Immanentizing the something or other

A journey into stuff


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
WWHRD
lucasthegray
Does anyone else find this disturbing, or is it just me?

  • 1
Actually I think it's good, because it draws attention to the fact that people are being watched. Because what's worse - knowing that you're being watched, or not knowing that you're being watched?

Plus the vast majority of people need a parental figure anyway, as evidenced by their belief in supernatural deities.

Do you have to take pills before you go on the internet to be this much of an ass online, or is it some sort of freakish mutant power which is energizedby the cathode ray tubes?

It's my destiny to piss you off.

so you DO do it on purpose?!

i had supposed it was your tendency to post sweeping generalizations and back them up with repetitive opining that started all those flamewars.

maybe you need an Internet Jesus, as evidenced by your above post. :P

How do you read intent from me saying it's my destiny?

Brian doesn't like me in general, so I figure it's my destiny to piss him off no matter what I say or do.

I don't need a jesus for anything; some people get pissed off at what I write, and some people don't, and I don't particularly care who thinks what because people who don't like me will find reasons not to like me. That's the way of the Internet.

your own... internet... jebus

:D i wasn't actually reading intent, that part was smartassery.

but, people who do like you can find your internet style frustrating and or ire-making. there is the outside possibility that they've got what they feel is good reason.

granted people who want to get all up indignant can always find a reason (hence slashdot), but that's kinda the same phenonmenon as when someone asks "what'chu lookin' at, huh?" i wouldn't call it internet-specific.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

What's different is that the Internet makes it easy for people to express indignance from a nice, comfortable distance.

The Internet makes everything easier!

Re: your own... internet... jebus

It also makes it easier to say things worthy of indignance.

People have had poor approaches to reason for thousands of years. These days, more and more people like you have been fortunate enough to have the opportunity to advance beyond shitty thinking. Graced with this opportunity, what do you do with it? You flip the bird to the less fortunate. Have a cookie.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

Well, with goading like that, I guess I can only reply (with whatever irony you choose to take) that it doesn't seem to have made being self-righteous any harder either.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

I suppose that's fair. But since I'm on a self-righteous tirade, I'll step up to bat one more time.

There are two ways to argue. One way focuses on correcting or dismissing the person you're responding to. The other is more difficult, and involves addressing what was said, giving credit for acceptable points, highlighting differences of opinion or flaws, and then possibly adding your own material, never failing to treat the opposing opinion with anything but the respect you'd give if the opinion were conceived by yourself (as if you'd come up with it in your younger years and later discarded it).

It's not so much that you don't engage in the latter approach. It's that you seem entirely incapable of the respect in requires. Just because you're a Bill O'Reilly with good ideas doesn't make you any less of a Bill O'Reilly.

I'm sure that to some degree, perhaps even to the fullest extent, this is a false impression. But I think it's an impression you convey, and it's responsible for a non-trivial degree of perceived asshattery.

Or maybe I'm way off-base and owe you an apology. I probably owe you an apology anyways for posting this publicly instead of e-mailing you privately, but I've got an asshole-hothead ego of my own that won't permit it.

Anyways, I do love your ideas, mate. Cheers.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

There are occasions for both ways of arguing. Sometimes there is an emotional component that cannot and should not be ignored. Sometimes there is no way to argue constructively, especially when the "opposing argument" cannot be perceived as valid.

I won't respect someone whose first step is to call me out. There's no real engagement possible there. I'm also not particularly respectful of pedantry and being overly reliant on semantics, because to me resorting to those tactics demonstrates a lack of confidence in his or her side of the argument. I also don't much admire wishy-washy relativism.

In short, there are behaviors and characteristics I don't respect, and I react poorly to them, and that colors arguments. And respect is a two-way street; one which I do not cross when the person on the other side starts off by throwing beer bottles in my direction.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

This reminds me of the people that complain about politicians using too much double speak and big words without actually answering the question. These are usually the same people to call someone being honest and blunt, rude or agressive.

Either you can have people get to the point and say what they think/feel, or you can have lots of flowery platitudes to make you feel better about having to hear what that person thinks/feels.

Personally I don't think that you should ask a question you don't want an honest answer to, or post your opinions on a public forum without expecting some sort of opposing opinion from someone.

Just because you don't agree doesn't make it wrong, just because you react to the statement with agression doesn't mean they were goading you. But then... sometimes they are.

Re: your own... internet... jebus

But you've got to admit that, "Fuck your point of view; here's mine..." is an infuriating approach that's rarely appropriate. And that's precisely the point of view that "Actually, it's good..." conveys.

Saying, "I understand your sentiments about privacy, but there's a more important principle at work here..." isn't just a platitude. It expresses understanding and acknowledges the other person's feelings. You're actually communicating with another person, perhaps even persuading them, instead of pissing on them. And you know what? It's really not hard.

But this isn't the best example, because obviously Mikey was trying to be flippant and obnoxiously clever. :)

Re: your own... internet... jebus

ZOOMJ

cannot be perceived as valid.



NEEDS MOAR ZOOMJ!!!1

cannot be perceived as valid.



and then there's being a smartass, through and thru. the Internets enable that like nobody's business! ph33r my hardline relativism.

The next step down a very bad path...

I kind of agree with mike that bringing attention to the fact that they have a panopticon over there is only good thing about it. The stats on the number of cameras is insane.

Several people I've spoken to refer to Middlesborough as the shopping mall for the rest of that region. Maybe they're just stepping up mall security...

And it's really just an intercom...

And the man with the evil leer and rubber glove is just shy about shaking hands...

"Obedience to law is liberty" my shiny ass

This -might- be okay if a bunch of laws were adjusted to account for the fact that the assumption that only a small fraction of a given infraction (say, littering) is going to be prosecuted.

If they start mailing full-cost tickets to everyone who jaywalks in Worcester, for instance, people will tear down the courthouse...

(Deleted comment)
"Stop touching yourself"
heh.

but that would be 'anti-social behaviour.' The way they were using that phrase alone really set my teeth on edge.

What are they gonna do? Dispatch the cops to pick up everyone who flips off a camera?

Obviously not. I was really mocking the stuff they were saying in the article about 'anti-social behaviour'

(Deleted comment)
Good afternoon friend citizen. You do not seem happy friend citizen. You love the computer don't you friend citizen?

yep. (though i knew it already)

*BEEP* You are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute...

*BEEP* You are fined twenty credits for a violation of the "You must wear pants" statute...

That reminds me of how pissed off a lot of drivers have become at gatsos over in britain. Apparently most of them have been set up to produce revenue rather than make the roads safer, so there has been a bit of a backlash

Benjamin Franklin Said It Best...

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Re: Benjamin Franklin Said It Best...

Obviously, Franklin wants the terrorists to win.

Re: Benjamin Franklin Said It Best...

franklin just didn't live in the post-9/11 world.

(Deleted comment)

Re: Benjamin Franklin Said It Best...

No, he'd be put in Guantanamo without arrest or recourse to due process.

My first thought was, "Do those cameras have microphones, or are the watchers going to have the read my lips when I respond, 'Fuck you and your facist bullshit!'?" But then, I operate on a guilt principle rather than a shame principle, and thus my behavior chances not one whit if there is a camera or if there isn't one. You see, the cameras don't make me feel safe, they do just the opposite. What would make me feel safe would be if they replaced every single one of those cameras with a yell-box (like you see on a lot of college campuses) - make it an opt-in system, as it were.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account