So when you repeatedly say you have stole nothing of value..
So you have stole something that is in your eyes worthless ?
Not necessarily. I can admire a woman and gain tremendous value from her beauty without taking anything of value but a slight wisp of the air she has breathed. She might look in the mirror and see an abhorrent creature. It's never a zero-sum game. Anyways, I haven't stolen anything but if you wish to consider it stealing, in this case, it happens to be of little value to me. If I were to take tremendous benefit from it, it would be no crime. The only "injustice" that would be felt is jealousy. To quote my writing: Jealousy is simply hating a person for experiencing pleasure or good fortune. How senseless. Primal -- but senseless. From this basis comes the absurd concept of "fairness"; the sense of entitlement from another's fortune. The only result of acting on this emotion is destruction. |
|
|
|
What? Cops, by definition of their jobs, have responsibilities above plumbers and other citizens. A cop pointing a gun at you is, depending on the jurisdiction, not necessarily a deadly threat. If you have illegal tint on your windows of your car and you get pulled over at night, there's a pretty good chance you'll be extracted at gunpoint just for the safety of the officer, and as long as they follow protocol it's usually not unlawful. I can't think of any comparable scenario where a plumber can point a gun at you and it's lawful.
But as I said, if the cop isn't acting in a lawful manner, then he's just some asshole with a gun - same as the plumber. That's the distinction.
I can't think of any time it's lawful for a person to harass me for using my common law right to travel while having darker windshields. The officer's safety should never come into question when I'm using my property and not aggressing against another person. A gun in my face is emotionally distressing and harm against my person. My preference in my property does not entail that. |
|
|
|
A parasite requires a victim. The host is harmed in the process. I've harmed nobody. I am not a parasite.
Your definition of parasitism is wrong.
This coming from you is hilarious. Parasitism does not involve taking something by force, which is what you contended on somehting awful:"Parasites are people who take by force. Rapists, The IRS, etc. " When you learn the proper definition, you can try correcting people. If I am not providing the correct value in return for what I am taking, it's stealing. I have not stolen anything of value. Parasites steal. If I cost my host nothing, I am only a symbiont: I can only create value.
Like hijacking someone's computer for your own purpose, without telling them, and potentially harming their hardware and/or increasing their electic bill while you reap the benefits. Yep, that's value right there. Que your response that nothing of value was stolen, the amount stolen was miniscule, blah blah. If you repeat something enough, you think people will give in. You know, when everyone around you tells you you're doing wrong, they just might be right. I'll stand by my definition. Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host.-Wikipedia It requires force to take. Anyways, when people go to a website, they accept to run all the software that is on it. You know, when everyone around you tells you you're doing wrong, they just might be right.
This is a dangerous mentality. The will of the collective is easily altered by social pressures; primal emotion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9UlQFRoajsCopying and pasting a wikipedia entry does not qualify you as understanding parasitism. There are plenty of cases of debatable parasitism, such a zooxanthellae reproducing in corals, where it in unclear that there is any detriment to the host, as the coral sequesters the dinoflagelletes and consumes their waste products of photosynthesis, but there is a clear detriment to the parasite: it is no longer free living and it's population is bioregulated by the host coral and they are digested at will. One could argue that it is mutualism, as both organisms can survive independent of one another, but only one thrives in combination. So what say you to the host benefiting from the parasite? The same could be said about much of your gut flora. In any case, when there is no victim, I show no concern. A woman disgusted with my front door and the fecal matter she had stepped in on her way to it is no victim in my view. She can take my home as-is. |
|
|
|
|
Abraham Lincoln is Un-American. He violated the constitution more than any other president.
|
|
|
|
Tragic. Its almost as if there were essential things that every society needs and that wherever you have people, you have to contribute to these essentials.
Still, at least you can sit at home complaining about it instead of trying something silly like voting for a change.
No, if you vote, you have no right to complain. The process you participated in put us in this mess in the first place. Also, you missed the whole point of the comic. |
|
|
|
A parasite requires a victim. The host is harmed in the process. I've harmed nobody. I am not a parasite.
Your definition of parasitism is wrong.
This coming from you is hilarious. Parasitism does not involve taking something by force, which is what you contended on somehting awful:"Parasites are people who take by force. Rapists, The IRS, etc. " When you learn the proper definition, you can try correcting people. If I am not providing the correct value in return for what I am taking, it's stealing. I have not stolen anything of value. Parasites steal. If I cost my host nothing, I am only a symbiont: I can only create value.
Like hijacking someone's computer for your own purpose, without telling them, and potentially harming their hardware and/or increasing their electic bill while you reap the benefits. Yep, that's value right there. Que your response that nothing of value was stolen, the amount stolen was miniscule, blah blah. If you repeat something enough, you think people will give in. You know, when everyone around you tells you you're doing wrong, they just might be right. I'll stand by my definition. Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host.-Wikipedia It requires force to take. Anyways, when people go to a website, they accept to run all the software that is on it. You know, when everyone around you tells you you're doing wrong, they just might be right.
This is a dangerous mentality. The will of the collective is easily altered by social pressures; primal emotion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9UlQFRoajs |
|
|
|
|
In defense of some them, they can be very relevant to the success of Bitcoin as a whole. A post in the main discussion is warranted in a lot of cases. I argue that banning all announcements would be to the detriment of the forum as whole.
|
|
|
|
|
The police system is horribly corrupt. Don't assume cops will be held accountable for their wrong-doings.
|
|
|
|
You know what the best part is? Atlas saying his crimes are victimless, even when he is stealing and taking advantage of others, makes him a parasite. The one thing he can't stand.
And no, Atlas, before you even begin. A parasite does not take things by force, that's predation. A parasite takes from others without providing anything to the host in return. All the "value" you provide to your victims is not reimbursement for your parasitism.
A parasite requires a victim. The host is harmed in the process. I've harmed nobody. I am not a parasite. Your definition of parasitism is wrong. If I am not providing the correct value in return for what I am taking, it's stealing. I have not stolen anything of value. Parasites steal. If I cost my host nothing, I am only a symbiont: I can only create value. |
|
|
|
|
It's a matter of semantics. I agree with the general definition of humility here and I'll leave it at that.
|
|
|
|
You have to accept there are other positions and you don't have the right to impose yours on other people.
I'm glad we agree. |
|
|
|
It conveys the message that it is better than whatever, but also that it is not best.
"Bitcoin is Best" sounds good too.... Yeah, about that...  |
|
|
|
Good. Send me the BTC you still owe me while you're at it.
I don't owe you any BTC. |
|
|
|
...snip...
Sorry but you have no right to force others to give up medical research for the sake of someone who is a quack. You may support his quackery - every quack has supporters - but that doesn't give you the right to copy the research work of people who are not quacks and resell their work for profit.
It doesn't because I'll be arrested at the expense of society. Enjoy fighting for your life for overpriced vaccines and treatments in the future. And rightly so. Do your own research and stop looking for excuses to profit from other people's work. I can profit off whatever I please. It's only a matter of who is going to stop me and my preferences. I prefer not to deny people rights to their actual property. |
|
|
|
I swear on my life that I haven't stolen anything of value.
You don't get to determine what is of value to others. Just because something may be of little material value of of no value at all to you doesn't mean that it's of no value to the person who possesses it. And why would you steal something which is of no value to you? The act of stealing on its own implies that you want the thing you're stealing - that it has some value to you. Look, you're taking my time right now. It might be small but to me that is worth over $100. I am going to have to bill you. Anyways: So what if it has value to me? Are you jealous, bro? You hate that I derive so much value my sub-Bitcoin fractions of a cent? Are you going to call mommy because I am having so much fun without you? Look, I'll help you out, man. I'll send you some Bit-fractions tonight. Heck, everyone can have some. There's enough for everyone! I am just awesome like that. |
|
|
|
You may have noticed the defintions of humility you quoted don't mention value.
Everybody has things they are better at than the average person, while conversely, everybody has things they are worse at than the average person. People humble enough to recongnize this can exchange goods and services to their mutual benefit. If you do not recognize your limits or the ablilites of others, any exchange you enter into will likely be inefficient and sub-optimal.
To force people to accept a sub-optimal exchange involves coersion.
So people who are not humble steal? Considering your aversion to humility and the fact that you indeed stole, the answer seems self-evident. I swear on my life that I haven't stolen anything of value. Theft is theft regardless of value I couldn't care less. I haven't revoked any significant value from anybody. If there is no victim, why should I care? I'll steal all I damn please if it doesn't cost anybody anything. No victim, no problem. Victimless crimes are only marks of tyranny. Victimless? a crime has a victim by definition You seem to be confused. Who is the victim if I walk out my back door and pop a couple rounds off into the tree trunk back there? Cause it's super-illegal... http://gawker.com/5858759/100000-atlas-shrugged-dvds-recalled-for-perfectly-hilarious-reasonThis is why I came back to this thread... Laws aren't morality and I don't stand under them. I do what I prefer. It's not a matter of who is going to let me do something. It's a matter of who's going to stop me. Who's going to stop me from firing weapons on my own property? Probably nobody. My neighbors are very friendly and I can do it regularly despite the local ordinances. You know who else does what they want...Cartman. That's you! Did you ever see your life hitting such lows, where you were the cartman amongst a bunch of pasty computer dweebs that aren't getting laid? I mean...that's gotta suck. Heh, I love how South Park is written by two Libertarians. Anyways, Cartman is awesome. Fuck you, man. In an online forum (South Park Studios Chat, 10 May 2001),[4] Parker and Stone responded to a participant's question:
Q: Are you two guys liberal or conservative? Me and my friends have had debates about this.
TREY: We avoid extremes but we hate liberals more than conservatives and we hate them [conservatives].
MATT: I hate conservatives but I really fucking hate liberals. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
