Koroviev

Yeah that's a really interesting point. The documentarians specifically said they were not creating the series to attempt to discover who was guilty and who was innocent or to place blame, but in stead of having a real discussion about the flaws in the infallible American justice system people are too busy picking sides and getting swept away in the minutia exactly the opposite of the intended goal. I also found the parallels between the Avery case and the situation in Oregon to be pretty fascinating. Government with the best of intentions over stepping their bounds and it's the citizens who suffer. Most people don't believe it can happen until it happens to them.

The way I see it this is a simple question: 1. is the "self-defense" funded through the initiation of the use of force? 2. is there actual evidence for the need of "self-defense"? 3. is the self-defense actually self-defense or is there an ulterior motive? 4. does the "self-defense" actually work? 5. if not who is held accountable

If you're looking for something new to watch on Netflix I highly recommend the documentary series Making a Murderer. It's about a guy in Wisconsin who was put in prison for rape in the 1980's. 18 years later DNA evidence is found that he was not guilty as he stated the entire time. Fantastic series highlighting some of the major pitfalls of the US "justice" system. It's one of those documentaries that makes you hope that it's biased and over dramatized because if it's not then we live in a pretty terrifying reality. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5189670/

This guy from Iran who was a big name in blogging before he went to prison for 6 years wrote an article reflecting on the changes he's missed in the internet in that time and touches on potentially what that could mean. It's a little long but very very relevant and helps to explain what I've been trying to say. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/29/irans-blogfather-facebook-instagram-and-twitter-are-killing-the-web

Is peaceful parenting not "doing something." Isn't this the whole point of peaceful parenting and spreading peaceful parenting so that we have intelligent humans for generations to come who create more intelligent and peaceful humans. But maybe you're right trying to start a revolution but attempting to change the minds of people who have been brainwashed their entire lives or overthrowing the system would probably work way better...

This is a really interesting question because, maybe, it's just considered "normal" and "healthy" in samples of children who aren't necessarily getting their needs met. Is it because mom and dad both work and they aren't getting the parental attention that children crave so they are transferring that to an object to self-soothe? Looking at it another way it could be that they're trying to model their parents' behaviors with the stuffed animal, or maybe the item is simply something that is really important to them for one reason or another. So I guess the question (as usual) is compared to what?

I hope you're right but every day it seems like this would take less and less. Just look at Net Neutrality, or how they just went and put CISA into the Omnibus. The scary thing is that a lot of, if not most, people see the internet as Twitter, Facebook, and Netflix not the horizon of freedom and opportunity that it really is. So if the government can make something sound like it's threatening their Netflix binge watching (Net Neutrality), or that people are being mean to each other (check out Twitter's new ban on hate-speech), or that the internet is dangerous and companies need to "share" all of their data (see CISA) the idea that something like white-listing or China's firewall require a state of emergency seem less and less likely. To give you an idea of how little people understand computers and the internet watch the news when they report on something like when the air traffic control system went down a couple months ago and count the number of times they use the word glitch, then ask yourself what do they mean by glitch. is it a bug in the code? software update gone awry? did someone trip over a power cord? did they DoS themselves or did someone else do it? maybe it was a power outage. Nope all we get is "glitch," and that is apparently enough.

yep I saw this earlier as well. I want to say I couldn't believe it, but no it sounds about right for a lot of "parents."

There are a couple of "ifs" that are always in the back of my mind when talking about cryptography. 1. most cryptography is government funded or government chosen. Even the Tor network, although it started in the private sector, is funded primarily by the US Gov (this made for a really fun Defcon talk a few years ago when Tor was being released ). AES the current most common best practice for encryption came from a NIST competition. 2. encryption is not perfect. even if you have an algorithm that is functionally un-breakable even by the most powerful machines you are still dependent on the end user to properly implement it. Just to give you an idea, part of my job is cracking passwords, and with what I would call a mid range PC I crack on average about 50% of user's passwords, these are users who are preached security every single day. so yeah IF there is generally accepted and usable cryptography we can know is not compromised (yes government funded does not automatically mean compromised, but.....) and IF it is properly implemented and IF technology has not caught up to the point where it takes less than centuries to do a simple brute force on it then yes we are set. If not, well, I don't like to think about that much.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/26/dutch-city-utrecht-basic-income-uk-greens

lol nice edit

Also, can't forget to add a clause about how confusing your children, lying to them, and scaring them into submission is in no way infringing on their property rights

I went through and read your article really hoping to find some good arguments against UPB only to be sadly disappointed by your obvious, dare I say intentional, misunderstanding of anything you were critiquing. I originally wanted to go through your critique point by point trying to counter your arguments but the post had gotten too long as there are issues with pretty much every sentence. As MMD said above your lack of attention to detail makes this fall into the "not-even-wrong" category, where it is so utterly incorrect you cannot even gain any insight from it's wrong-ness.

Oh you mean similar to the god exists outside of the universe card. I understand now thanks. Freedom applies to everyone not just non-criminals. Freedom does not mean no consequences but even a criminal is free to go live on their own in the woods in a free society heck they could even stay in town even though they would probably find it harder to get food, water, electricity, etc. There are consequences if you want to be a criminal in a society. Anarchism means no rulers not no rules.

This post should be titled "When will my property rights be infringed upon in a society based around NOT infringing on other's property rights"

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;

Is it a voluntary community or are they required to auction their property? Those 2 statements are mutually exclusive. I was talking about this a while ago when I came across an article Charles Murray wrote about it https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/45141-guaranteed-income-am-i-missing-something/ There's also this thread which talks about an article that discusses the counter argument to living wage https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/45105-the-living-wage-ripped-apart/

Do you guys get double if we use the affiliate link to buy fdr books?

also, side note the research found that people with high functioning autistism are more likely to be atheists or agnostic and it does not say that atheists and agnostics are more likely to be autistic. Important details.... http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2011/papers/0782/paper0782.pdf http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0036880

for being sorry you sure do use a lot of antagonistic language so it's not rational to say that extraordinary claims such as there's some being/group of beings that are all knowing or all powerful who created, control, and care about every single human being and want us to murder each other if we dont blindly believe in their existence without having any, much less extraordinary, evidence. ah you're right i see the lack of rationality now I'll go back to my puppy bed and let big smart and strong manly men like you insult me and people I respect. also, I see now that you're right correlation is causation I've been wrong about that all this time too, have you looked into the correlation between ACE and religion or maybe just about everyone on the planet? or how about autism and religion did you look into that at all??

if you are looking for the truth state your argument and have a logical and rational discussion with people. Being antagonistic and using logical fallacies to get a rise out of people then sitting back trying to be innocent is no where even close to "looking for the truth."

you seem to keep making these very antagonistic claims about atheists but you never actually seem to make any arguments also this is called ad hominem.

As Stef pointed out in one of his older videos (I think in the intro to philosophy series..maybe?) the word atheist comes from ancient Greece which was a religious society thus not believing in god/gods was against the norm. Therefore the word itself has negative connotations. As for OPs question read I think the category you are looking for would be coward (see Against the Gods https://freedomainradio.com/free/).

We try asking these questions every time we talk to them the last answer I got was they make enough now to pay most of their bills and since he's back in school they don't have to pay back his loans until 6 months after he's done. By then he'll be making $100k+ a year so they don't have anything to worry about. We get more stressed thinking about their situation than they do.... RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

I have an acquaintance who recently got married (although we've asked she hasn't said how much her wedding cost if I had to guess $20-30k at least) told us they had $35 in the bank (as she was on her way to starbucks) This is not counting the $100k+ they have in student loan debt, their 2 car payments, and their $7000 massage chair payment. They also are buying a house currently, oh and her husband is going back to school, they have 5 dogs, and are talking about having a baby. so...yeah not surprising but it's ok because The Bern is going to make it all disappear...