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 - Aether
« on: Today at 09:52:58 AM »
The entire year of 2012.
« on: September 15, 2018, 04:19:52 PM »
Put a bandage over it very firmly to keep it from getting rubbed constantly. Replace it at lest once a day and disinfect when you do.
I've never been into Battlefield games, but it seemed weird how over the top things looked in the trailer. I've always understood BF to be more on the authentic side of war games. I'm guessing the fans of the franchise weren't all that excited since pre-order sales are way down apparently. That dude telling fans, "don't like it, don't buy it," certainly didn't help, I would imagine.
Saw an interview with a guy from Dice saying they were rethinking things and trying to make the game more authentic now, but I'm not so sure it isn't too late for this game. Only time will tell.
Also, wtf how did they accidentally censor the phrase "white man?" And why censor Nazi in a game about WW2? That's just fucking retarded.
Recital 33: " This protection (being that of publishers and authors' content) does not extend to acts of hyperlinking".My understanding of article 11 was that it would be regulating links that display the title of an article and a bit of info underneath. Like those you see on Facebook when linking to any external news site. Which is not something I agree with.
As for article 13? If there are no fines then how are they going to hold platforms accountable for the copyrighted material on them? Why will they spend the money creating the automated systems or employing people to impose the regulations? If the laws are simply that the rights holder has the right to file a claim against something posted on a platform, then how is it really any different than what sites like YouTube already do? Where is the improvement here and how exactly are they going to actually impose the regulations on platforms?
I, personally, just don't see having to pay a fee for hyperlinking to be a good thing in any shape or form. The concept seems absolutely ridiculous. Hyperlinking is one of the most basic features of the internet and is essential for the sharing of information.The new regulations seem pretty awful for fair-use content creation and the sharing of information, regardless of how you want to spin it.I don't particularly support the Directive myself but be aware that there's two sides to this story. You're concerned with content creation, which is a legitimate concern, but you should realize that plenty of organizations representing artists, authors, musicians, photographers, videographers and so on have voiced their support for the Directive, arguing it will help content creators receive more and fairer renumeration and address people misusing and plagiarizing their work. I know several small time visual artists who are quite happy with the outcome for just that reason.
And I don't think it's a good idea to make platforms liable for their users having posted copyrighted material. My concern is that sites will create vast overreaching AI driven filters to remove or block copyrighted material that will not be able to distinguish between content that has been transformed through fair-use, all just to avoid getting fined.
« on: September 14, 2018, 09:51:31 AM »
With populism, I don't see why there couldn't be a genuine politician that would truly want to represent the ordinary citizen. For "real" communism it requires an entire society to go along with it to have it function properly. It only takes a single genuine person to have a true populist politician which is vastly more feasible. I don't expect there to actually be any genuine populist politicians, mainly because I think politics has been totally corrupted by money and special interests, but I don't think it's nearly as impossible for one to exist as you make it sound.
So no I disagree that the issues you speak about are inherent to populism, I just think they continue to happen because of the state of the current system and our societies. Scrutinizing corrupt politicians is, in no way something I am against, but I think they should be scrutinized for their actual specific corrupt practices, and not simply applying a blanket term to them that is supposed to encompass all of those practices. I'm not a fan of blanket terms in general because I feel like a lot of the nuance of any idea or movement is lost with them.
In regards to nationalism, I've always understood it to be mainly about pride in one's nationality and wanting to maintain their nation's culture and its ability to govern itself. There are many people I know, a lot of them in my family, that would identify as nationalist in that sense, but they wouldn't consider themselves superior to the people of other nations. So when you imply that supremacy is inherent to nationalism and someone accepts that, they would look at my family and see them as supremacists when they identify with nationalism, even though they are not.
I don't think attributing these negative characteristics to both populism and nationalism as though they are inherent to them is conducive to understanding many of those that identify with them with clarity. It's not that I think anyone who identifies with them is automatically good for doing so, I just think these ideas, with how you define them, cast a wide net of negative connotations over a great deal of people who identify with them that don't actually believe or practice those negative aspects. I think it would be better if people focused far less on these blanket terms when trying to address issues and focused on the specific issues instead.
On social justice, I have no problem with it. It's fine. What I oppose is authoritarianism and the trampling of liberty. With political correctness, I believe that there is technically no reason anyone actually has to feel offended by anything. We're only human so we will inevitably be offended by something, and that's perfectly understandable, but words ultimately only have as much power over our emotions as we let them have. People would be better off it they just learned to let go of their outrage at offensive speech. I see that kind of outrage as a weakness of character. Political correctness gives into that weakness and perpetuates it, which is why I don't like it. The fact that it has a tendency to infringe upon a person's right to freedom of expression is just an added negative.
Ultimately I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Just be careful when you oppose these ideas rather than individuals who identify with them because not everyone you oppose will be the way you might view them.
« on: September 12, 2018, 06:24:20 PM »
Are they not defined as such?I think it's very disingenuous to pretend that's what populism and nationalism are actually about. Populism is as much about caring about the ordinary citizen as soviet communism was about true equality and abolishment of social classes while those in power were just "more equal" than others and lived in wealth and decadence. On paper and oversimplified it sounds wonderful. Hell yeah, the normal, fair and honest citizens take on the sick and corrupt elite. Who could possibly be opposed to that? But in reality, it's a lot different. And I'll quote something I said in some other thread.-Being populist and nationalist.What exactly is so terrible about representing ordinary citizens? Or being proud of your country/nationality?
If some politician wants to put on a charade of populism but isn't actually really for the people he purports to represent then he's not really populist, is he? I'm sorry, there may be a lot of shady "populist" politicians but they aren't shady for wanting to represent the ordinary citizen. They are shady for whatever corrupt practices they have. If they don't actually care about the people of their country then they're not truly populist.
By all means call out politicians for all of their corruption but don't act like populism is a package deal with that corruption. It's not an inherently negative thing. Crooked politicians just use it as a method of getting what they want.
As for nationalism. I think we're just in total disagreement with what it actually is. I know a lot of nationalistic people, who are very proud of their country, heritage etc. but very few of them view themselves as superior to people from other nations. I don't see in any why why being proud of your country would inherently mean you have to think its people are superior to those of other nations. I, personally, don't see any reason for me to feel proud of some immutable characteristic I have no control over like what country I was born in, but I certainly don't think it's as terrible as you are saying.
I'm not being disingenuous here, this is how I view both populism and nationalism based on how they are defined and how I have experienced them. I can only think that we must have significantly different life experience to see these things so differently. I'm perfectly capable of recognizing when a political or ideological movement has issues like the ones you've stated, so long as the evidence for it is apparent, but I don't think it's wise to assume that something will always have characteristics that aren't inherent to it. I'm also not very fond of the meaning of ideas being warped by things that aren't becoming of those ideas. This has happened to the idea of liberalism here in the US and it's frustrating to see so many people criticize liberals for things that don't actually represent what liberalism is actually supposed to be about. I feel like this same thing is happening to both populism and nationalism among other ideas.
I'm an hour and a half from where it's supposed to directly hit. My town will undoubtedly be flooded very badly since a river runs through it, but luckily I live in an area away from the basin so water isn't as likely to build up here, although my neighborhood is still likely to flood to some degree as the rain keeps pouring. We're expecting over a foot.
My mom works at the hospital in Jacksonville NC which is much closer and it's mandatory for her to be there during the storm so she'll be in the thick of it. It's likely she won't even be able to get home for over a week after Florence has gone due to flooded roads.
« on: September 12, 2018, 11:34:44 AM »
-Being populist and nationalist.What exactly is so terrible about representing ordinary citizens? Or being proud of your country/nationality?
I'm not a very patriotic person but I don't have anything against anyone who is.
« on: September 11, 2018, 05:20:45 PM »
Sick, unhealthy people is big business.
I'm getting kind of tired of how politicized everything is seeming to get nowadays, but it more so bothers me when it's something I like that's specifically non-political or ideological, mainly forms of entertainment media. There are times when I just want a break from the circus so I'm not exactly a fan when the things I use as an escape start to join in.
As far as Nike goes, I just don't care really. I have no interest in them.
Their massive cryo-storage warehouses, of course.Are they harvesting their organs to?to where?
« on: August 27, 2018, 02:37:28 PM »
I think the oldest thing I have book/paper wise is my first blackbook that survived a house fire. It's all charred and burnt up now, but I think it adds to the charm.
Damn, those bring back memories.
« on: August 26, 2018, 01:22:39 PM »
« on: August 10, 2018, 08:39:13 PM »
H3 is saying their podcast got shut down on YouTube and their channel's livestream privilege revoked for talking about Jones.
Hopefully it was just the AI being absolute shit again, and Alex Jones isn't like Voldemort now.
« on: August 07, 2018, 06:42:26 PM »
These websites aren’t as untocheable as you guys are making them out to be. I wouldn’t be surprised if the large majority of content creators aren’t at least very irritated with YT these days.I know a bunch of fairly large creators that are particularly annoyed with YT. It's just that there is no viable alternative platform for most of them besides maybe twitch, and that's only for the gamers or artists I watch. Most creators really don't have any other place to go. No where else has the sheer amount of viewers YT can provide.
« on: August 07, 2018, 06:01:22 PM »
Okay? I'm not taking about Jones anymore.cringeleave YouTube to their devices and then maybe everybody will move to twitch and YT can die.Normies aren't going to stop using YouTube, and it's normies that ultimately dictate what platforms are the most prominent and where the majority of content creators are going to be.
I'm talking about alternative platforms becoming viable for large creators. Until your average person starts using them, most creators will continue to use mainstream sites like YouTube. I wouldn't expect people to uproot their followers by moving to another platform and risk losing a huge number of them for the sake of using a more free and open platform.
« on: August 07, 2018, 04:18:59 PM »
leave YouTube to their devices and then maybe everybody will move to twitch and YT can die.Normies aren't going to stop using YouTube, and it's normies that ultimately dictate what platforms are the most prominent and where the majority of content creators are going to be.