Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

An Algorithm to End the Lines for Ice at Burning Man

TsuruchiBrian Re:personal attacks vs logic (341 comments)

you've got nothing but personal attacks and unfalsifiable claims to support your contentions

It's not my fault if you can't read.

none of your counterpoints attack my logic or offer a falsifiable counterpoint

Your original claim is unfalsifiable in that it is subjective.

everything you've typed here is just random rhetoric to support your ego

another unfalsifiable claim...

if you has a logical counter to my argument you would have used it by now...

Your skewed opinion of what is and is not logical is less than worthless.

Please don't pretend to be some kind of logic expert now. It will just make you look even dumber and feel the need to further project superiority complexes on everyone else.

yesterday
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Automated hate? (546 comments)

It is not prohibited, and state governments can do whatever the hell they want as long as it isn't explicitly prohibited. The federal government can probably get away with it as well because of interstate commerce.

That's true it's pretty easy to get away with stuff.

Registered state militia does not have to mean government.

So I could start my own militia and have my friends join it, and then we have the right to own guns?

I think that everything I have said is consistent with the United States government having meaningful restrictions on how it can infringe upon the right to bear arms and the right to free expression.

I would agree that this would still be a meaningful restriction, as long as the government does not get to prohibit people from starting their own militias.

I don't think your reading of the 2nd amendment is definitely correct. I interpret the 2nd amendment to mean that the right to bear arms helps to foster well regulated militias, without the implication that this right can be taken away when it is not used in service of a militia. It doesn't seem so unreasonable that people would possess guns for protection, and join a militia (with their gun) when the situation called for it.

Unlike many "pro 2nd amendment people", I don't think the founding fathers were infallible. I don't have a problem changing the constitution to fit the times. But I do think we need to actually follow it to preserve the principle of rule of law. I don't think the founding fathers could have anticipated weapons that could kill hundreds or thousands of people that could be used by one crazy person. But to me this fact means it is our responsibility set actual limits in the constitution rather than simply reinterpreting it to mean what ever is convenient.

I would rather see the 2nd amendment repealed, than be mired in all these militia technicalities. I think adding our own restrictions to the constitution without going through the ratification process undermines the rule of law.

yesterday
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Automated hate? (546 comments)

And what is it you think I want to do? The 2nd amendment does not promise every individual to obtain any gun for any purpose. It is within the bounds of the constitution to, as happens in most states, ban the sale of guns to convicted felons or the mentally unstable.

I actually don't think convicted felons should be prohibited from buying guns, especially when the felony they were convicted for had nothing to do with guns. As far as I'm concerned, you should have your freedoms restored when you have served your sentence. I also think people in jail should be allowed to vote, because I don;t see a need to remove that freedom, as it does not endanger anyone.

It is within the bounds of the constitution to collect forensic data of every gun sold and connect that data to an ID number printed on the gun (and by extension, make unlawful the removal of those numbers). It would also be constitutional to register those guns to their owners in a national database (and guess who has such a database? Our "friends" the NRA!).

Which part of the constitution provides the federal government with this ability?

If we were to take it even farther, it would still be constitutional to restrict the sale of all firearms to registered state militia only, placing safety and security restrictions on those militia.

And by denying membership to the state militia to only people you want to have guns, you basically remove any affect the 2nd amendment might have had in restricting what the government could do.

Which I am not advocating; I would only like to see military arms (including anything with an automatic or semi-automatic feature) fall under such a restriction.

I would like to see super deadly weapons restricted as well. Which is why I would like to see the 2nd amendment changed. But what I think is pretty obvious is that the founding fathers did not want the 2nd amendment to be interpreted in such a way that it places no meaningful restrictions on what the government can do in terms of prohibiting weapons.

In the same way that the 1st amendment was probably not meant to be interpreted as allowing the government to decide when speech could be criminalized, and as long as some speech is allowed (e.g. speech that praises the president), then it is not a violation of the 1st amendment, because you are still free to say whatever you want except the things that are illegal.

There would be mass looting. Do you really want guns in the hands of non-militia members when the time comes to bear our arms?

Yes, because I am not in the national guard, and for all I know, it may be the national guard that we are fighting if that time actually comes.

yesterday
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

You are indeed yourself a person. Not everyone appreciates their own work (i.e. for example, some of the dbags that constructed my house in 1973). And if you believe in a personal God, then God is also a person who may or may not appreciate your work.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

I guess it could be a saying like "God only knows", but I think it depends on whether the person really thinks that God will see his work or whether "God will see it" just means "Nobody will see it". I understand the idea of taking pride in your work, and I think that's a good thing. If you want to be proud of your work in front of other people, I think that's fine too.

I have been renovating my house for several years. I constantly find evidence of shoddy work as I am doing demo, and fixing it along the way as best as I can. I find peach pits in the walls from workers who were to lazy to throw their garbage in the trash and who probably figured nobody (or only God) would see it.

I think a good case can be made for not wasting your time doing work that literally no one will appreciate (including yourself), but you still shouldn't throw peach pits into the walls of a new house, because someone really might actually some day find it, and it will matter to them.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Automated hate? (546 comments)

I never said the 2nd amendment was for fun. I said that entertainment was a legitimate purpose of guns. Defending yourself against tyranny is another. The 2nd amendment is the legal roadblock to doing the things you want to do (which would keep guns safe and fun, but not so good for stopping tyranny).

2 days ago
top

An Algorithm to End the Lines for Ice at Burning Man

TsuruchiBrian Re:infinitely proving my point recursively (341 comments)

You understand you are confirming my theory right? (i.e. the one where you acting like an asshole to everyone elicits the same response?)

You already should have known this was true.

And in regards to the superiority complex. It may seem that everyone is acting trying to superior to you, but when you actively try to remain ignorant, it's just that you are ensuring that most everyone will actually know more than you.

I didn't try to "mystify" anything. Are you really that mystified by the idea that learning about a topic rather than just assuming you already know is a sure fire way to look like an idiot? Are you really that mystified that being an asshole will not make people want to treat you with any kind of respect?

Maybe you should work on being a better person, because the problem is clearly you.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Automated hate? (546 comments)

The only thing left to do is to repeal the 2nd amendment, and we can start doing all that stuff legitimately.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

Welcome to planet earth, where people will not think about you the way you want them to, regardless of what it is.

2 days ago
top

An Algorithm to End the Lines for Ice at Burning Man

TsuruchiBrian Re:infinitely proving my point recursively (341 comments)

the people should WANT suggestions for improvement, and the response TFA author got indicates a "superiority complex" mentality

Even if we assume that the few people that Bennett talked to actually had a superiority complex and didn't care at all to improve things (which I think is a crazy assumption to make without more evidence), it really doesn't do anything to prove that this is a mentality that permeates and is perpetuated by the burning man event as a whole.

this is correct, and no matter what your experience you cannot contradict it, given what you have indicated

I never claimed that *all* of burning man is good or bad. You are the one claiming that burning man as a whole has a superiority complex and doesn't care about improving anything, is perfectly contradicted by my experiences. Because when you make sweeping generalizations, all it takes are individual examples to disprove them.

they should welcome suggestions, TFA author was not welcomed and was instead give a line of BS

By one or possibly 2 people, who may themselves have been misinformed. I think it's great that he tried to get to the bottom of it. Maybe it will turn out to be some misunderstanding at bruning man org that Bennett has just uncovered. Maybe it will turn out that someone working in the government misinformed burning man about the rules.

the fact that you think that b/c you were in the ice line once makes any of the above not correct **shows that Burners and Burning Man is about demonstrating abstract superiority**

I was in several ice lines over several years. I've been in long ice lines. short ice lines. I've been in ice lines where the volunteers were working very efficiently, and in ice lines where they were not so efficient. I don;t have a superiority "complex". My knowledge about the reality of the subject is objectively superior to yours.

What you don't seem to understand is that it is not rational to apply the traits of one individual to an entire group. You meet one burner with a superiority complex, and you assume every burner has a superiority complex. You read one story about a person X who tried to improve the ice line at burning man and was maybe given a bit of a run around by person Y, and you assume that everyone at burning man is just like the person Y you imagined. Not only is your perception of person Y probably wrong, even if it was right, that application of his/her traits to all of burning man is *definitely* wrong.

they should welcome suggestions, TFA author instead was treated insultingly and rudely....ACCEPT THIS FACT

People at burning man do welcome suggestions. Not everyone welcomes suggestions, but most do. Even I welcomed his suggestion, and offered a few of my own. The author may have been treated rudely.

The fact that one person was insulting and rude at burning man does not mean that rudeness and insulting people are encouraged at burning man, regardless of whether Bennett was actually insulted or treated rudely.

You are treating all of burning man with rudeness. Should I assume that your whole family, or that all your friends would also be prejudiced assholes too?

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

I didn't miss the point. I fully get that that is what the point is supposed to be. My comment was that the example given is not IMO a very good example of that point.

An atheist doing what's right is a better (albeit still imperfect) example than a believing Christian doing what's right. Maybe it's possible that a Christian can still do good deeds without considering the expected rewards for being a good Christian, but I don't think a believing Christian ever really encounters the scenario of "no one is looking", so it's hard to know what a believing Christian would do if no one (i.e. not even God) was looking.

2 days ago
top

An Algorithm to End the Lines for Ice at Burning Man

TsuruchiBrian Re:infinitely proving my point recursively (341 comments)

except if you read TFA, it's clear the author asked about it and was told it was a "food safety issue" which he checked on and found to be untrue

Ice is not dispensed by one person. It's dispensed by lots of volunteers at 3 different locations every day during the event over many years. I'm sure some probably do think it's a government rule. Not every volunteer is perfectly informed. This isn't relevant to the point that I am making about you.

again...you ARE indeed proving my point, that Burners like you who over-mystify something just to feel 'cool' and 'in the know' are the problem, pasted below from my OP comment:

Why are you trying to pretend to know about things that you don't? Are you just trying to feel "cool"?

Regardless of whether you like me or I like you, the fact is that I AM in the know (at least much more than you), because I actually witnessed the phenomenon in question. Normally there can be some debate over whether "experts" actually know anymore. I am not even claiming to be an expert. I am claiming that you know next to nothing, and the experience that I have (which I am not suggesting is comprehensive), as WAY MORE than what you have (which is none).

...the problem with this system is that Burning Man as an event encourages this superiority complex mentality

Not only does Burning man as an event not encourage this, but stating facts is not evidence of a superiority complex.

My advice to you is to know at least a little about a subject before trying to feign expertise. Or better yet, don't even try to feign expertise. It is possible to have a discussion about something without pretending to be an expert on it.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

those who do, do because it's the right thing to do, they don't have the time to worry about what you may think of them.

Putting little words on engraved cogs and gears is still an attempt to get credit in the eyes of someone, it's just God rather than other human beings.

I think putting little words on cogs and gears is like donating to a charity anonymously and then hiring someone to out you as the generous donor.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

And if it was a man, he'd find refuge in audacity [tvtropes.org] and just get to be a trolling asshole. The people hating him would only add to his mystique.

What planet is this actually happening on?

Women can't do that, but they can play on paternalism to make you feel sorry for them. Kind of a sad trade, if you ask me.

I guess if you wanted to, you could reward female trolls and add to their "mystique", to try to help them catch up to all the mystique that male trolls have amassed over the years.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

Yeah don't do it for credit from mere mortals. That's for chumps. Do it for credit from God, because getting into heaven is the real way to win at life.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Not just women (546 comments)

Ignoring the sexist nature of your comment for a moment, do you think we should simply stop trying to protect anyone from harassment and bullying because clearly it's their own fault for being sensitive to their disability/skin colour/nationality/etc? You are just blaming the victim here.

Is it even possible to offer any kind of analysis of why people become victims or suggestions of how to prevent it without being accused of victim blaming?

Is every self defense class a giant example of victim blaming because it doesn't place 100% of the responsibility on a would be assailant?

Are home security systems an example of victim blaming because people have a right not to be burglarized and security systems only perpetuate the victim blaming mentality that it is your own responsibility to prevent home invasions?

I agree there is such a thing as victim blaming, but I think frivolous accusations of victim blaming just dis-empowers efforts to point out real examples of victim blaming.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Slashdot, Stop Spinning the GamerGate Content (546 comments)

I think claim was that you would be an asshole if you constantly patrolled gamergate discussions and repeated what you just said, every chance you got. The idea being, that if you actually didn't care about gamer gate, then you would be off doing more important things like saving the world rather than wasting your time showing off your gamergate trump card to anyone who will listen.

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Slashdot, Stop Spinning the GamerGate Content (546 comments)

Group A: People who think gamers/games are sexist.
Group B: People who do not think gamers/games are sexist.
Group C: People who send death threats to people in Group A.

You can be on more than one group. There are definitely some people who are in both B and C. This does not mean that A is right and B is wrong.

A democrat sending you a death threat does not mean republicans are right about anything.

Face it, there positively without any doubt is a vile and disgusting segment of gamer culture

There is a vile disgusting segment of just about every culture, why should gaming be held to any higher standard?

2 days ago
top

The Inevitable Death of the Internet Troll

TsuruchiBrian Re:Automated hate? (546 comments)

Shooting guns is entertaining. That seems to be a legitimate enough reason. Maybe this isn't a good enough reason to allow rocket launchers given the danger they would likely pose, but entertainment is not an illegitimate reason.

2 days ago
top

An Algorithm to End the Lines for Ice at Burning Man

TsuruchiBrian Re:not two options_false choice (341 comments)

false choice....it's not a binary...it's not a choice between only either a) not volunteer or b) get ice slowly and not improve the system

I never implied anything was binary. There are many choices. They could care a lot, they could care a little, or they could not care at all, and everything in between. What I suggested was that they at least care enough to volunteer.

It was you who suggested the extreme option that they don't care at all.

the volunteers should try TFA's idea without a big hassle or drama...they should WELCOME a solution that makes it faster...and so should YOU

I'm sure they have tried it, along with lots of other ideas. Burning man is a place with a lot of smart people continuously trying new ideas. I am not saying that the process can't be improved. I am saying that the characterization of the current process by the OP is not accurate. The workers are already working in parallel, so getting the ice after the order is made doesn't slow anything down as long as it isn't slower than the transaction of money on average.

I think there probably exists even better ways of doing the ice line than what Bennett suggests. Some of those suggestions occurred right in this comments section. As someone who has personally witnessed the ice line several times over 6 years, and as a software engineer with 10 years experience, I can confidently say that Bennett's assessment of the problem and his solution are flawed.

You really are continuing to prove my point with all this

But that's not even what this is about. What this is about is someone (you) who *really* has no fucking clue what he's talking about, trying to pretend like he does. At least Bennett has been to burning man once, and is trying to make things better (along with most people who go to burning man).

You are someone who (I will assume) has been to burning man 0 times, who has heard how the ice line works from someone who has been once.

There are some douchebags at burning man. Most of the people are really intelligent, thoughtful and kind. Labelling volunteers you've never met, at an event you've never been to, as douchebags makes you a douchebag.

If you ever come to burning man. Please don't be a douchebag.

2 days ago

Submissions

TsuruchiBrian hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

TsuruchiBrian has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?