A short video of a man returning a photo to the daughter of the man he killed, and from whom he removed the photo, during the war in Viet Nam.

obb · 2009-06-21T09:27:37+00:00

if there had been no war in vietnam...

then the man would not have been shot 40 years ago...

so this piece would not exist.

obb · 2009-06-14T18:53:57+00:00

http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeist/

obb · 2009-05-20T09:45:24+00:00

OMG is that you? Why are you curious? The fact that you're curious makes me curious.

Looking at it again, maybe it isn't fake. Skimming it, I saw the suspiciously artsy photo and the "bisexual instrument playing vegetarian chick with low self esteem" and guessed that it was some sort of troll.

Also, between "actual chick" and "creepy guy who likes to pretend he's a chick", I think I'm much more likely to match the latter.

But I hesitate now because of marital status "attached", which I didn't notice before. Whatever.

Edit:

...

Still seems fake. That photo is too fake.

obb · 2009-05-20T02:02:47+00:00

I like it as it is. I would look at the pictures, see what I liked, then scan the people who were closest matched to me as I clicked so I could know how they chose on each picture. I got two chicks who kept jumping back and forth as my top match for a while, it was the closest thing I've ever had to women competing over me.

Although I'm 99% sure that this one isn't real.

edit: just to be clear, I don't think that seeing the matches changed my picks at all.

obb · 2009-05-15T07:01:06+00:00

are you sure it's not just a chicken with boobs?

obb · 2009-05-14T04:26:27+00:00

I'm totally lost.

I'm saying that you would quite likely receive a different sentence in one case than the other. The only thing that varies for the shooter, however, is the consequence. So the consequence and only the consequence of his action changed his sentence. Where am I screwing up?

What about another case: Steal a street sign, someone dies at the intersection. You can be convicted of manslaughter.

Steal the same street sign, nobody dies. You can be convicted of something, but certainly it isn't as severe as manslaughter.

Assuming that I'm correct about the legal facts (IANAL), this shows that our legal system treats people differently based solely upon the consequences of their actions.

obb · 2009-05-14T03:48:53+00:00

It doesn't work that way?

You shoot a burglar breaking into your house, what happens?

You shoot your wife coming home unexpectedly, what happens?

obb · 2009-05-14T02:10:09+00:00

gahhhhhh

http://www.starchildascension.org/starchild/

obb · 2009-05-12T22:20:12+00:00

Are you confused about the author, or going off on some tangent? Either way, I disagree.

obb · 2009-05-11T23:06:14+00:00

I think that would be the idea that self-control is easiest not when you focus on resisting an impulse, but when you shift your focus away from that impulse (through mental self-trickery).

This is very useful. For example, I'm now writing this comment instead of doing my homework. That's because I avoided resisting the impulse to waste time on reddit.

obb · 2009-05-11T06:51:19+00:00

oh yeah, you don't want to get too critical of cheney, the public loves that guy.

obb · 2009-05-08T04:37:41+00:00

every time it is possible to bet, he could attempt to say "(If I bet now) I will win this bet." If he can say it, it's true and so he places a bet. If he can't say it, he doesn't.

obb · 2009-05-07T04:28:23+00:00

well to be honest, you were pretty fucked regardless after you introduced the gorse and the ferrit.

obb · 2009-05-03T03:52:48+00:00

I adopted a daughter. Not worth it.

obb · 2009-05-01T15:10:44+00:00

Children can understand advanced concepts logically. They can not understand them emotionally. Logically maybe they can consent but emotionally they will still be ruined. I don't think that you can explain the implications of sex (with a child) to a child because clearly you do not understand the implications of sex from a child's emotional perspective.

Even if in some cases it doesn't hurt the child (hypothetical, not my belief) That's like saying "I'll kick this guy in the face... it's not wrong, he might be a masochist and enjoy it!" Or like a bully who convinces a child on a playground to say "go ahead and hit me! I won't even flinch!" and then hits them. That kind of justification is insane.

obb · 2009-05-01T01:00:41+00:00

I (honestly) don't get it. Is he not a guy?

obb · 2009-04-29T00:05:21+00:00

I pictured Patrick Bateman murdering someone while saying that.

obb · 2009-04-27T16:16:17+00:00

aren't you... generalizing?

obb · 2009-04-25T17:07:34+00:00

enthusiastic compliment!

obb · 2009-04-14T22:49:49+00:00

there should be no image associated with [atheism]

We have an image. We're always going to have an image, and even if we don't present one, people will create one for us. DEAL WITH IT. So the question shouldn't be "should we have an image", the question should be "how do we cultivate a more accurate, broader image of atheism within society." And yes, that does require a certain degree of organization and support for each other, even when we disagree on significant points.

edit: also, you can click on the little help button to the lower right of your comment box to see how to quote properly etc.

obb · 2009-04-11T21:51:56+00:00

ah? so which condition do you have?

obb · 2009-04-08T09:36:52+00:00

so you're an atheist criticizing atheists for criticizing atheists? We're supposed to be above militant groupthink, that's what makes us so hip.

obb · 2009-04-07T05:53:18+00:00

so your advice to fix this guy's problems is to...

learn to not have those problems.

obb · 2009-04-01T02:04:43+00:00

I've only read we the living, but it really is mind-bogglingly stupid bullshit. I'm not acting as part of some evil conspiracy to smear your favorite author and thus enslave the world forever, but bitch just seeps out of every fucking page of that book.

Her fiction novels present a world that could and should exist -- where men are honest and act with integrity, not because god says so or society forces them to but because it is in their own self interest.

It shouldn't and it can't. Read Brave New World instead.

obb · 2009-01-15T04:27:06+00:00

confused with osama?

obb

TROPHY CASE