test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Kate Mulgrew narrates film that says the Sun revolves around Earth

123468

Comments

  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    No it's not.
    Wrong again.
    You're not offering options, that's the problem with socialism: There are no options. You either use the public transportation or stay home. Walking will only suffice if the place you want to go to is close.
    Exactly the point.
    Then it's not "your studio," it's his/her studio.

    Oh, and not owning property is the only logical conclusion we have to take if we start banning things based on other people having them when you don't.
    Debatable.

    And yes, that is the logical and arguably desirable conclusion.
    Oh, so you're using a mantra Spock used to make the INDIVIDUAL decision to sacrifice himself to save the Enterprise as a means to bully everyone into doing things your way?

    Well, I reject that twisting of words and your collectivist agenda. Power to the individual!
    Yeah, whatever, dude. Maybe that works in Randroid Town, but not in the real world.
    I didn't mention any "rights." I said "OPPORTUNITY," y'know, the thing socialism lacks because you're forced to be like everyone else.

    Oh, and I prefer real books. Not a digital file that could be lost if there's a tech issue. My books will last as long as the paper lasts. And I'm not giving them up.
    Well, whatever. You can always use part of your state salary for storage space to hold those books.
    Socialist rhetoric. I'm soooo sure Stalin lived just as crappy as the common Soviet, and I'm soooo sure that Castro lives just as destitute a life as the average Cuban.

    Please, it's feudalism and you know it.
    Here you confuse the lifestyles of corrupt individuals with the theoretical and desirable possibility.
    And how do you know which is which? Both are technically poor, it's just that one is using it as an excuse. Are you going to monitor all of your serfs to ensure they do what you want?

    Glory to Big Brother!
    Nah, just give out the wellfare, but make it only enough to really be livable in the short term.

    There are few enough leechers that that should be enough.
    And damn straight I want what I want. That's the whole point of being a free individual, you get to aspire to get things. I don't want to be a serf.
    Desire does not equal need. Wanting X does not give you the right to have X.
    What? Are the anarchists you know always talking about the Anarchist Cookbook and how much the authority "sux?" I've met those kinds of "anarchists." They're not anarchists. They know nothing about the actual philosophy and thought behind anarchy.

    Furthermore, what's stopping you from taking over with your guns and army? Everyone else who's armed to the teeth. Violate the non-aggression principle and everyone else will smack you down.
    Not necessarily. What if I have more guns? What if I steal Bob's guns and make it look like Joe did it?

    It's all too easy to take over.
    So pretty much your answer is "yes, only the government is allowed to make noise." Also, not everyone sleeps at the same hours and during the dead of night, I occasionally do get quite a few military vehicles flying over my home very noisily, so it's not just during "standard hours." Such is the problem being several miles from an air force base.
    Well, not really.

    And those military vehicles serve an important societal purpose; providing a deterrent to other countries that might attempt to harm citizens.
    Again, who mentioned "rights?" I'm just stating there's no legitimate reason to prevent someone from acquiring something they want just because you don't like it. "Because it's noisy/obnoxious/'negative'" is not a reason.

    And as long as you don't try to go after her with chloraform, what's stopping you from attempting to ask Johansson out?
    Sure, Marcus can ask Scarlett Johannson out. But she's not going to say yes.

    Again, wanting something does not equal needing or being entitled to that thing.
    Two hilarious anecdotes. For the first one, that's a terrible character assassination combined with a strawman and also frankly such an act would be grounds for a lawsuit for the offender. And on the second, latinum doesn't exist and if such a thing did happen, I would be hoping my relative was smart enough to get insurance.
    Oh, but this is an anarchy, my friend. No laws means no lawsuits. So when you kill yourself drunk-driving your hovercar into a preschool? Nobody's gonna cry for you. If you survive? You're going to get lynched.
    Also, safety isn't a "right."
    Lie.
    Actually it's pretty accurate. In a society where freedom to innovate and express oneself is forbidden, you're not going to see a lot of progress in a lot of things. This is why monopolies with their patent TRIBBLE and trademark trolling have successfully kept technological progress at a crawl.
    And a socialist state would abolish those monopolies and have dedicated funding for research.

    Your point is moot.
    No we can't agree that a jet is such things, because otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument!

    And who decides what is "pollution?"
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    Those are the cretinous "true believers" I mentioned earlier. I'd bet my life on it that they're all infiltrated by intelligence organisations. The timing of their "attacks" is amazing.

    Uh-huh. Tinfoil hat alert!

    In short, you're full of it.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    This is why monopolies with their patent TRIBBLE and trademark trolling have successfully kept technological progress at a crawl.
    not saying anything else about the rest - other people can do that, but this is just flat out bull****

    technological progress has been steadily increasing for the past century

    we have handheld devices today with storage capacities and processing speeds that barely 30 years ago required massive bulky machines that took up ENTIRE rooms

    aviation is barely a century old and already we have planes that can break the sound barrier

    space flight is even younger and already probes are being sent out BEYOND the solar system

    and those are just a few examples

    technological progress is not at a crawl in the least...it's going by very quickly - too quickly, some might say
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    Wrong again.

    No.
    Exactly the point.

    So the point is to remove all options so you'll be happy that no one else has something that you don't. Okay.
    Debatable.

    And yes, that is the logical and arguably desirable conclusion.

    No, because it turns into a slippery slope. First we ban this because someone's unhappy, then we ban that because someone else is unhappy and we go on and on and on, just to make people "equal" and "happy."
    Yeah, whatever, dude. Maybe that works in Randroid Town, but not in the real world.

    Actually I think you'll meet quite a few people who'll reject the notion that they have to give up something they like just to make you happy. No, that's exactly how it works in the real world. Wars have been fought over such things.
    Well, whatever. You can always use part of your state salary for storage space to hold those books.

    Or I could live in a free world where anyone can buy a big house and not have to.
    Here you confuse the lifestyles of corrupt individuals with the theoretical and desirable possibility.

    And here you confuse theoretical and desirable with reality. Power doesn't corrupt, it attracts the corruptible.
    Nah, just give out the wellfare, but make it only enough to really be livable in the short term.

    There are few enough leechers that that should be enough.

    So, after an arbitrary time limit, cut off the poor sots even if they might legitimately be trying but having terrible luck. I'm still not seeing where socialism cares about the poor. Next you'll be suggesting debtors prisons.
    Desire does not equal need. Wanting X does not give you the right to have X.

    I don't see where I've said "rights" again. Are we speaking a different language? Furthermore, the lack of need does not negate desire or the ability to acquire.
    Not necessarily. What if I have more guns? What if I steal Bob's guns and make it look like Joe did it?

    It's all too easy to take over.

    I don't think you comprehend how many people are in the world or what it would be like if everyone had them. Sure, there might be a few jerks like hypothetical you, trying to take over, but most people just want to be left alone and live their life peacefully without jerks like hypothetical you trying to become Mr. Tyrant.

    Thus the right of self-defense. (Note that time I actually said "right" because that is a right.) So no, it would not be easy to take over.
    Well, not really.

    And those military vehicles serve an important societal purpose; providing a deterrent to other countries that might attempt to harm citizens.

    So I get it, government is above the law of noise, but us poor pathetic serfs have to be quiet. Fer our freedumz. Gotcha.
    Sure, Marcus can ask Scarlett Johannson out. But she's not going to say yes.

    Again, wanting something does not equal needing or being entitled to that thing.

    And I repeat, your dislike for someone having something does not necessitate it being barred. You are not master of the world, since frankly you'd be terrible at it.
    Oh, but this is an anarchy, my friend. No laws means no lawsuits. So when you kill yourself drunk-driving your hovercar into a preschool? Nobody's gonna cry for you. If you survive? You're going to get lynched.

    That statement alone proves you know nothing about anarchism. Natural law would very much exist (the non-aggression principle being at its core). I'm betting you don't even know what a DRO would be, let alone what it even stands for.
    Lie.

    Nope. It's not. Safety is not a right. It's a responsibility.
    And a socialist state would abolish those monopolies and have dedicated funding for research.

    Your point is moot.

    Becoming the monopoly itself. So no it's not.
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*
    *headdesk*

    That must hurt.
    Uh-huh. Tinfoil hat alert!

    In short, you're full of it.

    So now we're down to name-calling. That means you lost the argument.

    I win.
    not saying anything else about the rest - other people can do that, but this is just flat out bull****

    technological progress has been steadily increasing for the past century

    we have handheld devices today with storage capacities and processing speeds that barely 30 years ago required massive bulky machines that took up ENTIRE rooms

    aviation is barely a century old and already we have planes that can break the sound barrier

    space flight is even younger and already probes are being sent out BEYOND the solar system

    and those are just a few examples

    technological progress is not at a crawl in the least...it's going by very quickly - too quickly, some might say

    Ahem.... in some areas, but in others... we're quite stagnant.

    How many of those space probes going beyond the solar system are manned? When was the last time we went to the Moon?

    None. And the seventies.

    In fact, for 30 years NASA was using aging, decrepit technology just to get into orbit because there was no space market, no free enterprise. Now that there is, I expect we may finally see some actual progress, provided it doesn't get caught up in a patent hogging mess.

    Furthermore, we still widely use gasoline with electric and biofuel vehicles barely inching in. Shouldn't we be past fossil fuels by now when we clearly have the technology available?

    And then, tell me aside from Monsanto, who else is making progress in GE crops so that it might actually be safe to eat for once rather than be coated in poison? Hmmm?
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    When was the last time we went to the Moon?
    why do we need to? there's nothing up there but dust and rock...certainly no resources that can be mined or alien technologies that can be studied
    Furthermore, we still widely use gasoline with electric and biofuel vehicles barely inching in. Shouldn't we be past fossil fuels by now when we clearly have the technology available?

    last i checked, biofuel is still in limited supply - certainly not capable of supplying the entire world's population...well, the portion of it that use vehicles

    same with electricity; the batteries are only capable of holding a limited charge and recharging sations aren't widespread yet - good for short trips, but for anything longer, you still need a gasoline-powered vehicle

    give it a few years, though; it was the same thing with personal computers and televisions at first - not very widespread, but that changed quickly
    And then, tell me aside from Monsanto, who else is making progress in GE crops so that it might actually be safe to eat for once rather than be coated in poison? Hmmm?

    this i can't comment on because i don't know much about the farming scene or associated technologies
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    why do we need to? there's nothing up there but dust and rock...certainly no resources that can be mined or alien technologies that can be studied

    Wrong. http://phys.org/news166975298.html
    last i checked, biofuel is still in limited supply - certainly not capable of supplying the entire world's population...well, the portion of it that use vehicles

    We could make it more available by legalizing hemp. It has a higher return than sugar and corn and takes up less space too.

    But no, because it's related to that "evil Satan-weed" that the government says is "bad," hemp can't be grown without a lot of legal paperwork.

    And I don't see the Big Oil lobby letting this get changed anytime soon.
    same with electricity; the batteries are only capable of holding a limited charge and recharging sations aren't widespread yet - good for short trips, but for anything longer, you still need a gasoline-powered vehicle

    Unfortunately this is because the Big Oil lobby which has a lot of sway in Leviathan still wants us oil dependent. I don't see them in a hurry to build more of those power stations anytime soon and starting a new business to compete with these juggernauts is getting harder and harder. (Who do you think writes the business regulations?)
    give it a few years, though; it was the same thing with personal computers and televisions at first - not very widespread, but that changed quickly

    No, we're too easily controlled by gasoline scarcity. It's not going to happen quickly at all.
    this i can't comment on because i don't know much about the farming scene or associated technologies

    Oh, you should... you should. It'll make you sick to your stomach.
  • mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    why do we need to? there's nothing up there but dust and rock...certainly no resources that can be mined or alien technologies that can be studied

    There's plenty of resources you can mine on the moon (since rocks are the most common thing we dig for). The problem is shipping it back is more expensive than mining the same materials on Earth, even if they're rarer. Titanium, aluminum, and iron occur in relatively high concentrations depending on the location.

    It would also be a possible location for constructing large-scale spacecraft, given the lower gravity and local access to aluminum and titanium.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    as interesting as the information in that article is, they made a very major false claim saying the solar system was around 4.5 million years old - it is a hell of a lot older than that, so i'm naturally skeptical of all those other claims as well

    still, if any of it is true, especially that part about the helium-3, that would make for yet another supply of abundant energy, which is always nice
    We could make it more available by legalizing hemp. It has a higher return than sugar and corn and takes up less space too.

    But no, because it's related to that "evil Satan-weed" that the government says is "bad," hemp can't be grown without a lot of legal paperwork.

    And I don't see the Big Oil lobby letting this get changed anytime soon.



    Unfortunately this is because the Big Oil lobby which has a lot of sway in Leviathan still wants us oil dependent. I don't see them in a hurry to build more of those power stations anytime soon and starting a new business to compete with these juggernauts is getting harder and harder. (Who do you think writes the business regulations?)



    No, we're too easily controlled by gasoline scarcity. It's not going to happen quickly at all.

    ah, but the nice thing about all this...the only reason they have so much power and influence is because of their monopoly on a rapidly dwindling resource...once the vast majority of oil is gone, they lose everything because every oil-using nation will be forced to switch over to all those alternate forms of fuel

    but if that's not fast enough for some people, a little corporate espionage and blackmail or rifle diplomacy can speed things along, provided someone competent enough to do such things could be found
    It would also be a possible location for constructing large-scale spacecraft, given the lower gravity and local access to aluminum and titanium.
    provided, of course, that any such shipwrights remember to account for the moon's lower gravity when building the thing if they're trying to build a ship that can re-enter a planet's atmosphere without having to resort to oceanic crash landings like early shuttles did - and possibly modern shuttles

    a ship designed in the moon's gravity well would likely be torn apart on trying to enter earth's gravity well
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    Even if there is no resources on the moon, there is other uses. Can build massive telescopes without having to worry about an atmosphere or space telescope maintenance issues. Extremely hazardous materials and experiments can be conducted on the moon. Low G means we can manufacture things on the Moon compared to making it on Earth. Lunar Tourism would make people to visit Earth due to the things that astronauts have done like golfing on the largest golf course ever. Essentially, people like having solid ground below their feet and that is not possible in space.
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    as interesting as the information in that article is, they made a very major false claim saying the solar system was around 4.5 million years old - it is a hell of a lot older than that

    Editorial mistakes are wonderful, aren't they?
    still, if any of it is true, especially that part about the helium-3, that would make for yet another supply of abundant energy, which is always nice

    INDEED!

    ah, but the nice thing about all this...the only reason they have so much power and influence is because of their monopoly on a rapidly dwindling resource...once the vast majority of oil is gone, they lose everything because every oil-using nation will be forced to switch over to all those alternate forms of fuel

    Yeah, that'll be an interesting time, because the cold turkey scramble to switch will cause a lot of economic strife and destruction.

    (Hey, didn't say it would be fun. Just "interesting" like that Chinese curse.)
    but if that's not fast enough for some people, a little corporate espionage and blackmail or rifle diplomacy can speed things along, provided someone competent enough to do such things could be found

    Heh. A person can dream. :D
  • jonsillsjonsills Member Posts: 10,460 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    There may well be precious metals to be mined from the moon - the platinum group, for instance, if nodes are readily available - but for most of what could be mined, why would you ever want to send it back to Earth? Then you have to fight the gravity well again to get it back to your orbital facilities (you're mining the Moon, so you have facilities in orbit, right?).

    That's no way to build large space stations, or deep-space craft.

    "The Earth is the cradle of humankind, but one cannot stay in the cradle forever." - Konstantin Tsiolkovsky (1857-1935)
    Lorna-Wing-sig.png
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    Editorial mistakes are wonderful, aren't they?
    you think it was just a simple mistake?

    i suppose it could be; a quick search on the age of the solar system did show an approximate ago of 4.5 billion years, and the b key is rather close to the m key on a standard keyboard

    still, it pays to be cautious; i don't want to be one of those people who blindly believes everything they read without doing independant confirmation
    Yeah, that'll be an interesting time, because the cold turkey scramble to switch will cause a lot of economic strife and destruction.

    (Hey, didn't say it would be fun. Just "interesting" like that Chinese curse.)

    well, the economy over here in americaland is already approaching the point of depression, take two, so unless it somehow magically fixes itself fairly soon, things won't change much if that happened

    and which curse are we talking about? as i recall, the chinese have quite a few interesting ones...not that i'm planning on casting one...it's just simple scientific curiosity

    yeah, that's it...scientific curiosity
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    and which curse are we talking about? as i recall, the chinese have quite a few interesting ones...not that i'm planning on casting one...it's just simple scientific curiosity

    The one he's talking about is, "May you live in interesting times."
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    starswordc wrote: »
    The one he's talking about is, "May you live in interesting times."
    how is it a curse, then? i'd much rather have interesting than boring, so that doesn't seem like a bad thing
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • starswordcstarswordc Member Posts: 10,963 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    how is it a curse, then? i'd much rather have interesting than boring, so that doesn't seem like a bad thing

    I think it's a cultural dissonance thing. The Chinese also have this proverb that goes something like "The nail that sticks up is the one that gets hammered."
    "Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
    — Sabaton, "Great War"
    VZ9ASdg.png

    Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
  • kojirohellfirekojirohellfire Member Posts: 1,606 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    how is it a curse, then? i'd much rather have interesting than boring, so that doesn't seem like a bad thing

    Here's an example... having your dog run over, your house catch on fire, and being shot at by a mentally maladjusted psycho are all "interesting" events and a far cry from dull.

    Thus why such a statement is intended as a curse.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    Here's an example... having your dog run over, your house catch on fire, and being shot at by a mentally maladjusted psycho are all "interesting" events and a far cry from dull.

    Thus why such a statement is intended as a curse.
    ah...yeah, the chinese can keep that particular brand of interesting
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    You're not offering options, that's the problem with socialism: There are no options. You either use the public transportation or stay home.
    That is an option... Why does someone need a private vehicle when there are both public transport, and hireable taxis?

    Answer: Ego. What most, if not all, your points come back to -- What you childishly want, and somehow think that 'wanting' gives you some right to possess.

    Then it's not "your studio," it's his/her studio.
    Irrelevent semantics... I pay the rent to be able to to use it, and it is my name on the license, meaning if anyone else tries to use the equipment within, they are not only trespassing on my (admittedly rented) property, they would be breaking the law... For all intents and purposes, even though I may not outright own the propert, it is very much my studio. But as I said above, even if it was not rented from a person, it would be leased from the government...

    And how do you know which is which? Both are technically poor, it's just that one is using it as an excuse. Are you going to monitor all of your serfs to ensure they do what you want?
    I don't have to, there are government/state departments which keep track on the reasons why people are claiming unemployment and health benefits. I can't comment on the US Systems, and the current UK system definitely needs overhauling, but the point is, it should be possible to distinguish those who are in genuine need and deserving of support, from those who are simply unwilling to work...
    And as long as you don't try to go after her with chloraform, what's stopping you from attempting to ask Johansson out?
    Well, the main reason, is I doubt either of our respective partners would be overly keen on the idea. Then there's the fact of my having no means of contacting her in any significant way. Then, as mentioned above, odds of her saying yes, are not in my favor... Going after her with chloroform is actually probably my most viable option, but that's not my style, and I'm not going down in history as the guy who chloroformed Scarlett Johansson...


    As for the other stuff, Worffan already answered as much or similarly as I would, I just wanted to touch on a few specific points :cool:
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    Are you going to monitor all of your serfs to ensure they do what you want?

    Okay, stop right there! A 'serf' is a peasant who is legally required to work the land for the landowner. The term you are looking for is 'subject'.
    Actually it's pretty accurate. In a society where freedom to innovate and express oneself is forbidden, you're not going to see a lot of progress in a lot of things. This is why monopolies with their patent TRIBBLE and trademark trolling have successfully kept technological progress at a crawl.

    Yeah, hate to break it to you worffan, but the Soviet Union was not as advanced as the United States at any point. The Soyuz was much more dangerous than the Mercury or Gemini, and the only real advantage the USSR had militarily was that they could produce more military forces, but the NATO powers had overall better equipment. There's no time for creativity in a communist society; it's work, work, work...
    No we can't agree that a jet is such things, because otherwise we wouldn't be having this argument!

    And who decides what is "pollution?"

    The UN. They agree that anything which generates greenhouse gases or poisonous gases is pollutive.

    Just sayin'.
    Those are the cretinous "true believers" I mentioned earlier. I'd bet my life on it that they're all infiltrated by intelligence organisations. The timing of their "attacks" is amazing.

    Nope, sorry, you have no proof of this. This is a typical anti-government conspiracy theory with no credible evidence. Whereas the terrorist organisations worffan mentioned all claim they will stop at nothing to smash the west (probably what we deserve really, after Iraq). We had a couple of extremists butcher one of the fusilier guards in London a few months back.

    Also, Syria is under threat from jihadists as well, not just rebels. So are several African countries like Egypt.

    So terrorism isn't a lie. It is real. Though, I agree that the US government has exaggerated the threat since 9/11.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    why do we need to? there's nothing up there but dust and rock...certainly no resources that can be mined or alien technologies that can be studied

    WRONG!!!

    The moon is suspected to have significant amounts of uranium and other fissionable elements. Also, if you had a belt of solar panels around the moon's circumference, it would generate enough energy to power the entire planet.

    It's just that China are the only ones who can afford to go back to the moon.

    EDIT: NVM, point already made for me.
  • legendarylycan#5411 legendarylycan Member Posts: 37,283 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    WRONG!!!

    The moon is suspected to have significant amounts of uranium and other fissionable elements. Also, if you had a belt of solar panels around the moon's circumference, it would generate enough energy to power the entire planet.

    It's just that China are the only ones who can afford to go back to the moon.
    seriously, three other people already said similar things hours ago

    hearing something i already know repeated a fourth time is beyond annoying
    Like special weapons from other Star Trek games? Wondering if they can be replicated in STO even a little bit? Check this out: https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1262277/a-mostly-comprehensive-guide-to-star-trek-videogame-special-weapons-and-their-sto-equivalents

    #LegalizeAwoo

    A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
    An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
    A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
    A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"


    "It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
    "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
    Passion and Serenity are one.
    I gain power by understanding both.
    In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
    I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
    The Force is united within me.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    Worffan, Marcus, I'd just like to point something out. You are both confusing socialism with communism. Socialism is an ideology - communism is a way of achieving that ideology (and a very poor way, at that).

    A socialist state is where there are no classes, where everybody is equal and has equal opportunity and where everybody has freedom. Communism is none of those - you need a leading class to have a government.

    I'd rather live in capitalist America than communist Russia, thank you. Luckily, I get the best of both worlds here in the UK.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    seriously, three other people already said similar things hours ago

    hearing something i already know repeated a fourth time is beyond annoying

    I know, I edited it literally a couple of minutes after I posted it when I noticed other people had mentioned it. Sorry.
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ...words...
    This is going to be my last response to you, since there is clearly no way that this debate can end well.
    Or I could live in a free world where anyone can buy a big house and not have to.
    Go ahead. That world's going to royally suck after 5 decades or so of 7 billion people having exactly what they want at the expense of the environment.
    So, after an arbitrary time limit, cut off the poor sots even if they might legitimately be trying but having terrible luck. I'm still not seeing where socialism cares about the poor. Next you'll be suggesting debtors prisons.
    Then skip the time limit and accept that a few people will try to leech. Humans have pride, you know; very few people LIKE accepting charity and government handouts, and most will actively avoid doing so if they can.
    I don't think you comprehend how many people are in the world or what it would be like if everyone had them. Sure, there might be a few jerks like hypothetical you, trying to take over, but most people just want to be left alone and live their life peacefully without jerks like hypothetical you trying to become Mr. Tyrant.

    Thus the right of self-defense. (Note that time I actually said "right" because that is a right.) So no, it would not be easy to take over.
    This is laughable. Even if I didn't want to take over, it would still be laughably easy to kill my neighbor Bob, take his property, and blame it on Joe from on the other side of Bob's place.

    As long as I pinned most of the suspicion on someone else, nobody would ever find out because nobody would have the training and rigorous procedures of a police department.
    So I get it, government is above the law of noise, but us poor pathetic serfs have to be quiet. Fer our freedumz. Gotcha.
    Um...no.

    Government should strive to reduce noise from government work when possible, and should ensure that noise-producing activities are only done (a) for the common good (i.e. infrastructure repair) and (b) as quickly as possible to get them over with.
    And I repeat, your dislike for someone having something does not necessitate it being barred. You are not master of the world, since frankly you'd be terrible at it.
    And your Randroid dystopia would last about 3 weeks before some clever people got together and wrecked it.
    That statement alone proves you know nothing about anarchism. Natural law would very much exist (the non-aggression principle being at its core). I'm betting you don't even know what a DRO would be, let alone what it even stands for.
    You're right. I have no clue what a DRO is. But I laugh at your idea that "natural law" includes nonviolence.

    Nature is a brutal, bloodthirsty place. Without laws, humans are nasty creatures.

    And again, your pathetic dystopia would last maybe 3 weeks before some smart people wrecked it for the trollz.
    Nope. It's not. Safety is not a right. It's a responsibility.
    Wrong. And your appalling lack of concern for others leaves me wondering deeply about your mental state.
    ...words...
    You're being a sociopathic creep. So I win.
    Ahem.... in some areas, but in others... we're quite stagnant.

    How many of those space probes going beyond the solar system are manned? When was the last time we went to the Moon?

    None. And the seventies.

    In fact, for 30 years NASA was using aging, decrepit technology just to get into orbit because there was no space market, no free enterprise. Now that there is, I expect we may finally see some actual progress, provided it doesn't get caught up in a patent hogging mess.

    Furthermore, we still widely use gasoline with electric and biofuel vehicles barely inching in. Shouldn't we be past fossil fuels by now when we clearly have the technology available?

    And then, tell me aside from Monsanto, who else is making progress in GE crops so that it might actually be safe to eat for once rather than be coated in poison? Hmmm?

    --Space exploration is meaningless until we've fixed our own planet. I support reduced space programs in favor of expanded environmental programs.

    --Oil and coal companies SHOULD be banned, but they have too much political influence. This is what comes from not letting the state control large industry.

    --GE/GM crops are a dirty word at the moment because humans are stupid. So nobody wants to risk their cash. In a socialist state, we'd be researching GM crops anyway, with government funding.

    So in a nutshell, you're a Randroid and I'm not going to respond further to your laughable, selfish, and sometimes outright sociopathic arguments.
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Worffan, Marcus, I'd just like to point something out. You are both confusing socialism with communism. Socialism is an ideology - communism is a way of achieving that ideology (and a very poor way, at that).

    A socialist state is where there are no classes, where everybody is equal and has equal opportunity and where everybody has freedom. Communism is none of those - you need a leading class to have a government.

    I'd rather live in capitalist America than communist Russia, thank you. Luckily, I get the best of both worlds here in the UK.

    I actually feel that communism COULD work...provided that you have enough citizen-run collectivist anticorruption watchdogs.

    And yes, I want a state with no classes, perfect or near-perfect equality (where everyone has what they need), and people still have basic human rights like free speech, freedom of religion (or from religion), and the right to peaceably assemble.

    UK? Oh, you lucky guy...
  • organicmanfredorganicmanfred Member Posts: 3,236 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    I have no idea what is going on anymore, but it is good we talked about it.
    Because to talk about things is very helpfull and better than to kill shoot each other.

    Please join me again tomorrow when our show's subject will be: " Don't call my mother a tramp, you filthy hobo"

    Only on, E!
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    I actually feel that communism COULD work...provided that you have enough citizen-run collectivist anticorruption watchdogs.

    And yes, I want a state with no classes, perfect or near-perfect equality (where everyone has what they need), and people still have basic human rights like free speech, freedom of religion (or from religion), and the right to peaceably assemble.

    UK? Oh, you lucky guy...

    Communism doesn't work! It never worked! Even with those watchdogs, what happens if they become corrupt? Who watches the watchmen?

    The closest you can get is a socialist-capitalist democracy, with the government providing a welfare state, limited nationalisation, and a free market.

    And do you have any idea how hard it would be to get the private sector to accept a communist state? Without gulags and mass 'purging', you'd face a democratic revolution within a year.

    Also, the UK isn't so great. It's full of UKIP.
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Communism doesn't work! It never worked! Even with those watchdogs, what happens if they become corrupt? Who watches the watchmen?
    The people. They're the ones making up these (leaderless) watchdogs. Anyone can point to any government official with suspicion, and if say 60% of the group agrees, the government is legally bound to investigate under civilian supervision.
    ryan218 wrote: »
    The closest you can get is a socialist-capitalist democracy, with the government providing a welfare state, limited nationalisation, and a free market.
    Not a bad idea. Really, it's only large-scale, industrial business that would do better with state ownership. Small-scale stuff, and especially food production, is generally more efficient with regulated private ownership.
    ryan218 wrote: »
    And do you have any idea how hard it would be to get the private sector to accept a communist state? Without gulags and mass 'purging', you'd face a democratic revolution within a year.
    I'm not saying it would be easy, but I'd never stoop to purging and mass policing. I'd just have to hope that people would wait long enough to see that the grass really is greener on the other side.
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Also, the UK isn't so great. It's full of UKIP.

    We have Alan Keyes, the Tea Party, Alan Keyes, various corrupt goobers, Alan Keyes, the Constitution Party (who ran a KKK grand wizard a few years back, if memory serves), Ted Cruz (who is the single most arrogant and nasty loser ever to let the power go to his head), and last but not least, Alan Keyes.

    Alan Keyes is worth two UKIPs all by his lonesome. The man's batsh*t.
  • marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Worffan, Marcus, I'd just like to point something out. You are both confusing socialism with communism. Socialism is an ideology - communism is a way of achieving that ideology (and a very poor way, at that).

    A socialist state is where there are no classes, where everybody is equal and has equal opportunity and where everybody has freedom. Communism is none of those - you need a leading class to have a government.

    I'd rather live in capitalist America than communist Russia, thank you. Luckily, I get the best of both worlds here in the UK.
    I don't really care what it's called, I just feel that the welfare system needs revising so that while people will get the support they need, it will no longer be viewed as an acceptable lifestyle, jobs would actually be provided to the unemployed, and social housing would only be seen as acceptable in the very short term (ie capsules, not houses suitable for employed families) I'd say that here in the UK, we have the worst of both worlds, where the police can perform unreasonable stop and searches, without fear of action taken for a violation of a person's 4th amendment rights, where even a legal Swiss Army knife could be considered 'an offensive weapon' if the owner could not give a valid immediate reason for it being carried, and where burglars have more laws protecting them, than the poor sap they are burgling :eek:

    Communism doesn't work in practice. I accept that. But equally, capitalism is on the way out, and has created nothing more than tremendous class divides, and a culture of overly entitled consumers...
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    The people. They're the ones making up these (leaderless) watchdogs. Anyone can point to any government official with suspicion, and if say 60% of the group agrees, the government is legally bound to investigate under civilian supervision.

    Not even the public is above corruption.
    worffan101 wrote: »
    Not a bad idea. Really, it's only large-scale, industrial business that would do better with state ownership. Small-scale stuff, and especially food production, is generally more efficient with regulated private ownership.

    Debatable, but fundamentally, I agree.
    worffan101 wrote: »
    I'm not saying it would be easy, but I'd never stoop to purging and mass policing. I'd just have to hope that people would wait long enough to see that the grass really is greener on the other side.

    That approach won't get you very far. This is another reason why Communism doesn't work. Marx' theory was that the Socialist State would arise when the workers take power away from the capitalists. That didn't happen in Russia or anywhere else where Communism has existed.
    worffan101 wrote: »
    We have Alan Keyes, the Tea Party, Alan Keyes, various corrupt goobers, Alan Keyes, the Constitution Party (who ran a KKK grand wizard a few years back, if memory serves), Ted Cruz (who is the single most arrogant and nasty loser ever to let the power go to his head), and last but not least, Alan Keyes.

    Alan Keyes is worth two UKIPs all by his lonesome. The man's batsh*t.

    Ouch...

    Does Keyes use fallacious facts and fear-mongering to gather support like Nigel Farage?
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited April 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Not even the public is above corruption.
    Pessimistic. But this is an opinion thing and hasn't really been tested in practice.
    ryan218 wrote: »
    That approach won't get you very far. This is another reason why Communism doesn't work. Marx' theory was that the Socialist State would arise when the workers take power away from the capitalists. That didn't happen in Russia or anywhere else where Communism has existed.
    Point.

    Damn, I just want everyone free and equal (not free like "do absolutely anything you want with no consequences", but free like "freedom of speech, assembly, and of or from religion").
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Ouch...

    Does Keyes use fallacious facts and fear-mongering to gather support like Nigel Farage?

    Yes.

    The entire Tea Party, most of the Republican party in general, and a sizable chunk of the Democratic party does the same.
This discussion has been closed.