RationalWiki:Saloon bar

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Saloon bar
WIGO Bar colour.png

This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
Icon beer yellow.gif For previous conversations see the automagic barchives. Guinnesssmiley.gif

What is going on?

The Bar
(talk) (talk) (talk) (hic)

  1. There seems to be a LOT of people who hate us. (05:12, 19 Sep 2014)
  2. America as a Christian Nation (00:11, 13 Sep 2014)
  3. An invitation to participate in a study on existential risk. (16:09, 11 Sep 2014)
  4. The Science Delusion (06:13, 10 Sep 2014)
  5. What makes logic valid? (05:57, 9 Sep 2014)
  6. Has anyone heard of this - "Femitheism"? (06:10, 23 Aug 2014)
To do list


[edit] Cue overdue RationalWiki Scottish independence debate (pinned)

Uh oh. Osaka Sun (talk) 23:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

From London, the idea that a "yes" might take down half the Cabinet is quite delicious. Ed Miliband will be shaky too, but could probably weather it (since Labour don't actually have anyone less worse ... nah, that won't stop them) - David Gerard (talk) 08:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
The political fortunes of the current Parliament is none of my concern, it's the composition of the UK for the next few decades.
Take it from us, the sheer uncertainty over what would happen afterwards (over the status quo) was one of the factors for why the 1995 Quebec referendum fell apart. Osaka Sun (talk) 09:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems bizarre that right on the edge of the referendum there is no agreement on what currency the proposed new nation would use of what it's relationship would be with the European Union. (For US readers who may not be following the debate: The Scots Nationalists say they will be able to use the pound, the British Government says they won't; The Scots Nationalists say that entering the EU will be rapid and automatic, The EU says it would take years.)--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 10:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
The Krug concurs. Osaka Sun (talk) 21:47, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Education funding is another wooly area. Currently Scottish universities have very low tuition fees and almost all Scottish students get their fees fully subsidised anyway, as do students from elsewhere in the EU, but students from the rest of the UK studying in Scotland pay full tuition fees of £9,000 (just as they would at universities elsewhere in the UK). Scottish universities can operate like this under devolved education policy, and the SNP is claiming they would continue to do so under independence, but most education (and EU law) experts agree that it would be illegal for an independent Scotland (if part of the EU) to treat UK students differently from students from any other EU member state, and that when they can no longer charge high fees to non-Scottish UK students, free tuition for Scottish students will become unsustainable. WěǎšěǐǒǐďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 13:08, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Then there's the more 'mundane' things, like the state of the BBC. (Compare with the cross-border partnership maze for getting RTÉ to Northern Ireland and the BBC to the ROI.)
The Government is getting hit now for a lack of contingency planning on this, but it's the responsibility of Alex Salmond et al. (after all the arm-twisting to get to this point) not to offer magical thinking. And yet you guys are getting that. Osaka Sun (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
There is also the Royal Mail. I'm sure an independent Scotland would want their own stamps with Alex Salmond's head on them so they will have to find another way to fund all those highlands and islands deliveries without subsidy from south of the border. Redchuck.gif Генгисmutating Moderator 19:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
The whole thing is a hideous self-indulgent nationalist wet dream. The Yes campaign's arguments are almost entirely emotive and based on an awful lot of wishful thinking about how much better Edinburgh could do than Westminster. And whichever way the vote goes, there has been so much anti-English sentiment whipped up (and now anti-Scottish feelings south of the border) that the damage will be hard to repair. In the event of a no vote, the nationalists will be aggrieved. In the event of a Yes vote, Scotland will paint England as the bully when Westminster is difficult about the pound, national debt, and all the rest. It's a thoroughly unpleasant period in a 300 year-old union. Ajkgordon (talk) 21:10, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
So where was everybody when I was arguing with Auld Nick over this article/political tract? Now, fortunately, turned into an essay.--Weirdstuff (talk) 21:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Nobody thought it would matter then.--Miekal 00:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
IIRC I did object to it being an actual article rather than an essay, but didn't get too much support. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic? Moderator 07:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
"The whole thing is a hideous self-indulgent nationalist wet dream. The Yes campaign's arguments are almost entirely emotive and based on an awful lot of wishful thinking about how much better Edinburgh could do than Westminster." - you just keep that up. This condescending tendancy to treat every prospective Yes voter as a member of the Braveheart Brigade is why half the Nationalist's work has been done for them. Grumblejaws (talk) 19:04, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
It will fail but not by much. Have a similar vote in England however, I think it would pass.--Mercian (talk) 19:18, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I weakly agree. It's become a vote to see roughly which half of the Scottish people will be pissed off on the 19th. Grumblejaws (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Grumblejaws, actually I kind of agree with you. There has been a lot of condescension - from both sides. That was always going to work in Salmond's favour. Still, it is what it is. There is a lot of wishful thinking and the Yes campaign has fed off Scottish nationalism and, to some extent, hatred of the English. It IS mostly emotive. That doesn't mean that there a lot of Scots who feel independence is the best way to govern Scotland or who feel that Westminster will never represent Scotland's best interests. Ajkgordon (talk) 14:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
We can all stop worrying Nigel Farage is in Scotland to save the union. AMassiveGay (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Economic fear mongering before a referendum is inevitable. It always comes from the country that the region wants to separate from (the side that is being rejected) and rating agencies. Not the most reliable sources. Regions that separate with developed or near developed economies do fine on their own. --Shabidoo (talk) 18:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I find the "if you vote no we;ll devolve some more!" to be suspicious, why offer now and not earlier if you wanted me to vote no.--Miekal 19:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
[1](self promotion warning) - David Gerard (talk) 21:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
The UK's transition from a unitary to federal state is all but inevitable now. Osaka Sun (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
"Not the most reliable sources" So what about these economists? Osaka Sun (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
My favourite comment (and a rather honest one) on that link is from Austan Goolsbe: "no one knows". Caroline Hoxby gives a more articulated no one knows: "We should be uncertain. Short-term uncertainty would be high, yes, but "many years" depend on choosing sound policies for real growth." --Shabidoo (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I am going to bed now and by the time I get up Scotland may well be a foreign country.--Mercian (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Wake up. Osaka Sun (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
So Scotland voted against joining the Third World. Big deal. nobs"It all depends what Isil is" 16:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] The end of Thatcherism

However this goes (and right now the Yes side still needs a boost) history will frown on one notable politician as its catalyst. So... consolation prize? Osaka Sun (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

In point of fact Thatcher is still able to annoy people.--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 19:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Still carrying a hard-on for Thatcher, eh Osaka? There is no alternative to thatcherism, evidently. nobs"It all depends what Isil is" 16:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] UKIP

UKIP is already swooping in to try and claim benefits from the referendum, and just had a good 5 minutes of time to spread about a bunch of bullshit on the BBC coverage (and immediately got called on it by one of the people there) (and David Coburn just called SNP racist to english peoples)--Miekal 02:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Aaaaaaaaaaaaaand

Scotland decides to stay. How anticlimactic. |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ 12px If you ceased to exist yesterday / I'll erase yesterday from existance 01:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

What were you expecting, this? WēāŝēīōīďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 01:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Question about Iraq balkanization

I've been curious about this for a bit, is there anything besides potential cleansing that would be so adverse to iraq falling into two-three+ states? It just doesn't seem like Iraq as a free, diverse country is going to work out like we want it to.--Miekal 00:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

It's the ethnic cleansing. Osaka Sun (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
It's been a while since I read it, but I believe this was addressed in the Iraq Study Group Report and I think a major problem would be some of the subdivisions would have most of the oil while others would have almost none, basically condemning a new nation to poverty. Or I could be misremembering it entirely. DickTurpis (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Here's the problem with partitioning Iraq. If you are going to partition Iraq you might as well partition Syria and take out pieces of Iraq and Turkey to form a new Kurdish state. The Kurdish state and Sunni Arab states created from a partition of Iraq would be landlocked which may be fine in central Europe but is generally a bad thing when applied to developing countries especially ones in which the building of a desalinization plant is a forgone conclusion. And yes partition does in fact cause ethnic cleansing. Look at an ethnic map of the Balkans or even the rest of Eastern Europe from two hundred years ago and compare it to a recent ethnic map of the Balkans and Eastern Europe. The ethnic homogeneity of the Eastern and Southern European nation states is indeed product of ethnic cleansing coercive or aggressive. Nevertheless the reason why partition was used was to avoid bloody civil wars (like the one we are seeing in both Iraq and Syria) and it was even tactically supported by some European communists. Indeed the Soviets (judging by their actions in regards to Eastern Europe, and by their insistence on giving minorities autonomy within the Soviet Union itself) figured that it would be easier to talk about the internal issue of economic inequality and hence justify communist rule in an ethnically homogeneous country where hatred of the "other" (ethnic groups) isn't an internal issue. Anyway my view of this conflict is that it will go on until there is a partition of Syria, if not both Iraq and Syria, not because of what is happening in Iraq but because of what is happening in Syria (The two groups in that civil war both have way too much to lose for it to end in a clear cut victory for either side). That or we could simply replace Assad and the current Iraqi government with more strong-arm dictators and/or monarchs. The only European country that was founded as Republic as opposed to a feudal monarchy that I can think of where ethnicity and religion weren't and aren't divisive issues (literally) is Switzerland which has an extremely decentralized government perhaps even more so than the United States. Even the various decolonized African republics tend to be religiously homogeneous and the ones that aren't tend to face internal issues because they aren't. Hence while you (and civilized people of all ethnic groups and religions generally) may not like partitions and the inevitable ethnic cleansing that follows, as long as they aren't followed up by an outright genocide the international community tolerates them as a necessary tool for maintaining internal stability. Alsto003 (talk) 04:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC) Alex
  • The other problem is that people don't divide neatly along regional lines. What happens to people who are stuck in the "wrong" area for their ethnic group? Are you going to forcibly relocate them, abandon them to their fate, or what? --Aquillion (talk) 05:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
The proposals have been to create a federal Iraq along three quasi-territorial religious tribal and ethnic lines with Baghdad as the capital. The Sunni region (Anbar province) is however the poorest, and getting the Kurdish & Shia regions (Kirkuk & Basra) to share oil revenues is a major sticking point. You'd be pissed off, too, if someone kidnapped, raped your wife and then beheaded you. Sharing oil revenues may be bowing to extortion.
But the reality is, about 2 million Sunnis in the Sunni regions are ready to take up arms against these psycho-killers as well. They like drinking alchohol, watching pornos and girls in blue jeans with lipstick. They don't like cowing to religious nuts. nobs"It all depends what Isil is" 17:03, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Maddox on that one Spider Woman cover

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB6TiRJNI-Q I'm really not sure how to feel about this one.Ryantherebel (talk) 01:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Since he's doing a "make a genuine point" video instead of "make an ironic point" video, I think he should've quit while he was ahead. He started off with the clear point that there was no double standard. Then drifted into stupid points that are impossible to distinguish from those made by real-life bigots. Ikanreed (talk) 13:13, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I've been following his work for a while and honestly think this video was solid. He shows that he is a longtime comic fan and brought up the whole "Oi! We already did this!" Zero (talk - contributions) 12:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Question

How do you do that thing where it links the name and UTC time at the end of a thing? Also, does someone know how to make the fancy special username things? Do you need to have an account, or what? -JohnLesterMcFuck, 17 September 2014

You need to sign up for an account, otherwise your IP address is shown. To enter your name and the edit time you either click the signature button at the top of the edit window or type four tiles ~~~~. As for getting fancy effects, let's do one step at a time. Redchuck.gif ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. Moderator 10:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Article on Andrew Sullivan?

Should we create an article for renowned journalist Andrew Sullivan? Here is one good article from him: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/09/16/the-offense-industry-on-the-offense/ (talk) 19:51, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Already done. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 21:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Galt's Gulch Chile

I experienced an uncomfortable level of schadenfreude from the crash of this libertarian dream. If the mood strikes you do a quick google search and you can see one of the main promoters Jeff Berwick devolve from unthinkingly spruiking the project to talking about killing himself over it's failure. The craziest thing is, all along the way, they never once question whether or not their ideologically motivated beliefs might be wrong. Very interesting reading for those of us who are fascinated by people who believe stupid things (and are unable to stop believing them). Tielec01 (talk) 05:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The story seems to be filtering out into mainstream-ish media too. Tielec01 (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Even if this did go 100%, did anyone thing that Chile would be totaly cool with some weird Anarchist Republic in its borders that might have people stockpiling weapons? --Revolverman (talk) 08:31, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
It just now occurred to me that actually genuinely rich libertarians like the Kochs would never even consider "going galt", because they know the market would gobble up their previous position of power in the economy. It's always the poor sucker libertarians who suffer from these fantasies. Ikanreed (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
What's crazy is that, even if they had the resources to take this to court, the aggrieved parties have an ideological objection to courts so they won't do it. It's likely that the perpetrators of this scam will get off scot-free (topical pun not intended). You could not pick a better scam target than a bunch of ideologically invested people who have a principled stand against reporting you to the authorities. Tielec01 (talk) 00:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
They have an objection to courts? That never seemed to be the case to me. They just call them "private arbitration" or whatever. — Melab (Talk) 22:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Anarchists don't believe in a publicly backed court system - some believe that private arbitration courts magically will solve that problem, others just seem to live in fantasy land. Minarchists have no problem with public courts. This project seemed to be heavily marketed to the former category and some of them are sticking by their principles - which in a strange way is admirable but also very, very stupid. Tielec01 (talk) 09:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Missing pictures

I was in a discussion today about what to call various bits of the British Isles - and how today's vote will affect this and I said "there's a great Venn diagram on RatWiki. No, it's gone. Then, a few minutes ago, Prox noted that the picture of Warsi had gone. I then started clicking on the random page button and quite a few - maybe 20% - had missing pictures. Has there been some sort of cull or do we have a bijou glitchette in our picture library? Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 16:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

It's a known issue, mediawiki is just breaking like usual.--Miekal 16:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 16:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I could access the picture at a library computer but can't again with my home computer. What in the name of the most holy FSM could cause that? Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:30, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
We don't only need to sort out the technical problem, we also need to check that good faith editors aren't removing links to pictures that are missing on their computers. See Revision history of Sayeeda Warsi, other editors may make the same mistake. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Good faith editors can take responsibility for their own actions. We have a deletion log showing what has been deleted and why, as well as a technical support page for tech problems where this issue had already been raised. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] The Federalist thinks I'm interesting enough to talk about!

Article. My Response. (Kos) And all they did was just stroke my ego. Wahoo. Zero (talk - contributions) 19:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Is this seriously, "here let's have a 'newspaper' article about an edit war I had on wikipedia"? Because that's pretty amusing. Ikanreed (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
More like "Hey! Somebody noticed me!" Zero (talk - contributions) 20:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Conservapedia's own Karajou has decided to chip in--"Shut up, Brx." 20:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Sarkeesian

So, it's recently been revealed on Kotaku that rumors of a bomb threat against the GDCA for giving Anita Sarkeesian an award have been confirmed. Seriously, who the hell pulls this sort of crap?? I mean, the actual insanity of a bomb threat aside, for fuck's sake, she's just a journalist and media critic! She isn't on some sort of crazy Jack Thompson-esque crusade to ban video games or strong-arm game companies into only making games that feature only Strong Womyn Lead Characters Drinking Male Tears(TM). She's just making commentary that others aren't obligated to agree with. She even said herself in one of her vids: "It is both possible, and even necessary, to simultaneously enjoy a piece of media while also being critical of its more pernicious aspects."

Then again, I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised. We live in a time where some people think calling an armed SWAT team on a live streaming session is a humorous prank. Death threats have been around for centuries -- the advent of the Internet just means that it's that much easier to do anonymously, and there isn't even a letter to dust for prints anymore. In a nation of over 313 million people, the statistical likelihood of at least one person being batshit enough to pull something like this is bound to be pretty good. I just hope nobody will end up actually getting hurt due to all this drama... Noir LeSable (talk) 20:32, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it's because the people who don't like feminism aren't very smart. I seriously think that's it. They don't understand how other people think, they don't understand how violence undermines their point, they don't understand that this won't make anyone think more of their opinions. Ikanreed (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
You're making an unwarranted generalisation there. I'm sure there are a lot of anti-feminists who understand that violence would undermine their point... it's just that there are apparently also a few who are on another level. Nullahnung (talk) 21:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I think the only thing thats changed is the ease these psychos can pull this shit, rather then any belef that its getting worse then it was before. I mean, back before the Internet, death threats WERE serious things. You had to find our where your target lived, or worked. Now its as easy as a link and keystrokes. --Revolverman (talk) 22:21, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I did apply an over-generalization, but come on, these particular individuals are resorting to (definitionally speaking) terrorism, over a leisure activity. There's definitely a brain-reality gap somewhere in that process. Ikanreed (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
The Streisand effect never did anyone any good it seems. It escalates the amount of extreme shit that happens. Nullahnung (talk) 13:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, Swatting is a thing and people do that to just random streamers who DON'T have any kind of controversy or debate raging around them. The lesson here is that people are dickbags, not that people hate women. X Stickman (talk) 17:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
That seems like rather a simplistic & convenient conclusion, and one I'm getting tired of seeing. Even a casual reading of any of the blogosphere/YouTube/4chan/social media comments about Anita S or Zoe Quinn shows a hell of lot of overtly misogynistic comments, often using imagery of rape and violent fantasies, not just from a few isolated morons but huge groups of users. The fact that the same assholes also make unpleasant comments or attacks about certain guys they don't like is repeatedly held up as evidence that they're not really hostile to women, but this is is just evading the issue of what their comments about women actually say or imply. It's like saying a guy who beats his wife isn't really a misogynist if he also gets into fistfights with men too. WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
It's as if people treated her as someone who has stolen money from people. --Someon (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Look, people give on Kickstarter their own money whenever they are interested in a potential product. Whether they get disappointed or not by the result is for them to decide and I wouldn't call it stealing unless the person behind the Kickstarter just cut themselves off completely and never tried to deliver the product. Nullahnung (talk) 22:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sure all the rape threats, bomb threats & beat-up-Anita games came from her disgruntled Kickstarter donors. €₳$£ΘĪÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 23:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Assholes will press whatever buttons they know will work when targeting people. If they're after women, they'll call them slut, bitch, cunt etc... and threaten to rape them. When after gays they'll use fag, homo, abomination and threaten to stone them. When after muslims they'll use sandnigger, terrorist, towelhead and threaten to bomb them. That's what assholes do. They find what pisses you off, and they jump up and down yelling it. The constant claims of "wah it's a huge undercurrent of misogyny they all hate women" is something that I'M tired of. These people will use whatever the appropriate slur is for the specific target they're attacking, whether it's a woman, a homosexual, a black person, a white person, a skinhead, a jew, a fat person, a skinny person etc... The only reason the "hate on women" subset of assholes has become such big news compared to when this happens to all the other targets (remember the shitstorm over the fact that Fallout: New Vegas had HOMOSEXUALS in it? No?) is because the people they're targeting are media savvy enough to play it up in the proper media channels. X Stickman (talk) 19:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Have you stopped to wonder why such people are targeting and threatening women, homosexuals, black people, jews, etc.? Could it possibly be because they are misogynistic, homophobic and/or racist and not some other unspecified ulterior motive? ŴêâŝêîôîďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 19:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I never said it wasn't. I'm just pissed that misogyny is suddenly the hot topic when all the rest has been going on for years completely ignored. X Stickman (talk) 20:40, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Huh? ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 20:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I believe that what Stickman is saying is the following- "I am frustrated with the fact that, while trolls and arseholes will go around insulting any minority appropriate to a situation, the only one that is currently being discussed is misogyny, even though it's clear that these arseholes are not exclusively and specifically misognyistic, but just dickheads". At least, that's how I personally interpreted it. DØØM MĖSSIÅH What is this that stands before me?Dolan.png 06:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
You might have been right about the second to last thing Stickman posted here, but you misinterpreted his last post. In that he was merely saying that it was unfair how the homophobia/racism/etc. scandals that there have been online in the past haven't gotten nearly the same level of attention as when it's about sexism. Nullahnung (talk) 10:00, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, fair enough. DØØM MĖSSIÅH …Sate the Suicide ChoirDolan.png 23:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Astronomy Photographer of the Year 2014

I nearly put these in WIGO:World - Prepare to have your mind blown! Doxys Midnight Runner (talk) 23:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] The property pollution solution

I'm currently struggling over the libertarian solution to pollution. There's something odd about it, but I can't say what. I've always conceived of laissez faire meaning polluters couldn't be punished for their pollution (and that companies could essentially rip people off). This solution seems counter to laissez-faire, but it also doesn't… I'm having a hard time expressing this properly. It's also that this idea that pollutions is a problem merely because of the existence of a commons that I find strange. Let me just tell you that I've had this sort of break in my thinking between the time I didn't know about this and the time that I started researching it. After reading some of the libertarian stuff, I've come away seeing the world like it was divided by property lines. I didn't have this before, when I didn't see a distinction between a commons and a non-commons. Any thoughts/ideas? — Melab (Talk) 01:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

When people are fantasising about literally privatising breathable air, that's the point you can say with certainty they're so utterly divorced from reality that they needn't be listened to. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 02:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Nominally, a lot of libertarians are in denial about how connected and interdependent society is, then hand-wave whatever specific examples you come up with of how we need each other as being things the market would do better than the government. But yeah, when it comes to an-cap level libertarians, the denial that life is incredibly interconnected, by way of ecology, or at least can be replaced by a market, is fundamentally just science denialism. Ikanreed (talk) 12:56, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Even on paper, this idea is ridiculous. It would necessitate an insanely enormous legal system that would make the one we have now look navigable in comparison. We would also need some way to track every bit of particulate matter that crossed over into someone else's property. We'd have to go around in big hermetically sealed hamster balls when we wanted to leave our property. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:11, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Legally the situation today is already just as ridiculous. What you might be missing (and probably lots of libertarians are too) is that most of the time people don't insist on strictly enforcing the rules. "live and let live" is the way most people behave and the courts are keen to encourage that. Justice is not always well served by a legalistic approach, even though that's all the courts can offer. Remember that time you lent a friend (some amount of local currency) and they said they would pay you back tomorrow but they actually didn't until next Tuesday. In law you were entitled to be compensated, if you were both businesses in the EU you'd be automatically entitled to a further administration payment and at least 8% interest on the loan. But nobody acts that way, even very few businesses impose such penalties, at least the first time it happens. The law doesn't say "obviously the first time you have to let them off" or "This rule doesn't apply for the first few days because that's crazy". Likewise the law doesn't say 31mph in a 30mph zone is OK, and in most jurisdictions shoving past a person who has rudely blocked a narrow path is technically assault and you could face prison.
When people do insist on strict enforcement we think they're crazy. Neighbours who call the police when a football comes over the fence. Companies that try to send in the bailiffs over a 26p surcharge that went unpaid by mistake. Even when security services visit to "have a word" with someone who makes what seems obviously to be a joke about blowing up an airport we say things like "The world has gone mad" and raise our eyebrows. So it has never been the case that "there's a law about X" translates into "the legal system can and will intervene in every instance of X". Tialaramex (talk) 07:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Privatising breathable air is not so far fetched. India for example, has a brewing controversy over foreign corporations (like Coca-Cola) cleaning up the water that people of the subcontinent have been pissing and shitting in for several millenia, bottling it, and reselling their own resources to them. nobs"It all depends what Isil is" 17:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] What's the name of this shit?

I heard about some book a while ago that said something along the lines of this: human societies were all fucking good and shit with sexual equality and matriarchy and whatever, but then, everything changed when the fire nation attacked we started using writing instead of pictures, which apparently, like,fucking, awoke the masculinity of the left brain logic and sexism or some shit. It sounds like bullshit, but anyway, does anybody know what I'm talking about? I think the guy who wrote it was called David, but I'm not certain. THE GREAT RIGHTEØUS DESTRØYER Sorry if I piss you offDolan.png 14:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm just going to call that "more of the same", because all that evo-psych pseudoscience kinda blends together in making assumptions about the past, making assumptions about how that imagined past influenced human development, and then making assumptions about how that influence affects human beings today, then calling it "science". Ikanreed (talk) 14:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I think you're mixing together two different things here. Part of it sounds like anarcho-primitivism a la John Zerzan, where the noble savages lived in a state of "unmediated experience" until language was developed. The other is the ancient matriarchy claims made by Gimbutas et al. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I was trying to make the case that all the pseudo-antrhopology kinda blends together. So, mixing up two "different" things that read very similarly is pretty reasonable, right? Ikanreed (talk) 15:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Oh not at all -- I was replying to OP. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
But all this left brain/right brain stuff is massively overinterpreted isn't it?--Bob"I think you'll find it's more complicated than that." 16:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Yup. See hemispheric dominance. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Sounds like The Fall: The Insanity of the Ego in Human History and the Dawning of A New Era to me.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Sounds like a generic golden age fantasy such as appears in various creation myths from around the world & still crops up in various tenuous academic theories. There was once a state of balance and harmony within human society, then something fucked it up. Depending on what you want to believe, this might be human consciousness, language, literacy, settlement, agriculture, government, marriage, divorce, temptation, sin, knowledge of evil, stealing fire from the gods, opening some kind of magic box, etc. etc. €₳$£ΘĪÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
There's also The Alphabet Versus the Goddess, but IIRC that was from a guy named Leonard. All of this stuff draws on popularized versions of early and speculative anthropology, and various aspects of these beliefs are treated at Indo-European languages and pagan survivals. What makes it more interesting is that one central myth here remains the Nazi legend of Aryan supermen; all the goddess worshippers have done is to root for the losing team. - Smerdis of Tlön, for the defense. 19:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
That's the one- thank you Smerdis. Your infinite knowledge of obscure crank ideas has, once again, been quite useful. MĖSSIÅH ØF DØØM Play the best song in the world, or I'll eat your soulDolan.png 00:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] 4Chan hits new lows


Really. (talk) 11:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Some people will do anything to create drama and negative attention. They are called trolls. Nothing new there. Nullahnung (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
I often wonder if people didn't point and shout with outrage at every awful thing that happens in the seamier parts of the web, whether anyone would notice. I am reminded of the truism that there are many people out there who watch telly/films, listen to music and surf the web for the sole purpose to be outraged. AMassiveGay (talk) 12:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Always reminds me of those daily mail headlines that start with "OUTRAGE OVER (activity, event, person)", even though they're the first/only news source reporting it, so any outrage over the event can't have been particularly ragey since next to nobody would've known about it. X Stickman (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] What's Apple thinking?

I just saw this story about a former NBA guy who stole thousands of dollars from the Apple Store by using their self checkout system. Since when does the fucking Apple Store have self checkout? Why not just pile all their inventory out front with a sign that says "take what you want"? DickTurpis (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about Apple stores in your area, but none around where I am have self check-outs. They all just have the standard awkward and/or uncomfortably friendly staff members each equipped with iPhone and card scanner. Noir LeSable (talk) 16:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know about apple stores in your area, but none around my area are actually fucking worth going to considering you can buy pretty much all of the products elsewhere, that the staff-members are annoying as fuck, that when you need to get shit fixed, you have to wait 259064119098888632117006315809844 years (just for them to say your warranty is no longer valid), and that Apple products are complete shit, anyway. DØØM MĖSSIÅH Impurity is the secretDolan.png 23:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
*shakes head* Nutty Roux (talk) 04:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] The American Yawp

The American Yawp, an open use, CC-BY-SA collaboratively built American history textbook, now in beta draft. (One suspects the "yawp" comes from Walt Whitman, "I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.") Inn-teresting... Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Personal tools