Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Rushy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 175  Next >
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Another mass shooting...
« on: October 13, 2017, 02:47:32 PM »
You underestimate your addiction!

Number of firearms manufactured in the US in 2013 (for instance), 10,847,792. Number of those guns that stayed in the domestic market (US), 10,413,880, only about 4% exported. Of all the small arms the UK armed forces have, most are made either in the UK, Europe or in Canada the only US ones are sniper rifles.
 
The NSSF reports that the domestic firearms industry (US) is worth $42.9 billion, however the cost of fatal and non-fatal gun violence to the U.S, is estimated at $229 billion due to your retarded health system.

That is why serious gun control will never happen, not only will it cost the gun makers but all the attendants to its effects would suffer too. Quite a little industry, sell killing and maiming machines to the masses and call it freedom, and then build another billion-dollar industry to benefit from the carnage.

Edit; 2013 US exported small arms = $1.1 billion, Imports $2.5 billion, what Rushy not checking his figures again, surely not.

I was wrong. I was thinking of the weapons industry as a whole, instead of only looking at the numbers for small arms.

It was when the laws were being debated in the early 20th century. There's a great quote from a Conservative MP who essentially said that any kind of traffic laws were a fundamental attack of an Englishman's right to go where and how he likes.

The difference, again, being that "to go where and how he likes" is not a fundamental right.

And I'd agree with you about not making people wear cameras, but if, following some horrific crime, a politician tried to use public anger and fear to push his 'All Cameras All the Time' policy, I would expect that people like you and I would argue the follies of that policy and debate it down. I would have little respect for the argument that even proposing the policy is in some way in poor taste.

As I said, I'm not taking a position on gun control or traffic regulation in this thread, I'm simply making the argument that trying to shut the debate down on etiquette grounds is really disingenuous.

I can agree with that.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Another mass shooting...
« on: October 12, 2017, 11:17:14 PM »
It doesn't have to be an emotional reaction. There are plenty of logical arguments based on statistics and probability on both sides of the debate, but they never get much attention beyond people who passionately care one way or the other until something like this happens. I'm not suggesting that we leave legislation to hysterical Helen Lovejoy-types, but when the national media has shone a spotlight on the subject, and there are people who are impassioned enough to lobby their legislators and turn up to protests, then politicians who want to make a positive change (whatever that looks like) should be free to make the most of this situation without being accused of being 'a shitty person'

The Road Traffic Act 1934 was brought into effect in the UK following mass public outcry over a record number of casualties on Britain's roads. It reintroduced a speed limit, made tests compulsory, and included a number of other clauses which still inform British driving legislation today. In fact, reading about the battles underlying the Act, it's easy to see the similarities with America's gun control debate:

On the side of motor car controls, the Pedestrians' Association argued that busy main routes were, roads of ‘blood and tears’ because of the number of accidents.

On the side against controls, a Conservative MP railed against the pleas about 7,000 people a year dying on the roads by saying: "'Why such concern over 7,000 road deaths a year? More than 6,000 people commit suicide every year, and nobody makes a fuss about that."

Change only comes when people have an emotional investment in making it, insisting that we never talk about gun control or changes to legislation following a mass-shooting out of 'decency' or 'taste' is really just an effort to shut down the debate entirely.

This debate isn't as simple as adding some traffic tests or other measures. Owning weapons is a fundamental right in the United States, and is specifically stated to be so in a Constitutional amendment, while something like driving, as far as I know, is not considered to be a fundamental right in any nation.

The key here is that after something like this happens, certain politicians move in to use the emotional capital to pass legislation that limits the rights of people. I see gun control as no different than, say, demanding all of your citizens wear a camera at all times to prevent crime. The price of removing rights is always higher than some little added security.


Not changing the fundamental rights of a population (to kill each other) based on the needs of gun manufacturers profit margins and good old boy sentiments, despite the mounting tragedies, typically are the best kind of (non)changes.

Fixed that!

Gun manufacturers profit margins wouldn't be terribly affected by a consumer gun ban, since their biggest customer has been is will always be governments around the world. Many European countries might have distaste for our gun policy, but that distaste disappears when they order our weapons en masse for their own purposes.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Another mass shooting...
« on: October 12, 2017, 12:05:51 AM »
The shooter was an old white guy.
I'm relieved.  Now a minority group can't be blamed.

If you do a search for "suicide bomber" you get a new incident almost every week. Also, you're a pretty shitty person for using this as political ammo.

Out of curiosity, why? When someone is hit and killed on a dangerous stretch of road, the family is usually one of the first people using the tragedy to try to improve the safety of that stretch of road. Following the 1968 Ronan Point gas explosion, building regulations were changed so that high-rise residential buildings could not have gas feeds. Following the recent Grenfell Tower fire in London, there has been a push to investigate all similar tower blocks for similar faults.

Why is using this, or any shooting, as an argument for a change in the law considered to be in 'bad taste'? Politicians aren't professional mourners, their job is to review the legislation to make people's lives better, if a mass-shooting gives the topic the attention and political drive to implement a change in the law to prevent future shootings, then they should take advantage of it. What that change looks like, or whether any change is needed is, of course, up for debate, but trying to shut down that debate out of some sort of bizarre fixation with 'taste' seems like a pretty shitty excuse to not do your job.

Changes to the fundamental rights of a population based on emotional reactions to tragedies typically aren't the best kind of changes.

4
Technology & Information / Re: Snupes is building a computer
« on: September 27, 2017, 04:38:54 AM »
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103099

This cooler is extremely quiet and much cheaper. Just keep in mind that it is very big. Probably wouldn't fit in any case smaller than a midtower.

5
Technology & Information / Re: Snupes is building a computer
« on: September 27, 2017, 04:07:50 AM »
Seems fine to me, but I question the need for such an expensive CPU cooler and a soundcard when your motherboard has a dedicated audio chipset.

Liquid CPU coolers use more fans, which really just equates to more noise, combined with the already very low power consumption of the 7700k. Personally, I wouldn't shell out money for it, especially since their failure rate is higher (and they're harder to fix/replace). As far as the sound card goes, I'll admit I know pretty much nothing about sound processing, but from what I've gleamed, sound cards really don't make a difference anymore since most motherboards (such as yours) come with onboard audio chipsets.

Also, the motherboard you're buying has onboard wifi, you definitely don't need a wifi adapter.

6
Technology & Information / Re: Apple Event 12 September 2017
« on: September 25, 2017, 04:44:00 AM »
If you lower the price of the iPhone X, then the Note will probably have a comparable price adjustment. See how that works? Value is determined by the market, not your fanboy whims.

Value is determined by the market, and the market for the latest, greatest Star Citizen ship is inundated with copious amounts of money and scarce intellect.

Fixed that for you m8

iPhones last but a few years, virtual spaceships are forever.

7
Technology & Information / Re: Apple Event 12 September 2017
« on: September 24, 2017, 03:37:37 PM »
If you lower the price of the iPhone X, then the Note will probably have a comparable price adjustment. See how that works? Value is determined by the market, not your fanboy whims.

It's almost like buying the newest, overpriced phone is a ripoff or something. Value is determined by the market, and the market for the latest, greatest smartphone is inundated with copious amounts of money and scarce intellect.

8
Technology & Information / Re: Apple Event 12 September 2017
« on: September 15, 2017, 08:03:32 PM »
I mean, their smartphone prices are in line with other flagships so that isn't really true.

And touchscreen laptops are gross.

Overpricing their products because their competition also overpriced theirs isn't very reassuring.

Gross? The X1 Yoga is amazing, I use it every day for school. Paper notebooks are for peasants.

9
Technology & Information / Re: Apple Event 12 September 2017
« on: September 14, 2017, 10:57:08 PM »
iPhone X looks pretty unpolished (aside from being overpriced). The sensor bar up top makes the display look pretty awful.

All Apple products are overpriced, so adding that addendum without at least adding it to every product you mentioned is pointless.

Also, Apple's continued refusal to create a touchscreen Mac is extra lolzy.

10
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: September 08, 2017, 02:59:29 PM »
Also, I'm watching Westworld now. It's pretty good so far.

11
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: September 04, 2017, 12:50:01 AM »
I was right about the undead dragon and Jon/Dany.

Those two details were leaked over a year ago.

How is that relevant? I don't keep up with leaks.

12
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Star Citizen
« on: September 02, 2017, 02:50:22 AM »
Actually the king of exploration vessels is the Javelin.

13
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: September 02, 2017, 02:47:12 AM »
I was right about the undead dragon and Jon/Dany. Too bad my "Littlefinger wins" prediction is sunk.


Also, for such a long-running Character, the run-up to Littlefinger's death is pretty fast. Hardly any dramatic tension. Just a sort of "you're dead now lol" given from the show.

14
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 21, 2017, 12:37:02 AM »
i think robb died to move the plot forward.  it wasn't a judgement about the morality of his decisions.  i don't think this series makes moral judgements in that way.  all of the characters are morally grey.

Some morals are more grey than others.

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Public Vice, Private Virtue
« on: August 20, 2017, 08:37:28 PM »
Laziness is what causes environmental damage, not consumption. Lazy consumption is what causes the most damage. The production/consumption cycle, given an ideal state, does not cause environmental damage (at least in the sense that they are "green" processes).

Also, having less children is a problem only experienced by first world nations. Third world nations are having more children than ever before thanks to an impoverished economy that correlates family income to family size in combination with modern medicine. The populations of India, China and West Africa will continue to explode while Western nations wither and die.

16
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 20, 2017, 08:30:48 PM »
OMG Rushy shut the fuck up.

rude tbh

Do you not want more Missandei/Greyworm fanfiction?

"shit, we don't have anyone buttass naked at all in any of these episodes, what will we do? Ayy here's an idea, tell Nathalie Emmanuel her clothes are coming right off"

17
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 18, 2017, 02:47:42 PM »
Because the Karstarks betrayed them and the noble thing to do is to behead traitors.
That wasn't a "do whatever the fuck I want" move. That was justice for treason. Just like Jon had the mutineers hanged and beheaded Janos Slynt. Which is the same thing Ned did.

Joffrey beheaded Ned Stark for treason, but I don't think that was very noble, either. Robb made a one dimensional, immoral decision to behead a man for idiotic reasons. When he beheaded Lord Karstark, he caused the deaths of many more men.

Honestly, Rushy. Your idea of morals in this world is so fucking off. Who do you think the most moral person on the show is? Missandei? Do you think she'll win?

Yes, I need more Missandei fanfiction sloppily inserted into the show.

Anyway, I still think Littlefinger is going to win.

18
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 18, 2017, 04:02:34 AM »
The Red Wedding happened because Rob stopped being the "good guy", he made several immoral or just plain stupid mistakes in a row and effectively got himself killed. It doesn't go against the "good guy vibe" of the show.
Yes. It really really does. His immoral choice was marrying someone he wasn't supposed to? C'mon.

Many good people have been killed in the show. This isn't a child's cartoon, it's not strict on those rules.

The show always killed people after they made some kind of stupid immoral choice. e.g. it killed Ned when he decided to try and circumvent the law with money which got him killed. The only people who do bad things in the show and get away with it are people are pretty much bad 24/7. The good guys that go down a dark path get whacked within a few episodes.

The next episode just leaked. It was good overall, and without spoiling anything, it confirms one of the more infamous leaks from last year. The biggest problem is Arya. Her stupid grudge against Sansa makes no sense, and neither does her continued creepy, threatening behavior.
Arya is being a stupid smug bitch this season. I'm glad Littlefinger is manipulating her.

Arya was always that way, and pretty much always had a massive dislike of Sansa, it seems that every has forgotten what Arya was actually like because she spent the past few seasons joining the Assassins and fighting the Templar.

That is ridiculous. Robb's death, just like Ned's, was shocking and effective precisely because he was so noble. Their fatal errors lay in their judgment, not their character.

Robb was killed precisely because he stopped being so noble. He married some hot nobody just because she had great tits, completely ignoring his pledge to the Freys, then before that he beheaded the lord of the Karstarks for some menial bullshit that his mother advised against entirely (reminder that this is literally the same thing Joffrey did). Robb was going down a path of "do whatever the fuck I want" and discovered that it actually doesn't work that way.

19
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 16, 2017, 12:47:07 PM »
The Red Wedding happened because Rob stopped being the "good guy", he made several immoral or just plain stupid mistakes in a row and effectively got himself killed. It doesn't go against the "good guy vibe" of the show.

20
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Game of Thrones
« on: August 16, 2017, 12:35:12 AM »
Edit: also something really bugs me about the whole half-dragon thing of the Targaryen ever explained? How is it that they're half-dragon? I'm betting the Lord of Light gave them this ability somehow, otherwise we have to assume the biological route, which is, uhh, well it's better than the incest I guess.

lore lore lore

They're not literally half-dragon. The ruling families of Valyria had a sort of intuitive magic that allowed them to communicate with and control dragons, which the Targaryens have managed to preserve in their bloodline through hundreds of years of inbreeding. The same magic is what gave Dany her invulnerability to fire. Also, R'hllor, the Lord of Light, doesn't have any real connection to Valyria, the Targaryens, or dragons beyond the shared use of fire.

This is book lore and has very little impact on show lore.

Also, for being born "intuitively magic" they sure do have a lot in common with dragons. Being able to communicate with dragons and also being fireproof sounds awfully "half dragon" to me.

Jon Snow is not fire proof.

You don't know this for sure, unless he got burned or something and I don't remember it.

Also, the "Jaime kills Cersei" path might not happen because Cersei is prego. I mean it's possible he'll kill her anyway, she's nuts, afterall.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 175  Next >