butterfly is a fucking pain for me
How so? It's one of the easier bosses in the game. Block his darts attack and roll through the homing beam or laser (first strafe all the way left or right and then roll through it in the opposite direction as it's about to hit you. And the second it sits down to rest you have at it.
3260
« on: December 20, 2016, 02:44:05 PM »
It's hard for me to look past the term. It would kinda be like arguing against masturbation with the word "self-rape". There are legitimate reasons against masturbation, but you can't rape yourself.
We need to come up with a new term that prevents any unnecessary confusion, like academic recycling or something.
Duplicate publication is another common term for it.
3261
« on: December 20, 2016, 12:28:37 PM »
Now I suppose it's your turn to demonstrate how violent video games cause violent behavior in a similar fashion.
I'm not. I don't have the time right now and this is a pretty pointless discussion. Replacing the word "sexual" in your searches with "violent" gives us just hundreds of thousands of results and dozens of studies finding links between violent behavior and exposure to violent media at a younger age. I'm not looking to get roped into this because it won't go anywhere. These are unresolved and highly researched issues that neither of us can solve. My entire point was just that yes, they shouldn't be treated identically because they're not the same, but I don't agree with both your eagerness to dismiss valids concerns about exposure to violent media at a young age, as well as your insistence that exposure to sexual or nude content is so much worse. I don't advocate ruthless exposure to nudity and sexuality by children, nor do I think violent media aren't without risks for children either. I just think you're too extreme and leaning too much to one side here. That's all I had to say about this.
3262
« on: December 20, 2016, 03:23:09 AM »
Shame he stopped posting much. He was a good guy even though his taste in ponies was questionable.
3263
« on: December 20, 2016, 02:54:49 AM »
Doom
Worth it. The multiplayer got stale rather quickly to me, but they're still pumping out new content. The campaign is great and well worth it if you can pick up the game at a lower price. Brutal, fast, unforgiving, lots of collectibles and throwbacks, great soundtrack, difficult enough at higher settings, plenty of playstyles and unlocks... Would recommend to anyone, especially people who are fans of old school FPS games like Quake, Wolfenstein and the previous DOOMs.
3264
« on: December 20, 2016, 02:51:04 AM »
Another thread ruined by weeaboos.
3265
« on: December 19, 2016, 01:01:58 PM »
Anyone still playing Pokemon Go?
3266
« on: December 19, 2016, 02:44:43 AM »
Freedom of speech is the freedom to yell fire in a crowded theater, or to verbally harass someone.
Freedom of expression is the freedom to hold whatever opinion you'd like and let it be known you hold it, without persecution.
One is a joke, the other is the foundation of democracy.
I don't think I've ever seen that distinction made before and I've had to read a ton about free speech and limits to human rights. Is this some American approach I'm not familiar with?
3267
« on: December 18, 2016, 02:06:14 PM »
Flee prepping them truth bombs
Only because you ask so nicely. - Courts do not prosecute anyone or anything. It's the public prosecutor who prosecutes natural and legal persons before a court which decides on their guilt (save for trials involving a jury) and the sentence. Saying that anyone gets prosecuted "by a court" is simply incorrect. See: The Dutch Public Prosecutor's Office website. - Wilders was not convicted or tried for any of the things claimed by Loaf. He was not convicted for hate speech against Muslims. He was not convicted for wanting to ban all Muslims and the Qoran. He was not convicted for wanting all mosques shut down. And he sure as shit was not prosecuted for saying he wanted to leave the EU if he ever becomes prime minister (seriously what is this even). Wilders was convicted (but not sentenced to any punishment) for inciting discrimination and attacking an ethnic minority, being Morrocans. And the reason they convicted him was because of the indiscriminate nature of his statements in which he was leading a chant of "less, less Morrocans" to which he said "I'll arrange that". Morrocans in the Netherlands are like Mexicans in the US: guest workers who are typically rather well integrated. His advocation for the removal of an entire nationality (not even religion) without any sort of distinction based on beliefs, criminal record or anything at all is the sole reason he was convicted. See: the full court case detailing allegations, charges, facts of the case, reasoning of the court and judgment given. - Wilders does not want to ban all Muslims. He has repeatedly (and recently) stated that he does not want to evict or get rid of Muslims. See: a speech by Wilders earlier this year in which he literally says "Muslims can stay". - Wilders his popularity has been rising for months and the judgement itself has not made any clear difference whatsoever. The weeks before the conviction (and this is not something which was hyped up in the Netherlands at all; the trial was pretty much forgotten about by the general public until the outcome) his popularity rose in the polls at the same speed as it did in the period afterwards. I'm not at all saying that it couldn't help him in the long run, but this idea that his conviction is resulting in a surge of new support carrying him towards becoming prime minister is simply incorrect. See among others: the Dutch Ipsos MORI political poll.
3268
« on: December 18, 2016, 09:16:27 AM »
"There was recently a right wing politician named Geert Wilders, who got prosecuted by the courts for hate speech against Muslims, wanting to ban all muslims and the koran, close all masques, and leave the european union if he becomes prime minister."
This is incorrect on so many levels.
Oh, really? Well you're not going to bother defending your point of view so you're dismissed.
It's not a point of view when it's a fact. It's not my opinion. It's just that much of what you said is factually wrong and uninformed. I'll go over it in detail when I'm no longer on mobile.
3269
« on: December 18, 2016, 07:07:15 AM »
"There was recently a right wing politician named Geert Wilders, who got prosecuted by the courts for hate speech against Muslims, wanting to ban all muslims and the koran, close all masques, and leave the european union if he becomes prime minister."
This is incorrect on so many levels.
3270
« on: December 17, 2016, 05:11:31 PM »
"For years Belgians have been suffering systematic oppression from many factors, one being waffle shops shutting at 5pm."
Too fucking true. Buy this shirt, please.
Send me some Duvel plis.
You're a fan of Duvel? I think I still have some in the back.
Hell yeah man. Tried it in Spain and no beer tasted the same after. Duvel just has that thing.
Hang on, I've got something for you.
Well, it's not so much that I actually have something for you. But I saw this at the store earlier and it made me think of you.  $9.99 for a 6 pack of Duvel and their official fancy glass. You like?
Pages: 1 ... 107108109 110111 ... 520
|
Show Posts
