Jump to content

Fighter

Members
  • Posts

    802
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Fighter

  1. in question of that sun article and not that I am fun of Putin but:

     

    "He can be a genius mathematician, a brilliant musician or a soldier, a man who can fight without fear, compassion, regret or pain.

    "As you understand, humanity can enter, and most likely it will in the near future, a very difficult and very responsible period of its existence.

    "What I have just described might be worse than a nuclear bomb."

    The autocrat warned that world leaders must agree on regulations to control the creation of mass-killing super soldiers.

    He said: "When we do something, whatever we do, I want to reiterate it again - we must never forget about the ethical foundations of our work."

     

    I don't know but those citations does not sound that crazy, maybe that nuke stuff overblown but still. I mean if you read this without contect would you be surprised if it would be qotation from any other politician? There is kinda deep ethical dilema in genetic modifications of humans

     

    Putin would be the first in line to make "super soldiers". 99% of everything he says is bull****. Should see him talk about free speech, free markets, and the rule of law. And then everything he does is the exact opposite.

  2. Finished Shadow of Mordor, the very definition of mediocre. The Nemesis system is also way overrated, though it has some potential.

     

    I was more impressed with it's main big quest of the second half. Turning the warchiefs. The game gives you a large task and provides a sandbox system to complete it. You can pick any orc anywhere on the map and make him into a warchief through a number of paths and the end result is somewhat uniquely yours. You set your own missions to accomplish the desired end result. It's not a perfect sandbox by any means but this is a direction open world games should go to instead of littering an open map with linear quests.

  3. Trigger warnings would be extremely helpful in her recovery to get her to that point. But no, because some empathy-deprived **** on the internet are mad at a bunch of overdramatic misandrist **** on the internet, something that is as simple as a short freaking "may contain traces of rape" message becomes this huge deal to everyone because ****ing internet. Because mental trauma is a good enough reason to not go to jail if you killed someone, but it's not enough of a reason to put everyone through a bit of text they can safely ignore and doesn't even ****ing affect them in the slightest. To that I say, **** those people. And if they can't deal with that bit of text without getting triggered, maybe they shouldn't be the one throwing stones.

     

    Do you think trigger warnings can be narrowed down enough? Because the lists of things that require trigger warnings that come out of the community that typically pushes for them are long and vaguely defined and derived often using capricious and frivolous interpretations. For example rape is rape, but a "trace of rape" can be lots of things to lots of people. And to comb through something for any traces that may trigger somebody doesn't sound like a realistic task. Can you really track all aspects that may remind someone out there of something they've experienced?

     

    It seems like practically speaking you can only cover the big things that are already covered by most content warnings like violence, sexual violence, etc. And for the rest content has to be checked by someone for a specific individual and their specific case.

  4. Except Wikileaks doesn't make " governments " transparent

     

     

    They typically only  target the USA, where are all the leaks around Russia or China and these are much more intolerant and dictatorial governments than the USA

     

    So its not about keeping governments in check, Wikileaks is a personal campaign to undermine the USA  and the West

     

    This is ironically such a Russian response through and through.

     

    Whenever someone in Russia exposes government corruption the typical response from pro-Putin camp is, "But in America/Europe/etc. they do this too. You're are targeting us. You're doing this to undermine our country. You're an American agent (just like Wikileaks is being labeled a Russian front) etc, etc..."

  5. Hm, makes sense. Offensive language or whatever the hell that article has is in text there (thought not like it has to be) but unlikely the articles on terrorism or war or jail riots would be showing body parts, corpses, videos of the killings etc. Besides, if they DID put that and the "viewer discretion advised" type warning was applied to just descriptions of murders, wouldn't that be something people'd mock as well ?

     

    Oh, come on. If anything at all deserves a warning it's certainly the latter. It's comedic in sad way that by comparison "offensive language" bs is even being entertained.

  6. Lets take it at face value. "Teh Russians interfered".

     

    Ok. So what did said Russians actually do? It wasn't staffing the ballot boxes with fake ballots. It wasn't hacking the voter machines. It was releasing some embarrassing emails which Putin did not write.

     

    What if the emails said she killed someone? Would it still be Russia's fault? What type of potential corruption does a candidate have a right to never be revealed? Because if it was Russia and if this was actually what's responsible for the final result (which I doubt) then checkmate I guess. Because what is there to do, say "disregard those facts over there your honor because they were obtained illegally" like in a court room?

     

    Also if this is enough to claim Putin "hacked" the US elections then the system is so incredibly fragile that it shouldn't be functioning at all. Like seriously, give me a break.

    • Like 4
  7. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.2471de6b80b6

     

     

    More irrefutable evidence about the Russian hacking impact in the US around influencing the election. This time from the CIA, its really time some people stopped denying this  :yes:

     

    Would you kindly point to where this irrefutable evidence actually is.

×
×
  • Create New...