Using Tinder in Southeast Asia

sylvania12 · 5時間前

Because I'm not some delusional SJW who wants to let definitions of words become meaningless because there was a time when these words were synonyms

Well this is lacking historical insight and a fundamental misunderstanding for how language works. Bravo, dude. The time when these words were synonyms is mostly past; they now denote two different concepts. Guarantee and warranty literally come from the same word and would have been synonyms at a time, but guess what? They have related but different meanings. Words can (and do) change meaning.

Just because people want to change what words mean so that people with mental conditions can embrace their delusions does not mean it is correct.

Or maybe it's because people recognize the difference between what we now call sex and what we now call gender and our language is evolving to reflect that new understanding.

BearsNecessity · 10時間前

Well, yeah, but what about 90 yards through the heart of the Midwest?.

thebigswamp · 4日前

I thought only first class mail was protected from search.

This is not the case. Any mail you send is protected from unwarranted search and seizure.

Also I think numerous abuses is a bit of a stretch, there have not been that many abuses, and when they were found they were consequences

This is patently false. Even a cursory overview of the various leaks that we have from various sources show that this is not true.

thebigswamp · 4日前

All I see is a bunch of yelling with no solutions.

Yes, and that's a problem. You want solutions? Write your congressmen, vote for politicians that support openness and disavow corpratism, get out in the streets and let your voice be heard.

Despite what many think, your words on reddit do matter to a certain extent. Every discussion you have on here is in the public eye and can be viewed by everyone. While arguing on reddit is the bare minimum, that doesn't mean it is nothing.

thebigswamp · 4日前

Your comment has almost zero relation to mine. I was talking about the bulk gathering of private information by the NSA. You're talking about the FBI finding people publicly stating their intentions on social media.

NSA =/= FBI

Social Media =/= Your private metadata/correspondence

The NSA (in 2014, forgive me) admitted that their bulk data collection programs had foiled one terrorist plot, namely where a man was trying to send money to send money to al-Qaeda. If that's your burden for holding people accountable, then the Federal government must really get your blood in a boil with where they send their money and arms.

Don't obfuscate the issue. The FBI doesn't need to have access to literally everyone's records of everything they have done to foil the ambitions of would be militants. Not to mention, even the articles you presented are dubious in terms of the actual threat presented, though that must be my "liberal" (parentheses added because I'm a socialist, not a bloody liberal) narrative talking.

Regardless, Michael E. Horowitz stated himself (which is heavily redacted) in a report that the FBI had only foiled "only one or perhaps two" terrorist plots.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/21/fbi-admits-patriot-act-snooping-powers-didnt-crack/?page=1

This is not to mention that there is reason that the operation against Christopher Lee Cornell may have been a case of baiting; meaning it may never have even been something that would potentially have happened without the FBI agent's prompting.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/16/latest-fbi-boast-disrupting-terror-u-s-plot-deserves-scrutiny-skepticism/

Maybe you should get your news from more than what the TV/government tells you.

thebigswamp · 5日前

What a well-reasoned and logical argument. Bravo.

thebigswamp · 5日前

No need, dude. You weren't wrong. <3

thebigswamp · 5日前

That's a super literal reading of the 4th amendment. Plus, your mail isn't in your home either, but that's still protected.

Secondly, that's a really optimistic look at what the NSA is doing especially considering that the organization responsible for giving out those warrants has never rejected a request.

Thirdly, do you believe all that despite knowing the numerous abuses we have had leaked to us and the fact they have never foiled a terrorist plot?

thebigswamp · 5日前

I agree completely. I regret my tone, but it's a little late for that.

thebigswamp · 5日前

...The NSA? Have you not heard any of the things going on with that? Edward Snowden? Julain Assange? That whole thing?

thebigswamp · 5日前

Okay, there have been numerous cases that have shown an abuse of that metadata. People using it to spy on exes, people passing around naked photos they stole from the archives, that kind of thing.

You're really okay with people having access to who you called, when you called, the contents of the calls, anything sent via text, anything sent via email? Especially when we have concrete examples of people abusing it?

The fourth amendment is no longer protecting us to the degree it should be.

thebigswamp · 5日前

I'm okay with this and thank you for your contribution to the conversation.

To be fair, I shouldn't have been as sarcastic two posts up, but I was responding in kind.

thebigswamp · 5日前

Can you give me an example of other trade agreements that had their negotiations, and not just the final agreement, being open to the public?

In the case of trade agreements, you are correct. Why? Because they're essentially executive orders rather than actually treaties. Treaties are negotiated in (sometimes and ostensibly) public because they are created in Congress. The President doesn't need to tell you whats in a trade agreement before signing it.

Regardless, just because something is the case does not mean it should be the case. Saying, "Oh yes, well, these are always done in secret, clearly that's how it should be," isn't really very reasonable.

thebigswamp · 5日前

The freedom to be protected in our homes, persons, and effects from illegal search and seizure. There's one for you. And, as I know you can, you could think up more on your own.

thebigswamp · 5日前

I'm aware of them being two different things. In this case, by my estimation, OP is just being contrarian. He asked for specific examples and I gave them to him.

Let's get a definition going:

opposing or rejecting popular opinion; going against current practice.

He fits the literal definition of contrarian. The popular opinion here is that the US is indeed not looking out for the good of its people's freedom. He's countering that without any real basis for his claims.

thebigswamp · 5日前

Sounds like you're a sucker for sensationalism.

No more than you're a sucker for contrarianism.

What freedoms have been taken from me? How is my life any different than it ever was before....I'll give you a hint. It's not.

This is one of the most inane things I have heard recently. Your argument is, "Well, I have experienced this supposed stripping of my freedoms in a personal, direct, obvious, and individual way, therefore it doesn't exist. Phew!" Assuming that you are a straight white man (could be wrong), states barring gay people from getting married may not affect you either, but it's still a a freedom being denied to someone and is still wrong. The NSA data collection is an encroachment upon our freedom, all of us. Just because something hasn't affected your life in what could only be a ridiculously overt manner doesn't mean it's right.

Specifics please! All I ever hear are vague insinuations that corporations will become more "corporationy" and tyranny will assuredly reign supreme.

Holy shit your apathy is amazing. You really are must be hanging out with your head in a hole to not have heard any specifics about what is happening with the TPP.

Here is a comic that explains the TPP very well. Here is a summary from /u/HannasAnarion:

"Free Trade" treaties like this have been around for a long time. The problem is, the United States, and indeed most of the world, has had practically free trade since the 50s. What these new treaties do is allow corporations to manipulate currency and stock markets, to trade goods for capital, resulting in money moving out of an economy never to return, and override the governments of nations that they operate in because they don't like policy. For example, Australia currently has a similar treaty with Hong Kong. They recently passed a "plain packaging" law for cigarettes, they cannot advertise to children anymore. The cigarette companies don't like this, so they went to a court in Hong Kong, and they sued Australia for breaking international law by making their advertising tactics illegal. This treaty has caused Australia to give up their sovereignty to mega-corporations. Another thing these treaties do is allow companies to relocate whenever they like. This means that, when taxes are going to be raised, corporations can just get up and leave, which means less jobs, and even less revenue for the government. The TPP has some particularly egregious clauses concerning intellectual property. It requires that signatory companies grant patents on things like living things that should not be patentable, and not deny patents based on evidence that the invention is not new or revolutionary. In other words, if the TPP was in force eight years ago, Apple would have gotten the patent they requested on rectangles.

And I'll add something to ponder: THE DEAL IS BEING NEGOTIATED IN SECRET, THUS MAKING IT HARD TO GET SPECIFICS. Why aren't we allowed to see what's going into it? Well, based upon what we have heard and can infer, it's because most of us wouldn't be particularly happy with it.

thebigswamp · 5日前

And here we see the meta-contrarian in his natural habitat. Two things:

Just because the US isn't North Korea doesn't mean the government isn't failing to adequately respect our freedoms.
You're just sweeping NSA data collection and the ridiculous shit being passed in the TPP under the rug as unimportant? That's an almost impressive amount of apathy.

But, hey, you don't care; you just wish other people would shut up about it.

edit: a word and a n't

thebigswamp · 5日前

That's kind of a meaningless distinction. Providing a service can afford people certain freedoms. It depends on how you view and define the concept of freedom.

TeamLongNight · 6日前

Nah, Thoros is gonna pull a Moqorro and give Jaime a functioning hand of gold after he redeems himself. Thus Goldenhand will work with the Hound to fuck up some unGregor.

CertainDuck · 8日前

But what about Ouzo? At least it gets you drunk.

wise-tactical · 10日前

No OD Green ACS stocks :(

I even have the money to pick one up too

Wotalad · 10日前

I mean, D&D actually gave an interview about Jon's 'death' where they specifically talked about how they made it gruesome to emphasize that he was really dead and expanded that to other characters.

From an Entertainment Weekly article:

“In a show, everybody sees it for what it is. It’s that rule: ‘If don’t see the body then they’re not really dead.’ Like when we cut Ned’s head off, we didn’t want a gory Monty Python geyser of blood, but we needed to see the blade enter his neck and cut out on the frame where the blade was mid-neck—it was longest discussion ever of where to cut a frame; two hours of talking about whether to cut at frame six or frame seven or frame eight. And that’s all by way of saying we needed Ned’s death to be totally unambiguous. I remember reading the book and going back and forth, like, ‘Did I miss something? Was [Ned] swapped out for somebody else?’ There’s a level of ambiguity because you’re not seeing something starkly represented. In the book, you can write around things to preserve a certain level of mystery that you have to commit to on screen.”

long_time_lurker_01 · 10日前

You realize that GRRM pays homage to Robert Jordan as well, right?

House Jordayne whose sigil is a golden quill?

Seriously, I had no idea so many people disliked the WoT so much around here.

Plus, there's a lot of people talking about flat/shallow characters who only read 4-5 books in a 14 book series. Just throwin' that out there.

A_Prince_of_Dorne · 11日前

But let's go back to the feudal system's rules and ask again: who's the rightful king? As Robert Baratheon and Aegon the Conqueror show, it's whoever wins. And with all the support he had, Renly might not have been the favorite to win, but it was hardly impossible.

I see this get brought up a lot and the line "It's whoever wins," is a gross oversimplification. There's a reason why we (historians) view the Roman Empire's methods as being different from most Medieval monarchies. Rome didn't have defined laws of succession based on heredity. Often the person named as successor to the Emperor wasn't even related by blood or, in a few cases, even Roman. This is a system where "It's whoever wins," is actually kind of the case.

For most Medieval cultures, like Westeros is based on, "It's whoever wins" glosses over the hereditary laws in place that govern who actually has the "right" to the throne. You're correct that ultimately a conqueror can circumvent the right of succession and declare themselves the King, but the key word there is circumvent.

Even Robert, who won the throne by right of conquest practically speaking, still used his Targaryan heritage as a right. Robert was actually the rightful king (by the laws of hereditary succession) after Aerys, Rhaegar, Aegon, and Rhaenys were killed, along with the exile of Dany and Viserys.

Stannis decided to value the rules of succession over any other criteria. Which is ultimately arbitrary, not fair or just.

Stannis is the legal, hereditary heir of Robert; this is beyond contestation based upon what we, as readers, know. His claim is in no way arbitrary or unjust. Hereditary rights clearly have a lot of power in Westeros and are held to be a very real and binding factor when it comes to succession. There's a reason why Robert emphasized his Targaryan blood and Cersei keeps the parentage of her children a secret.

Right of conquest in societies like this is literally the ultima ratio, the final argument. And even then the would be conquerors support their claims in other ways. Hereditary succession is still extremely important and is held up as a legal means of declaring a successor.

LiterallyAnscombe · 12日前

OHGODNO. I need to learn to read French, because German is not sufficient for my grad school desires. I was going try and see if Duolingo could help me get some footing.

Even more worrying, I can't drink tonight because I am doing a medical study on alcohol tomorrow. Though, I'm pretty sure they're going to inject me with alcohol through an IV while I am getting an MRI. So I've got that going for me. Which is nice.

Samuel_I

トロフィーケース

本日のreddit gold目標額達成率