Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Tolpuddle Martyr on September 20, 2017, 04:45:59 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
Military are state annihilation machines? Yeeah, they can be used that way. Kind of like how your car can be used for drag racing-potentially.
22
But the alt-right seemed so nice!/s
23
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by pyro on September 20, 2017, 12:31:17 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?

You're surprised that people are basically having Pavlovian reactions to these speeches? I don't think it actually matters what President Trump says: everybody is just going to respond the same way anyhow.
24
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Eiki-mun on September 20, 2017, 10:36:11 am »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
25
Forum Games / Re: Ask the next poster a question!
« Last post by SomeApe on September 20, 2017, 10:30:08 am »
Seems better to me.

But isn't it .net now?
26
Politics and Government / Re: Richard Spencer's pal Jorjani wants concentration camps
« Last post by Id82 on September 20, 2017, 08:29:21 am »
Well Trump pardoned Arpaio whos prison called tent city  was pretty much a concentration camp that he was proud of.
 
27
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Tolpuddle Martyr on September 20, 2017, 08:24:00 am »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAnWYLTdvfY" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAnWYLTdvfY</a>
Agent Orange threatened to destroy North Korea.


28
A long time ago, say a decade or so, Nazis used to claim that all that bad stuff Hitler did involving gas ovens, human experimentation and pits of corpses never happened. Well, they've officially stopped pretending.

Quote
Jason Reza Jorjani, a co-founder of a prominent alt-right media group claimed to have had contact with Steve Bannon when Mr. Bannon was in the Trump administration. Mr. Jorjani also laid out a future of expulsions, concentration camps and war in Europe.

Hermansson, a Swedish journalist went undercover with the preppy suit wearing Fascists in Spencer's crew to find out what they said behind closed doors. Spoiler, not only are they not denying anything Hitler did-they want reruns.

Quote
As video Hermansson provided to the New York Times shows, he got one of the group’s highest-ranking members — Alt-Right Corporation board member Jason Reza Jorjani — to admit his “final solution” for minorities.

“It’s gonna end with the expulsion of the majority of the migrants, including [Muslim] citizens,” Jorjani told an undercover Hermansson at a pub near the Empire State Building in New York City. “It’s gonna end with concentration camps and expulsions and war at the cost of a few hundred million people.”

“We will have a Europe, in 2050, where the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great,” he continued. “And Hitler will be seen like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category — no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader.”

Jorjani also claimed to have connections within the Trump administration, and to even have spoken to the president himself.

“The scary thing about the Alt Right Corp and Jason Jorjani is that they’re building a media empire,” Hermansson said at the beginning of the video, citing the AltRight.com website Jorjani runs with the help of notorious figures like Richard Spencer.

Make no mistake about it, these modern Nazis aren't some dupes who bought the whole "holocaust never happened" bollocks. These are deeply evil people who want to start up the ovens all over again!
29
Science and Technology / Re: Google facing multiple lawsuits
« Last post by Tolpuddle Martyr on September 20, 2017, 03:09:49 am »
Okay, first thing's first, that's a pretty serious accusation. Do you have anything to back it up? Because like I said earlier, anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. And I'll be looking at it, especially considering that some of the evidence you've cited in the past has been... wanting.

Ooooh a serious accusation. Well, lets see if your google bro starts with a question or a conclusion.

Quote
Google's political bias has equated the freedom from offence with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don't have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.
He concludes that Google is an echo chamber and this silences ideas. That's not a question it's a conclusion you ninny! The scientific method starts with a question about nature and then seeks to follow the evidence to where the evidence leads you. An exposition sets out an argument and then sets out to bolster it. Learn your fucking text types.

And unlike you, I have an example. Remember when you cited this? Well, the conclusions the study drew were based on interviews with 73 male college students, all of whom went to the same university in North Dakota. The small size alone means that there's a margin of sampling error of about +11.5%. In other words, it shouldn't be taken seriously.
I didn't cite it you dumbass, I just checked my internet history that website only appears the one time I followed your link. So many people are telling you that you're full of shit you're getting them mixed up.

Besides, I'd say that what he said was validated by his public shaming and subsequent firing. You can dress it up however you choose, but the fact remains: he accused Google of being a politically correct monoculture, and got fired for questioning the prevailing orthodoxy. If Google intended to prove him wrong by doing this, they only made themselves look worse. It's the equivalent of responding to being called violent by punching the accuser in the face.
Well, he must be the only person in history to be sacked for expressing views in public that make a company look bad. Your hypothetical that Google meant to prove him wrong had nothing to do with their decision, more likely Google wasn't engaging in debate they were firing an employee who was making them look stupid.

Thanks for the link, by the way. It taught me two valuable things. First, that Gizmodo hires the most brazen liars since Gaddafi's propagandists. The article calls it an "anti-diversity screed", when one of the memo's headers is "Non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap". You don't need to be Phoenix Wright to spot the contradiction.
Well, let's not hurt your fee fee's-we'll call it an exposition, an opinion piece even. What it isn't is science!

Also, the author cites non discrimination? Great-he must be on the side of angels and North Korea must be a Democratic Republic!

Direct question: how much of the memo did you actually read?

Direct answer: Fuck you with a pineapple Eva Braun, but I digress.

Quote
Left Biases
Compassion for the weak
Disparities are due to injustices
Humans are inherently cooperative
Change is good (unstable)
Open
Idealist
Right Biases
Respect for the strong/authority
Disparities are natural and just
Humans are inherently competitive
Change is dangerous (stable)
Closed
Pragmatic

Shit someone better tell trade unions that right to work laws are great because they change their ability to do their fucking jobs and tell Randroid libertarians that they should stop trying to drown the government in a bathtub while they're at it because "change is dangerous" dont'cha know. That's not even good politics let alone good science that's a list of stereotypes pulled out of the authors cavernous asshole.
Quote
They're (biological differences are) universal across human cultures
They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
The underlying traits are highly heritable
They're exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective

Note that Googlebroz didn't cite any sources for this waffle but an actual scientific study in 2001 found:
Quote
Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures.

From a 2010 psychology textbook: Handbook of gender research in psychology Chapter 2 Gender and Personality

Quote
research on social context suggests that what differences do exist may be better explained by social roles and situational contexts rather than by biological sex


So, right off the bat Googlebroz exposition is rendered dust because this core assumption. That men and women like what they're like because science sez they're the same cross culturally is a pile of fetid dingo kidneys. "Science" doesn't say that male and female differences are "universal across cultures", Scientists laugh out loud and throw food at Googlebroz and he cries.

Because you lack the self discipline to stick to one topic at one time I'll punt my response to your Nazi water carrying bullshit down to Flame and Burn where I can more fully describe the myriad ways you're full of shit and just how much you repulse me.

30
Science and Technology / Re: Google facing multiple lawsuits
« Last post by Lana Reverse on September 19, 2017, 09:01:29 pm »

They do worse than get into scuffles at rallies. They make unprovoked attacks on people simply because they were there. Or have you already forgotten about the cancelled Yiannpolous talk in Berkeley? Antifa are thugs LARPing as freedom fighters. Why shouldn't I be against them?

Also, I'd like you to explain why you think the memo is "sexist" and "anti-science", preferably with direct quotes from it.
Because fishing for and cherry picking data to support your conclusion is precisely the opposite of science. When you start with this statement.

Quote
"When it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence."

And then thrash around looking for anything to back it up you're doing political advocacy, not science. It's the opposite of science. The scientific method gathers evidence, develops a hypothesis based on said evidence and only then starts talking about a theory. The google manifesto started with butthurt, tried to bolster the butthurt with bullet points of cherry picked statistics and then declared butthurt to be so, that's the fucking precise opposite of science.



Google guy is pretending to be the guy on the left when in fact he's the guy on the right, start with a contentious conclusion and bolster it with a bunch of sciency words is not fucking science!

Okay, first thing's first, that's a pretty serious accusation. Do you have anything to back it up? Because like I said earlier, anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. And I'll be looking at it, especially considering that some of the evidence you've cited in the past has been... wanting.

And unlike you, I have an example. Remember when you cited this? Well, the conclusions the study drew were based on interviews with 73 male college students, all of whom went to the same university in North Dakota. The small size alone means that there's a margin of sampling error of about +11.5%. In other words, it shouldn't be taken seriously.

Besides, I'd say that what he said was validated by his public shaming and subsequent firing. You can dress it up however you choose, but the fact remains: he accused Google of being a politically correct monoculture, and got fired for questioning the prevailing orthodoxy. If Google intended to prove him wrong by doing this, they only made themselves look worse. It's the equivalent of responding to being called violent by punching the accuser in the face.

Thanks for the link, by the way. It taught me two valuable things. First, that Gizmodo hires the most brazen liars since Gaddafi's propagandists. The article calls it an "anti-diversity screed", when one of the memo's headers is "Non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap". You don't need to be Phoenix Wright to spot the contradiction.

The second is that comments sections can provide intellectually stimulating discussion, even on the laziest, most dishonest articles. I quite enjoyed reading them, so again, thanks for the link.

Direct question: how much of the memo did you actually read?

And I still can't muster any sympathy for those who wear a swastika, or a MAGA hat for that matter. Both stand for the politics of white racial supremacy but I guess, sure - you shouldn't launch uprovoked attacks on racist fuckholes not because it makes you look bad but because unprovoked attacks bad m'kay? Not gonna lose any sleep when it happens though.

Calling a MAGA hat equivalent to Nazi symbolism. Wow. You're really not helping your case.

Bottom line, ANTIFA's stated historical reason for existence, that you can't rely on the state to stop Nazis, was bourne out in Berkely, where the cops disarmed Antifa but not the right wing  thugs LARPing as freedom fighters and in Charlottsville, where Heather Heyer was killed and that African American fella was thumped with poles by Nazis mere yards a police station, the cops just sorta hung back.

If the cops cannot be bothered defending a synagogue from crowds yelling "jews will not replace us" then the good police officers of Charlottsville are essentially advertising for Antifa. You don't want an out of control anti far right counterinsurgency? Get your fucking police to do their damn jobs!

Were those claims borne out? I don't think so, at least not to the extent you claim.

First, let's look at Berkeley. Again, we seem to be encountering the problem of you not reading your own sources. Rich Black seems to be claiming that Antifa were already attacking by the time the police disarmed them:

Quote
However, if it were not for the Police immediately disarming the first wave of Antifa, whom were in a full charge against us, the event would have been shut down before it began and would have resulted in tremendous blood shed.

If you're going to take him at his word, you better make sure you understand what he's saying. Speaking of which:

Quote
As it has been established before and remains an unwavering creed: The LRA does not condone nor promote violence at the events we organize. Careful measures were taken to ensure that, among our invited detail, there were none who appeared to have any desire to engage in physical confrontation. Those who appeared to have an interest in physical confrontation were removed from this detail prior to the event.

Quote
As far as Identity Evropa, the Alt-Right and the Sacramento Workers Party who showed up to attend our event: We did not extend an invitation to these particular groups and we had many denouncements in regards to them, prior to this event. When Nathan Damigo arrived I met with him in the center of the park and I told him that because of his affiliations, that his group was not welcome to occupy our space on the stage, and he would not be provided security.

Honestly, it's kind of hypocritical for you to accuse Damore of cherry-picking to back up a conclusion he's already decided.

And as for the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville, again, your own article doesn't exactly support your black-and-white view of things:

Quote
Perhaps the Charlottesville police had the July experience in mind and opted to take a more hands-off approach this time around. Or perhaps they were just overwhelmed by the larger size of the rally—some 500 neo-Nazis and white supremacists, 10 times larger than the Klan march, plus hundreds of counter-demonstrators. That’s a large crowd anywhere, but it’s especially large for Charlottesville, which has fewer than 50,000 residents and a police department of fewer than 130 officers who don’t typically deal with events this size.

And that's just for starters. Again, if you're going to cite something, make sure to read it all the way through.

I agree that this was a failure for the Charlottesville police. Where I disagree is with the idea that the tragedy happened for ideological reasons, as well as the idea that it reflects a broader reality.

TL;DR Your evidence is lacking and your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10