Skip Navigation

Posts
20
Comments
1236
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • One of the only things I ever got a trophy for was coming in third place as a third grader in the entire elementary school, K-6, in the first annual chess tournament they ever gave.

    I learned how to play chess from my mom a few days after they announced that in a few weeks they were going to be having a chess tournament.

    I'm not very good at chess compared to a computer, but when I'm playing people, I win far more often than I do not, so I'm not bad at it either, but the only thing that I had going for me is that when I would play, I would think about what I did allowed my opponent to do.

    Technically, I did not lose a single game until I had played everyone, but the last two games ended in stalemates, and the judges didn't know that you don't decide the winner of a stalemate by the number of pieces on the board.

    At the time, I didn't either, so for a brief moment, I thought I was first place. The only reason I didn't get first place was that with the other top three chess players having had the opportunity to play me once, they were able to beat me on the second go round.

    Needless to say, my school was in a fairly rural, south-eastern location, and it's not exactly like they "promulgated excellence in education" or anything fancy like that. Most people there turned every single syllable word into a two or three syllable word just by their pronunciation.

    I said all of that to say, in support of the conversation at hand, that having the ability to think about the consequences of your actions, to logically look at the board that is laid down at you, and what can happen because of what you choose to do, is one of the default characteristics of high IQ people.

    And when you think about the consequences of policies such as:

    Murdering women for having an abortion.

    Criminalizing the use of birth control.

    Assembling a team of shittroopers to hunt down legal immigrants and imprison them and then throw them out of the country without due process.

    Allowing those same shit troopers to murder your own citizens in broad daylight on camera and go unpunished.

    Failing to punish felons for their crimes and instead appointing them to the highest office in the country.

    Looking the other way as that same felon gives kickbacks and tax breaks to his already absurdly ultra-rich buddies just for the funsies.

    And so many more things that no single post can fairly describe them, then it becomes incredibly difficult to be even a moderately moral person and vote conservative.

    I say that it is practically impossible to be anything like a moral person and vote for conservatism when you have the intelligence to see what conservatism stands for.

    The grand majority of these people are what you call single issue voters, and that's because a single issue voter is too stupid to actually think about the issues.

    Their thinking can barely handle anything more than, "immigrants = bad, trans = bad, abortion = bad, woke = bad".

    They do not stand a chance against the propaganda machine that they paid $1400 for at the Apple Store, telling them what to think and making their conclusions for them and parroting what the computer told them to say.

    I know I am also vulnerable to propaganda. I am not trying to prop up the other side. I am just saying that conservatism has, by and large, always been the party of making the rich white people richer and whiter, and the only reason why the grand majority of people support them is either because they hope to one day be the richer, whiter person or they have been conned by the rich white people.

    And although you can easily fool smart people, smart people tend to be more likely to see through the con.

  • Their prostate must have looked like a dehydrated pumpkin

  • And if they were really a problem, you could have them docked. But, imagine the piercings! You could look like two light brights tried to fuse together and formed a human in between them.

  • I love it when something is funnier than it is grotesque.

  • The interesting thing is that there are surprising numbers of similarities between Trump and syphilis.

    One, you typically only get either of them when you've been doing something you shouldn't have been doing, but there are also a myriad number of innocent victims who truly do not deserve it.

    Two, both of them will destroy you if you don't get rid of them.

    Three, you're fucking anyone that you give them to, and possibly also their spouses and children and the future generations that linger on afterwards.

    Four, they're both much worse when you give them to the underaged

    Five, the minds of people who've had them long enough get damaged, and in some cases they even are grateful for having got them in the first place, attributing having received supernatural powers thanks to them.

    Six, thanks to modern technology, they can technically both be cured with a shot.

  • My biggest concern, well, pretty much my only concern, with open-source software is that it's entirely too plausible that even with the evidence publicly submitted that the manufacturer of the open source software has inserted malware, it still requires somebody else to come behind them and read what they have submitted and review it and sound the alarm.

    I use quite a bit of open source software, but I have never read the source code for the software that I use.

    I am entirely reliant on other people to do that for me. See 7-zip, notepad++.

    And the only recourse that I as a user have for being theoretically victimized by a malware distributor like this is to hope that the person faces legal punishment for their crimes.

    But I would still rather deal with all of that than ever give Microsoft a penny.

  • grrr

    Jump
  • If you want to have that debate, then you have to address the concept of insults themselves.

    It is the soul of irony to suggest there is a specific line that you're not allowed to cross when you're being offensive, when insults themselves are meant to be offensive.

    You can find a bone to pick with any insult. You can't call someone an asshole because there is a significant portion of the population who have either been congenitally born without assholes or who have lost theirs and are using a colostomy bag. And every time the word asshole pops up in their radar, they're reminded of their plight and it is trauma-reinducing.

    Calling someone a fucker is potentially trauma-inducing to people who have lost their genitals or been surgically mutilated and are unable to enjoy any pleasure from sex or possibly unable to have sex itself.

    And I get that people who have experienced difficulties are different from people who are born with difficulties, but both of those groups are forced to live with things that they simply cannot do anything about. When they encounter aggressive language all they can do is take it.

    I still think you are correct that we shouldn't use the r-slur, but we also shouldn't really tone police one another in public when the only method available to do so is to detract from a much more important conversation.

    After all, the only way we're ever going to get to a world where the largest concern we have is the Emotional Impact of what words we use when we are angry and frustrated is to deal with the actual world in front of us, where people are murdering and killing people for being born different.

  • grrr

    Jump
  • There is a correct and good community building way to address this issue, and there is a "Gotcha, fucker! you made a mistake in your words, I'm gonna yell at you on the internet!" way of dealing with this issue.

    The correct way would be to privately message the person and say, "Hey, please don't use that kind of language, it is offensive"

    They might have gone back and edited it.

    I feel like people have forgotten the concept of face, since the internet is anonymous, and a lot of flame wars happen because people do not consider each other's faces when they are talking to each other.

    So if you really consider the impact of derailing a conversation about how Republicans and Trump supporters and fascist pedophiles are destroying the entire world and making everyone on the planet miserable to say, "Hey, you used a word that is offensive to people with mental difficulties", then I would say that you were in the wrong for addressing your concern in the way that you did, not that your concern itself was wrong.

  • 3 9's is not bad, that's less than nine hours a year in downtime.

  • NSFW

    bite me rule

    Jump
  • You make a good point that I had not considered.

  • The white sock tighty whitey slide across wooden floors.

  • NSFW

    bite me rule

    Jump
  • I wonder if it's the same when trans girls argue online?

  • "Dress was so short that you could see what I had for breakfast" is such an amazing turn of words

  • You expect me to buy less than $5 worth of Arizona iced tea?

  • It's Katy Perry, I believe.

  • Honestly, you probably would be able to do the job with a well-placed myocardial thump.

    Ball your hand up into a fist, and wait for him to nod off and just swing down to hit him in the middle of the chest as hard as you can, and then spend the rest of the time fighting off anybody that would try to save him.

    If you have time for a second round, a knife hand to the throat would be a good follow up.

  • o7