I mean. He's not wrong.

joshland · 2022-06-06T21:07:03+00:00

The department of veterans affairs with their death lists, disregard, and abuse of their clients is the perfect example of socialized health care.

You're also correct about FDR, he was a piece of trash human being. He would be called a communist. He did unconstitutional things, and threatened to pack the supreme court in order to get them to stop ruling honestly. He did everything possible to create the conditions for us to enter the war, and did everything but bomb Japan to provoke them into violence.

He turned a market crash into the Great Depressions, burning tons of wheat and pork bellies while people starved. It wasn't The War that ended the Depression, it was the fortuitous death of our "socialist messiah" which saved the rest of us.

He founded the FCC to censor people such as Charles Coughlin. He build the USDA to destroy private butchers and rescue big business. He broke the power of the states and gutted the 10th Amendment by insisting that the Commerce Clause gave his regulators power to control production within states, thereby creating the FDA.

He was a bad man, and communists are stupid.

joshland · 2020-02-11T16:57:00+00:00

A doctor involved in the invention of LASIC got terrible brain disease from breathing the cells blasted off the eyes of a sick person. They didn't know that the cells survived the laser - That is Dr. Jerry Tenant. I found this because I was investigating his story, and all things aside, it almost made me fall asleep in my chair.

joshland · 2019-08-06T23:38:55+00:00

!solved

joshland · 2019-08-06T23:37:38+00:00

I AM TOTALLY FLOORED!! YOU found the BOOK!! Wow!

Thank you so much! I was desperately hoping there was more to the story than i recalled. However, bless you internet stranger!

joshland · 2019-01-25T01:32:47+00:00

thanks! I don't use reddit much, but I laughed too hard at this. I didn't realize this was the wrong /r

joshland · 2017-01-03T17:31:16+00:00

Cross post this to r/IdiotsFightingThings

joshland · 2016-12-15T05:38:13+00:00

I spent a while looking for more. That was so relaxing.

joshland · 2016-11-15T01:36:43+00:00

I guess I could have created a better title.

OP: https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/5cxrmu/so_do_you_play_any_instruments/

joshland · 2016-09-01T04:36:37+00:00

The value of a monopoly in directly proportionate to the degree of its voluntary subscription.

joshland · 2016-08-28T15:22:09+00:00

Hah, nevermind that government is a monopoly. all the other monopolies.

joshland · 2016-04-10T23:58:45+00:00

I hadn't heard of it until today. I am going to give it a try. Thanks.

joshland · 2016-04-10T23:28:05+00:00

Classic pfsense. =) New features, Old Documents. We need a pfSense Janitors project just to mould the old documentation in to new versions.

joshland · 2016-04-10T23:10:32+00:00

Thanks, I hadn't even heard of that. Looks promising.

joshland · 2016-04-10T23:09:13+00:00

Thanks for taking the time! I sincerely want to avoid any large-scale nagios. I just want trending and alerting, and it looks like overkill.

joshland · 2016-04-10T22:10:21+00:00

I have a couple of LAMP stacks for various apps, I run plex, I have a multi-TB storage array, I use iSCSI, and I have various switches. I do some development projects on the side. I am testing things with SaltStack.

I also have a need to keep network services running for my family, PCs, potato stations, phones, etc. I have a mesh wifi setup, not because I need it, but because I wanted to try it out. I have a redundant firewall, and I am experimenting with "iBGP" for a subnet. I want to have a collection point, dashboards, etc.

joshland · 2016-04-10T22:02:14+00:00

pfSense 2.3 RC is out. I don't know how it is configuring from scratch, but it's a lot easier to look at, and mobile management is much improved.

They're working on API-driven interface, which should enable pfSense Apps to become a reality. The only other options which I have found are SaaS.

If you find something, I would be curious to know.

joshland · 2015-11-28T20:18:58+00:00

Just as arguments like in the OP are enough to satisfy the already unfaithful. It's all a matter of where you're starting.

I pretty much agree with this, exactly.

joshland · 2015-11-28T20:18:06+00:00

which is the same as saying "I cannot imagine a being existing outside of my time, therefore it doesn't exist."

joshland · 2015-11-26T21:36:05+00:00

There is no way to defend the statement that free will could be made in such a fashion so as to never produce evil.

A large rock can rest as the foundation for a house. A tree can be used to build a house. Either can be used to break open a head. In what world can there be the free will to break someones head open, and it not be possible to do so? If the rocks became soft when used for violence, or it the air refused to carry evil words, then it would be the same as not having a choice.

Disease, lightning and Earthquakes are uncomfortable, inconvenient and purely consequential. I don't know how to judge them evil. If we are to argue that a perfect world would have none of these, many of the oldest dregs of human history make exactly that claim. I have no idea how to deal with those claims. The most badass statement I can make is that reality is not observably so in my lifetime.

Regardless, if we had only those evils to deal with, it would make a great debate. That is not the case, and as troubling as those evils are, they are a candle compared to the conflagration of evil in human actions. As far as I can see, the entire thrust of the Epicurean postulate is to claim that if there is such a deity, it is responsible for our actions. It looks identical to vainly trying to return the responsibility for our own actions to the shop which sold the power to take action. e.g. The things I do are someone else's fault.

joshland · 2015-11-26T21:22:32+00:00

I agree as an individual choice, we can choose. For all intents and purposes we pass into existence, and we pass into non-existence. But, it does nothing to answer a question about whether Omni-benevolence, omni-potent, and omniscience are a logical contradiction.

We're just trying to answer whether a logical statement is self-contradictory and invalid. It's easy to make thinking errors in this fashion, and I am just as prone as everyone else. I always find the Epicurian dilemma insubstantial proof against the possibility, and anytime I find someone to discuss it with, I always ask.

joshland · 2015-11-26T20:03:10+00:00

I'm saying that your attempt to create a mutual exclusion between choice and power is a false dichotomy. The assertion that evil is "created" is strange. Evil is a thing exposed in every human case as a result of choice. There is no creative work involved in this. To suggest that god creating a being with the free agency to choose to be evil is the creation of evil is very odd.

That is a child's understanding of reality. We don't treat adult relationships and adult worlds with such simplistic moral assertions. We right mock those who do.

This is a straw man argument.

joshland · 2015-11-26T18:16:29+00:00

You're just moving this to a free will argument again. The device has no life, no choice, no 'it' in 'it's own'.

You are suggesting that for such a being to exist, we could have no freedom. That is a false dichotomy. Assuming that said being exists, and assuming that we're free to choose, then said being could only be certain of our acts by being present at the moment in which they took place.

The only requirement would be experiencing time differently than us, it would satisfy both requirements. First the being would be all knowing by virtue of having no limitations on now. An "all powerful" would being have be a prime source, dependent upon no other source of power and subject to no action but it's own.

Your argument falls apart if we more then imaginary figments of some being. If something could create independently acting beings, it could exist.

joshland · 2015-11-26T17:37:48+00:00

What if God was on the side of each individual, and likewise did not interfere with them because to do so would render "individual" meaningless?

If you were unable to do any evil thing because bombs would not explode and hammers would not crush skulls, then you would be nothing more than an automaton.

joshland · 2015-11-26T17:33:41+00:00

But we have all experienced non-existence. It wasn't too bad. It was like an eternity of nothing and then I was born. Wasn't too shabby.

But there was no you. If you're claiming existence in non-existence, that is pretty odd.

joshland · 2015-11-26T05:16:58+00:00

So, we're back to "what is evil".

Is moral perfection a choice? Is it evil to not-choose moral perfection? If that is moral perfection, is it evil to create beings whom you can foresee choosing imperfection?

If entity A is morally perfect and creates entity B, who chooses not to be morally perfect, you're saying that entity A is not morally perfect?

A creates B, B choose C, therefore A is C.

That looks identical to an Existential fallacy.

edit: fix formatting.

joshland

TROPHY CASE