User Controls

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. ...
  5. 479
  6. 480
  7. 481
  8. 482
  9. 483
  10. 484
  11. ...
  12. 593
  13. 594
  14. 595
  15. 596

Posts by Obbe

  1. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Daily No shit you fucking intellectual cunt thanks for repeating back to me what I just said

    Oh wait are you gonna come at me with your "objective" analysis of the "lack of meaning" of the universe that's new

    Just commit suicide if everything is so meaningless and absurd OH WAIT you won't because you're a fucking poser cunt

    When faced with an absurd meaningless reality commiting the act of suicide would only be more meaningless. People may create meaning in their own lives, which may not be the objective meaning of life (if there is one), but can still provide something to strive for. So it goes.
  2. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Daily Metaphors…mythology…religion…folklore…art. These things, to me, have meaning.

    To say these things have meaning "to you", is to say that meaning is personal or subjective, is it not?
  3. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by LegalizeSpiritualDiscovery Just about to be done with Cat's Cradle. Which book should I start next? Neuromancer, Dune, The I Ching, or World Without End (sequel to Pillars of the Earth)?

    How did you like it?
  4. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by greenplastic why the fuck did i just read that

    Did you? What do you think ... is he insane?
  5. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Captain Falcon Didn't read

    Money says malice is attention whoring or insane.

    So it goes.
  6. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    I agree. However I thought Watchmen was great, though the book is better.
  7. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Captain Falcon I don't really care at all about my size, I just want to lift heavier. Exercise is about progress to me. Doing more, doing it harder. If I'm not doing that, there's no point for me because I don't actually enjoy exercise very much, it is just something I do to relieve stress and as a matter of discipline.

    I could stay at my current weight and just keep pushing more reps for endurance but I really don't have any interest in doing that, I get bored with exercise really easily and it feels like a chore, specially since it'll take more time. I really prefer high resistance, low rep exercises. But now I can't lift any heavier, I've just been getting better at lifting the same weight.

    So it goes.
  8. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    I think it's unhealthy. You should really just be happy with your size now. You don't need to be bigger.
  9. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by mmQ I've only farted once. As a babby. No bother to me.

    How about you Benjamin? Do you too get emotional and use broad, loosely defined blanket labels or do you have specifically defined criterias for labeling?

    It's all subjective.
  10. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    I had thanksgiving like a month ago.
  11. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Captain Falcon You missed the train to be edgy and cool by quoting Kurt Vonnegut like 14 years ago, bud

    SO IT GOES!
  12. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Lanny Per Marx, Communism is characterized by communal ownership of the means of production (things like factory equipment are owned by the community, which democratically organizes their use and product), absence of a state, and absence of social classes. I don't have a particular position on wether communism can or can't work. People are free to argue one way or other but citing fiction about talking farm animals or the failures of the Soviet Union both miss the point wholly. Now Marx also has a theory of how capitalistic societies will transform into communisms via workers' revolution and ensuing dictatorship of the proletariat which I think is fair to criticize as it's been an empirically unsuccessful hypothesis so far. But it's important to separate that theory social transformation from Communism proper, they're not the same thing.

    So the central point here was that the Soviet Union, even in its own highly charitable estimation of itself, never progressed past the "dictatorship of the proletariat" stage and thus was never a Communist society.

    So it goes.
  13. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Lanny Note he replied but failed to define communism. This is because he doesn't know what communism is.

    I did notice that. How would you define or describe communism, Lanny? Why do you think it would work despite the "greed" factor Parker mentioned?
  14. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Speedy Parker No, but more importantly it explains why communism can't work. In a word, humans.

    So why is communism incompatible with humans? And how would you describe or define communism?

    (I'm going to read the book, But I want to get your opinion)
  15. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Bill Krozby What is your avatar of?

    No, actually it's a scene from the movie "Interstellar".
  16. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Bill Krozby What is your avatar of?

    Me in hyperspace.
  17. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    I've always liked Coors.
  18. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Totse 2001 Just asking if you're a jedi Asian or White jedi/asian

    Cause race matters SO MUCH to you, right? You racist.
  19. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Speedy Parker Read it, understand it, and get back to us.


    https://www.amazon.com/Animal-farm-Fairy-George-Orwell/dp/0451526341

    I actually bought this like a month ago. Is it really as terribly written as Lanny says?
  20. Obbe Alan What? [annoy my right-angled speediness]
    Originally posted by Lanny I think it will happen and it'll be a good thing. Not because I have any particular faith in tech companies or regulatory authorities but because it's a convenient thing that will make an incremental improvement in the lives of first world citizens i.e. it's the type of technology who people who are involved in making technology actually give a shit about.

    When I was in school I took an ethics in sci/tech course and one of the hypotheticals that came up was this: you're in a self driving car going over a bridge. A school bus in front of you full of children hits the breaks, your car has this information and also knows it can't stop in time to avoid the bus. The car has a "choice" to hit the bus likely killing all the kids but deploying airbags and saving your probably or swerving off the bridge almost certainly killing you but keeping the expected death toll low (one person vs. the majority of a full bus). What is joe programmer writing implementing the car's logic supposed to do? I thought the answer was pretty obvious, responsibility to minimize loss of human life far exceeds a company's duty to its customers. It seems pretty uncontroversial that a pharmaceutical company manufacturing like thalidomide for example, knowing the risks and marketing it to pregnant women, is doing something wrong even if its customers understand the consequences. Likewise we shouldn't sell people cars that are going to increase the total deathtoll just to soothe their anxieties (indeed it would even, in aggregate, put such customers at greater risk since they're more likely to be on the other side of that kind of dichotomy). It was surprising how mixed reactions to that case are, a lot of people really believe that there's something wrong with a car that might sacrifice its driver for the greater good.

    I think an actual automated car would automatically leave enough breaking distance between itself and other vehicles that it wouldn't have to "swerve off the bridge" so scenarios like that would be unlikely.
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. ...
  5. 479
  6. 480
  7. 481
  8. 482
  9. 483
  10. 484
  11. ...
  12. 593
  13. 594
  14. 595
  15. 596
Jump to Top