First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Trump n' Clinton: "Let's ban the internet!"
Posted 12/10/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


thegreywitch wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


VZ68 wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:



I'm sorry, I just wanted to sound cool.


I'm old and don't understand you kids with your hippin' and hoppin'



https://youtu.be/y7tI1E6kp0o




I just don't think guns would do a lot if the populace is uneducated. If' we're not fit to vote, how on Earth are we going to govern ourselves in case we need to rebuild the Government?


Fit to vote? So you are suggesting only the wise and intellectuals may partake of suffrage, then? The only problem I see with that is that such a change could be used to take rights away from individuals in any demographic, say, by class, or ethnicity(like muslims), creed, anything. Its might set a dangerous precedent i.e. its a slippery slope. We should just go back to a feudal system of the noble aristocracy calling all the shots for the peasantry and anyone we deem not fit to partake in the direction a nation should go.

Having said that, I think everyone should go to college thats able, but I wouldn't take rights away, thats just regressive and, well, counterproductive.

I feel this is a strawman, and don't know how to reply. I never said that or meant that. Just because I think certain people aren't fit to vote doesn't mean I want a law banning such a thing, as the implementation of such would be disastrous and counter intuitive to society. It's the debate between legality and morality. Just because one person believes it is immoral or unwise doesn't necessarily mean they want laws to cover such. But yes, I do think those with a certain degree of knowledge should vote, and that education is the best implement, not restricting it merely on a knowledge test or an IQ score. You're merely making out my argument to be what it is not. As Bill Nye said, we need Scientifically literate voters, and in my opinion, we need politically literate voters as well. Bill Nye doesn't believe we should have a law restricting what a parent teaches their child, that would merely be the Government overstepping their boundaries.


The point I raised is important to consider within the framework of law and morality. It is thus appropriate for this discussion, although I don't know why you feel threatened by it.

In the end, it doesn't really matter, the point isn't personal, nor does it hinge on whether you doubt my intent. Just contributing to the thread with my take. I won't feel insulted if you dismiss it.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 12/10/15 , edited 12/10/15


The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.
Posted 12/10/15 , edited 12/10/15

thegreywitch wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


thegreywitch wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


VZ68 wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:



I'm sorry, I just wanted to sound cool.


I'm old and don't understand you kids with your hippin' and hoppin'



https://youtu.be/y7tI1E6kp0o




I just don't think guns would do a lot if the populace is uneducated. If' we're not fit to vote, how on Earth are we going to govern ourselves in case we need to rebuild the Government?


Fit to vote? So you are suggesting only the wise and intellectuals may partake of suffrage, then? The only problem I see with that is that such a change could be used to take rights away from individuals in any demographic, say, by class, or ethnicity(like muslims), creed, anything. Its might set a dangerous precedent i.e. its a slippery slope. We should just go back to a feudal system of the noble aristocracy calling all the shots for the peasantry and anyone we deem not fit to partake in the direction a nation should go.

Having said that, I think everyone should go to college thats able, but I wouldn't take rights away, thats just regressive and, well, counterproductive.

I feel this is a strawman, and don't know how to reply. I never said that or meant that. Just because I think certain people aren't fit to vote doesn't mean I want a law banning such a thing, as the implementation of such would be disastrous and counter intuitive to society. It's the debate between legality and morality. Just because one person believes it is immoral or unwise doesn't necessarily mean they want laws to cover such. But yes, I do think those with a certain degree of knowledge should vote, and that education is the best implement, not restricting it merely on a knowledge test or an IQ score. You're merely making out my argument to be what it is not. As Bill Nye said, we need Scientifically literate voters, and in my opinion, we need politically literate voters as well. Bill Nye doesn't believe we should have a law restricting what a parent teaches their child, that would merely be the Government overstepping their boundaries.


The point I raised is important to consider within the framework of law and morality. It is thus appropriate for this discussion, although I don't know why you feel threatened by it.

In the end, it doesn't really matter, the point isn't personal, nor does it hinge on whether you doubt my intent. Just contributing to the thread with my take. I won't feel insulted if you dismiss it. :)


Let's rewind a bit. I said certain people are unfit to vote. That's true in my opinion. But I never said suffrage should only extend to the intelligent by means of laws and such. Hence where education comes in. The important freedom is giving people the choice to dissent. I.E. Prevent moral ninnynannying. I feel a bit offended by your misrepresentation of me, but only because I like you for that comment saying I was kind and sweet. If it were anyone else, I'd be a lot more vicious in my disapproval. I also missed your bottom portion,a nd I agree to an extent. One needs not go to college to be politically literate. Although my position on this extends to those voting for Hilary because she's a democrat/not Trump if anything else.
Posted 12/10/15

megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


A couple of years is still by no means a laughing matter. Just clarifying.
Posted 12/10/15

megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


Like Bill Gates, Kevin Mitnick, etc. If only that was all it took to become a magnate or a CEO in today's competative world!
Posted 12/10/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


A couple of years is still by no means a laughing matter. Just clarifying.


He's right. PV, I mean. Time goes much more slowly behind bars.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 12/10/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


A couple of years is still by no means a laughing matter. Just clarifying.


The section down below specifically mentions it will be harder for these kids to find a job.
Posted 12/10/15 , edited 12/10/15

megahobbit wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


A couple of years is still by no means a laughing matter. Just clarifying.


The section down below specifically mentions it will be harder for these kids to find a job.


So? Don't do the crime if you can't take the consequences. Also, harder, but not impossible with proper rehabilitation and supports.

Edit: I think we're finished here. I bid you good day.~
13496 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Scotland
Offline
Posted 12/10/15
So people on the left are trying to restrict freedom of speech and people on the right are trying to restrict freedom of speech. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Seeing 8chan's /pol/ implode on itself was entertaining but you guys really need to get sombody else elected.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 12/10/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

I really hope neither of them become president.


I'm kind of hoping no one wins presidency at this point, as pessimistic as that is.



9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 12/10/15

thegreywitch wrote:

So? Don't do the crime if you can't take the consequences. Also, harder, but not impossible with proper rehabilitation and supports.

Edit: I think we're finished here. I bid you good day.~


WTF are you talking about?
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 12/10/15

megahobbit wrote:

Its a grey territory. Alot of this has to do with what they will define "meant to cause imminent or potential violence"

IE: If the site literally says "go shoot people" it would not be protected under free speech. "Yay, ISIL" is a bit more grey territory.

Either way issue in Hillarys case is a bit more complex in my opinion than the stupid shit Trump said.


I wouldn't doubt that Hilary at least put more thought into it than Trump.

I'd like to have more information though on how exactly Hilary plans to implement this exactly.



Posted 12/10/15 , edited 12/10/15

thegreywitch wrote:


megahobbit wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


megahobbit wrote:



The people are acting like getting arrested for a cyber crime will ruin your life permanently. Most people who do shit like that on the web go to jail for a couple years then get cozy jobs in cyber security firms.


A couple of years is still by no means a laughing matter. Just clarifying.


The section down below specifically mentions it will be harder for these kids to find a job.


So? Don't do the crime if you can't take the consequences. Also, harder, but not impossible with proper rehabilitation and supports.

Edit: I think we're finished here. I bid you good day.~


megahobbit: There, in red, is the context. I have no sympathy for hackers who are gifted and use their gifts for exploitative reasons. None whatsoever. Although I think they CAN get their shit in order and be productive members, nor do I think breaking the law behind a computer is an instant passport to financial success. That is what the fuck I am talking about.
8609 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 12/10/15
I just want to torrent my anime.

Please don't take that away, government.
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 12/10/15
Ban the internet? Yeah, I'm sure everyone will be just fine with that
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.