Rejoice! Actmyname is soon to be demoted

[nullius]

What is an Usenet?

Usenet is where people trolled, argued, and insulted each other shared knowledge, friendship, and source code long before the Web was invented.  Though it later ran over the Internet, it originally was distributed through UUCP.  Judging your age by your mental level, I infer that must have been before your parents were born.

Here, wiki link.  Shiny.  Go read.

[Wendigo]

What is an Usenet?

Usenet is where people trolled, argued, and insulted each other shared knowledge, friendship, and source code long before the Web was invented.  Though it later ran over the Internet, it originally was distributed through UUCP.  Judging by your mental level, I infer that must have been before your parents were born.

Here, wiki link.  Shiny.  Go read.

What is UCCP?

I am wasting much less time trolling you so the joke is on you. Efficiency trumps effort 

[johhnyUA]

Yours is.  Moreover, the whole notion of “empathy” is disgusting.  It is nothing more than an emotional blank cheque demanded by the weak and incompetent on those who are not so.  It is the distilled essence of the Sklavenmoral.  But as all such things, it is a poison which acts only against those who choose to drink it.  Repudiate the concept, and it is as powerless as its preachers.

No, it's neuro- reaction. It's in our nature (in most of us, bro) - "Research in recent years has focused on possible brain processes underlying the experience of empathy. For instance, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been employed to investigate the functional anatomy of empathy. These studies have shown that observing another person's emotional state activates parts of the neuronal network involved in processing that same state in oneself, whether it is"
You can check sources by yourself - here

Of course, as i said before psychopaths, misanthropes and other very useful part of society doesn't have such neuro mechanisms.

But one important moment: Are we talking about "empathy" in meaning "the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within the other person's frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another's position" ? If yes - all that you're write above it's nonsence. Real creepy nonsence.  It's the same to said that bitcoin will die because it's not provided with gold. Or

that miners have complete power and if you are not mining there is not much you can do. Miners are the ones who control the network I mean we should say mining pools as mining solo is not what we want.

 
And now i'm looks like this guy who said

WRONG.

And you like him - bitfools  

Empathy helps to us in very various ways: starting from helping an old man with heavy luggage to not to kill a random beauty girl on the dark park because you wan't to fuck her dead body. Don't tell me that fear of the punishment stops you from doing that.   There too many ways to avoid it (i don't have statistic how it in western countries but i have for my country. Only 50 % of heavy crimes disclosed).

[exstasie]

Of course, as i said before psychopaths, misanthropes and other very useful part of society doesn't have such neuro mechanisms.

Yeah. I’ve been reading the commentary about “empathy” and I’m puzzled....are we all talking about the same “empathy” that separates psychopaths from society? Because I’m not aware of any other relevant definition than ~ “the ability to understand and share feelings of another.” According to the DSM-5, lacking empathy is a basis for antisocial personality disorder, formerly known as psychopathy or sociopathy. I’m not the most compassionate person in the world, but I’m amazed at the degree some people here show such disdain for other human beings.

Is this the consensus opinion?—That psychopaths are good and everyone else is weak for having feelings? I don’t know how else to interpret “the whole notion of empathy is disgusting.” I know we’re all expected to be 4-Chan-esque assholes here, but I didn’t realize you people embody that culture IRL. The fact that this is encouraged as a legitimate ethical position blows my mind. And clearly, liberal pro-intervention political positions are being used as a straw man for basic human emotions.

At least now I understand the culture here a bit better. I guess this is what happens when Randian and Rothbardian ideas are overwhelmingly pushed as dogma without discourse.

Markets may be zero sum. As a trader, I can acknowledge this. But life is not; human society is not. If you really perceive human connection as a weakness, I’m guessing you’re either a very angry and lonely kid or a sociopathic adult. I didn’t build my network of friends, clients and business contacts by completely disregarding them as human beings. Basic human emotions like empathy (which equates to social skills) were required. I really don’t think sociopaths function well in society, no matter how often they puff  their image up online (like a blowfish).

Just my 2 cents. I’ll fuck off back to Speculation now....

[Lauda]

Of course, as i said before psychopaths, misanthropes and other very useful part of society doesn't have such neuro mechanisms.

Yeah. I’ve been reading the commentary about “empathy” and I’m puzzled....are we all talking about the same “empathy” that separates psychopaths from society?  Because I’m not aware of any other relevant definition than ~ “the ability to understand and share feelings of another.” According to the DSM-5, lacking empathy is a basis for antisocial personality disorder (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder), formerly known as psychopathy or sociopathy. I’m not the most compassionate person in the world, but I’m amazed at the degree some people here show such disdain for other human beings.
-snip-

Calling someone a psychopath as a way of criticizing their philosophy is just fallacious. You need to read a lot of Nietzsche's writing[1] to understand why he thought the way that he did. If you do, it is very likely that you will also become a "psychopath". I think that you are also fundamentally confusing 'inherent lack of empathy' with rejecting empathy because you see it as a weakness. Those two are not exactly the same.

If you really perceive human connection as a weakness, I’m guessing you’re either a very angry and lonely kid or a sociopathic adult.

False generalization. How about another 'OR' you are a just a free thinker?

I didn’t build my network of friends, clients and business contacts by completely disregarding them as human beings. Basic human emotions like empathy (which equates to social skills) were required.

Building networks of *whatever* =/= having empathy =/= needing empathy =/= being a sociopath/psychopath.

Hopefully no one on DT gives me negative trust for expressing an unpopular opinion which might be construed as supporting those horrid Filipino spammers who make you all so angry all the time.....

I would say that it is not likely, although it has happened before. I'm pretty sure that you expressed a popular opinion given the Sklavenmoral, i.e. most Joe's are modern slaves in a way and would agree with "praising empathy".
[1] It is also on my TODO list.
Note: Freud on Nietzsche: "He had more penetrating knowledge of himself than any man who ever lived or was likely to live.". Apparently the source is supposed to be this book, although I can't really confirm that.
The thread diverged to the point where it could be split into a Politics and Society thread though.

[nullius]

You need to read a lot of Nietzsche's writing[1] to understand why he thought the way that he did.

[...]

[1] It is also on my TODO list.

It’s good to see that some people still believe in reading books, rather than simply Googling for unfamiliar words:

Let's fuck some weird Neitzschie foolishness in there as well, so that the easily-intimidated will back off in the face of your overpowering intellectualism.
[...]
and if you need any more pseudo-philosophical theories to throw around (with associated almost-german words), here's a link: https://www.pinterest.ie/fiveatheart59/philosophical-bullshit/ Have fun!

I myself have not yet made it through all of his sixteen books.  That takes awhile, together with comprehending the nineteenth-century social-historical context against which e.g. he prefaced The Will to Power, “What I am now going to relate is the history of the next two centuries.  I shall describe what will happen, what must necessarily happen: the triumph of nihilism.”

Also apropos hereof, with boldface supplied:

I reduce a principle to a formula.  Every naturalism in morality—that is, every healthy morality—is dominated by an instinct of life, some commandment of life is fulfilled by a determinate canon of “shalt” and “shalt not”; some inhibition and hostile element on the path of life is thus removed.  Anti-natural morality—that is, almost every morality which has so far been taught, revered, and preached—turns, conversely, against the instincts of life: it is condemnation of these instincts, now secret, now outspoken and impudent.  When it says, “God looks at the heart,” it says No to both the lowest and the highest desires of life, and posits God as the enemy of life.  The saint in whom God delights is the ideal eunuch.  Life has come to an end where the “kingdom of God” begins.

The thread diverged to the point where it could be split into a Politics and Society thread though.

I intended to do exactly that, yesterday, with my reply to johhnyUA.  The greatest substance thereof was written immediately; but I decided to gather some supporting pictures, so as to aid comprehension by those who don’t read.  Will do, and link from here.

P.S.—

If nature have no pity on the degenerate, it is not therefore immoral: the growth of physiological and moral evils in the human race, is rather the result of morbid and unnatural morality.  The sensitiveness of the majority of men is both morbid and unnatural.  Why is it that mankind is corrupt in a moral and physiological respect?  The body degenerates if one organ is unsound.  The right of altruism cannot be traced to physiology, neither can the right to help and to the equality of fate: these are all premiums for degenerates and failures.  There can be no solidarity in a society containing unfruitful, unproductive, and destructive members, who, by the bye, are bound to have offspring even more degenerate than they are themselves.

Edit, P.P.S.—I missed this on an initial skim over foolishness:

I guess this is what happens when Randian and Rothbardian ideas are overwhelmingly pushed as dogma without discourse.

I was waiting for some thoughtless nitwit to accuse me of following the pseudointellectual pretender known as “Ayn Rand”.  No, I do not.  I pass that judgment after having read all of her published works, and then regretting the waste of my time.

I’ve never read Rothbard.  Thus, I can’t very well be advocating for his ideas, much less pushing them as “dogma”.

[johhnyUA]

[Many Nietzsche quotes]

You must admit, that Nietzsche works it's just his own opinion and ideas. Of course, it's his (and YOUR) right to think in such way. But he was just theologian and philologist, not a sociologist (or something).
It's very naively and foolishly to use another's (EVEN IF IT IS Nietzsche or some other famous philosopher) opinion or counclusions for your own life. Life is much compilated thing and noone can understand it all. Different problems - different answers 

[HodorHodl]

<Massive irrelevant snip>

I've decided not to bother engaging with you anymore.

Just had a look at your post history, and you've quite simply just gone full Jane Austin. From your perspective, you're just owning the place, right? Well, from mine (and the other people you think are "peasants"), you're just looking more and more foolish every post. But you know what, I don't actually need to take on any worry over you. So I won't

No doubt you'll chalk this down as a massive victory - you have a history of doing that. Hey, listen, you take your wins where you perceive them, even if the reality is a bit different. As long as Starbucks keep allowing you sole use of that double-table for your gramophone and MacBook Pro, more power to your elbow. Reality bites, sooner or later. Wear thick underwear, it's coming for you.

Parting comment: I've met people like you before. You are clearly intelligent, and I wouldn't take that from you. But your emotional development has been very seriously impeded somewhere along your path. Frankly, I don't care about that - it's your problem. However, you try to move through life with that attitude, and sooner or later, you will meet someone who will not only react badly to your patronising and arrogant demeanour , but will also be in a position to very seriously affect the quality of your life. I wish you the very best of luck. You will most certainly need it.

Out.

[actmyname]

This thread has derailed. Completely—not even in the same zip code anymore.In regards to the actual topic, I'm interested in seeing OgNasty's opinion on my DefaultTrust status, given that they are an active DT1 member that has the ability of fully excluding me. I don't believe that I've seen any weigh-ins yet.

[Lauda]

In regards to the actual topic, I'm interested in seeing OgNasty's opinion on my DefaultTrust status, given that they are an active DT1 member that has the ability of fully excluding me. I don't believe that I've seen any weigh-ins yet.

If you want to resolve that quickly, either: a) Say that you strongly support me. b) Disagree with him on *something*. Voila, you are no longer part of DT.

[OgNasty]

This thread has derailed. Completely—not even in the same zip code anymore.In regards to the actual topic, I'm interested in seeing OgNasty's opinion on my DefaultTrust status, given that they are an active DT1 member that has the ability of fully excluding me. I don't believe that I've seen any weigh-ins yet.

I'm not sure why I'm being mentioned here, but you can say "he is" instead of "they are" as I'm not a delusional sociopath.  

Answering your request, I believe I was going to exclude you along with The Pharmacist (I might have even done it for a period of time).  If memory serves me correct it had to do with a thread I read recently aimed at you both suddenly unleashing a wave of red over the forum's users.  However, from what I read it seemed like you understood your actions were counter to the forum's stance on the issue while The Pharmacist expressed that he respected my decision to exclude him.  If I was wrong and you are going to act like The Pharmacist and make racist posts talking down to newbies, I will most definitely add you to my exclusion list.

OgNasty, I respect your decision fully.

[actmyname]

I'm not sure why I'm being mentioned here, but you can say "he is" instead of "they are" as I'm not a delusional sociopath.

Will do so in future mentions. Thanks for clarifying.

If I was wrong and you are going to act like The Pharmacist and make racist posts talking down to newbies, I will most definitely add you to my exclusion list.

While I don't completely align with some of The Pharmacist's remarks, I do believe that they have a significant portion of valid negative feedback ratings, which is why I plan on taking a look at some of their ratings in case accounts that warrant the red trust are now made neutral.I don't think I have made or will make any racist remarks towards others.

[bobq]

It’s good to see that some people still believe in reading books, rather than simply Googling for unfamiliar words.

This sentence made my day
I write books and with your permission I may one day quote this sentence, when it would fit the context, and I will credit it to Nullius of to any other name you'd PM me.

[4x4et]

Well, not really, he is obviously riding again.

Can someone tell me why this idiot actmyname was banned?

Was it the usual - lying, blackmailing, scamming, extortion - as Lauda and Suchmoon, a.k.a members of his gang?

[JayJuanGee]

Well, not really, he is obviously riding again.

Can someone tell me why this idiot actmyname was banned?

Was it the usual - lying, blackmailing, scamming, extortion - as Lauda and Suchmoon, a.k.a members of his gang?

Why don't you explain yourself a little better and perhaps provide some links, logic, facts to support your assertions?

Is actmyname really banned, and what is the date of such banning and what is your evidence?

And from my understanding Lauda and Suchmoon are upstanding forum members (sure they get attacked from time to time, but how are members going to know what you are talking about based on mere assertions), so what is the evidence, logic, facts for the accusations that you are throwing in their direction?

I don't necessarily have a problem with anything that you say, if it were to be true, but the superficiality of your assertions, especially when you are bad mouthing other members should be supported by links, facts and/or logic, and your lack of providing such support causes me to doubt what you are saying to be beyond mere mudslinging.  

Edited:

By the way, I just looked at your trust rating, and perhaps you are focusing on Actmyname, Lauda and Suchmoon because they are three out of four trusted members who have given negative trust to you... which to me, means that you have even a greater burden to substantiate the claims of your previous post with evidence and logic.