@saxnot @dvdl @malin Since the instance you're on looks like the sort where someone might say this unironically...
The idea of "mens rea" or "guilty mind" is one of two elements of a crime: "mens rea" the "guilty mind" or "acus rea", or "guilty act", the actual crime being committed. Often this is called "Intent".
This is an important concept because people should only be punished for actions they intended to take. Chaos theory has been described as a butterfly flapping its wings causing a tornado, if we take the same concept and apply it to a breath of air then you could suddenly punish people for breathing despite that act not being intended to cause any harm and not reasonably being expected to cause any harm.
There's a number of stories about people who visit foreign lands (or science fiction stories about people who visit alien planets) who think they're in a paradise until they accidentally commit a crime and are suddenly on the hook for a disproportionate sentence for something they didn't even intend to do.
I bring up the concept of mens rea because that's pertinent to what RMS said: If you're being deceived and think that some girl likes you, then it turns out later that without your intent or knowledge the girl was actually being coerced to convincingly pretend that she liked you, you shouldn't be responsible for something you never had any intention to do. It's different if someone could prove you knew the woman was being coerced, but that's fundamentally important.
As for your other point, it's true that all freedoms need to be applied to a balancing test. Even a country like the United States with some of the strictest free speech protections on the planet has limitations to that speech in the case of things like fraud, libel, deceptive advertising, lying to courts, and so on, and that's because you can use your rights to cause harm to someone else's rights.
What you said is sometimes true -- we need to protect groups of people without holding the individual as a divine concept. If we worshipped individual rights to the exclusion of group rights, then it would be hard to justify law and order at all, since you could argue that any enforcement of collective norms upon the individual by a government of the majority would automatically be an infringement of that individual's rights. On the other hand, the opposite is also true. We cannot hold the group as a divine concept either. If you did, then it would be justifiable for example in any country that was predominantly white to cause harm to any ethnic group that was not white as whites are the majority, and it would be justifiable for heterosexual cisgendered individuals to harm gay or trans people because they are the majority everywhere by a massive margin.
Hence the balancing test being a necessary approach. We need to look at the balance of harms and determine how we protect everyone to the maximum degree while causing the least harm to people in the process of protecting others.
For me, what we have here is the freedom to express an unpopular political opinion vs. the freedom to not be exposed to an unpopular political opinion. On the balance, this is such an overweighted test it is pretty much textbook. Only the worst authoritarian regimes on the planet would punish someone with a virtual life sentence for expressing an unpopular opinion just because someone more politically powerful doesn't want to hear that opinion.
The idea of "mens rea" or "guilty mind" is one of two elements of a crime: "mens rea" the "guilty mind" or "acus rea", or "guilty act", the actual crime being committed. Often this is called "Intent".
This is an important concept because people should only be punished for actions they intended to take. Chaos theory has been described as a butterfly flapping its wings causing a tornado, if we take the same concept and apply it to a breath of air then you could suddenly punish people for breathing despite that act not being intended to cause any harm and not reasonably being expected to cause any harm.
There's a number of stories about people who visit foreign lands (or science fiction stories about people who visit alien planets) who think they're in a paradise until they accidentally commit a crime and are suddenly on the hook for a disproportionate sentence for something they didn't even intend to do.
I bring up the concept of mens rea because that's pertinent to what RMS said: If you're being deceived and think that some girl likes you, then it turns out later that without your intent or knowledge the girl was actually being coerced to convincingly pretend that she liked you, you shouldn't be responsible for something you never had any intention to do. It's different if someone could prove you knew the woman was being coerced, but that's fundamentally important.
As for your other point, it's true that all freedoms need to be applied to a balancing test. Even a country like the United States with some of the strictest free speech protections on the planet has limitations to that speech in the case of things like fraud, libel, deceptive advertising, lying to courts, and so on, and that's because you can use your rights to cause harm to someone else's rights.
What you said is sometimes true -- we need to protect groups of people without holding the individual as a divine concept. If we worshipped individual rights to the exclusion of group rights, then it would be hard to justify law and order at all, since you could argue that any enforcement of collective norms upon the individual by a government of the majority would automatically be an infringement of that individual's rights. On the other hand, the opposite is also true. We cannot hold the group as a divine concept either. If you did, then it would be justifiable for example in any country that was predominantly white to cause harm to any ethnic group that was not white as whites are the majority, and it would be justifiable for heterosexual cisgendered individuals to harm gay or trans people because they are the majority everywhere by a massive margin.
Hence the balancing test being a necessary approach. We need to look at the balance of harms and determine how we protect everyone to the maximum degree while causing the least harm to people in the process of protecting others.
For me, what we have here is the freedom to express an unpopular political opinion vs. the freedom to not be exposed to an unpopular political opinion. On the balance, this is such an overweighted test it is pretty much textbook. Only the worst authoritarian regimes on the planet would punish someone with a virtual life sentence for expressing an unpopular opinion just because someone more politically powerful doesn't want to hear that opinion.
@Madcucks @Turbo_Neil_Breen I always have to wonder how many of any of these people that they claim to listen to are actually fans on any side of any debate. "Our biggest fans, Lord & Taylor, wanted this so we're going to do it for the fans!!"
@alex @Atlas look, you need to realize that you're only allowed to be a person of color if you adhere strictly to the racial stereotypes of people of color being feeble pathetic losers who will never accomplish anything in their lives. If you are Arab or Chinese or Indian or basically any other race including black but you're not a complete loser, then they just call you white, because that's how you be not racist.
Now I know what you might be asking yourself, "isn't that the most racist thing on the planet?", And of course you'd be wrong because we put a frowny sticker on things that are racist and we put a smiley sticker on this. Completely different, now stop asking and check your privilege.
Now I know what you might be asking yourself, "isn't that the most racist thing on the planet?", And of course you'd be wrong because we put a frowny sticker on things that are racist and we put a smiley sticker on this. Completely different, now stop asking and check your privilege.
@footjamfan @crunklord420 "We have blacklists that end people's careers based on political ideology. You know, that thing the good guys do!"
@Phelan That guy thought he was being really poetic when I think what's on the mind of most angry Trump voters is "Leavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealoneleavemealone"
@Its_Not_Gay_If_Bore_Soy_Does_it Deeply apologizing for... kitler?
Maybe people need to calm tf down. The people who actually fought the nazis are looking down on us and they're disgusted. "We fought and died and watched our friends die and we suffered for *this*?"
Maybe people need to calm tf down. The people who actually fought the nazis are looking down on us and they're disgusted. "We fought and died and watched our friends die and we suffered for *this*?"
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a34372005/solar-cheapest-energy-ever/
Liar, liar, liar, liar, liar!
All these people are lying liars who lie!
Everywhere that is mandated solar has some of the highest electricity prices on the planet. Australia went from having some of the cheapest electricity on the planet to the most expensive. Ontario Canada mandated green energy and that has created the global adjustment charge that represents half of an industrial customers Bill and 75% of the residential rate. that has once again but Ontario from being one of the cheapest places for electricity in the country to one of the most expensive!
In terms of being a proven solution there's exactly one green energy source that works: Hydro. Compared to Ontario, Manitoba is fully run by hydroelectricity and their electricity is dirt cheap. Similarly, Quebec is almost exclusively run by hydroelectricity and their electricity is dirt cheap. Reality doesn't care about your ideology!
One guy I knew in Ontario was ultimately paying 400 a month in electricity to heat his home, and then he moved to propane and his heating costs dropped in a quarter.
Then Trudeau brought in a carbon tax because we can't have people not choosing between heat and food!
If solar was the cheapest energy production in history, then places with the most solar would have the cheapest electricity. Simple as that. And we know, we can look, the numbers are publicly available -- it's simply not true! Quit lying!
Liar, liar, liar, liar, liar!
All these people are lying liars who lie!
Everywhere that is mandated solar has some of the highest electricity prices on the planet. Australia went from having some of the cheapest electricity on the planet to the most expensive. Ontario Canada mandated green energy and that has created the global adjustment charge that represents half of an industrial customers Bill and 75% of the residential rate. that has once again but Ontario from being one of the cheapest places for electricity in the country to one of the most expensive!
In terms of being a proven solution there's exactly one green energy source that works: Hydro. Compared to Ontario, Manitoba is fully run by hydroelectricity and their electricity is dirt cheap. Similarly, Quebec is almost exclusively run by hydroelectricity and their electricity is dirt cheap. Reality doesn't care about your ideology!
One guy I knew in Ontario was ultimately paying 400 a month in electricity to heat his home, and then he moved to propane and his heating costs dropped in a quarter.
Then Trudeau brought in a carbon tax because we can't have people not choosing between heat and food!
If solar was the cheapest energy production in history, then places with the most solar would have the cheapest electricity. Simple as that. And we know, we can look, the numbers are publicly available -- it's simply not true! Quit lying!
I just opened my #ewj2 package containing the new earthworm jim 2 comic. It's like Christmas morning! There's 2 embroidered patches, some stickers, a couple of smaller softcover comic books, a really cool poster, and then the main event: The book is beautiful, gilded pages, two colours of foil, embossed, really something special.
Doug Tennapel is someone I strongly disagree with on political issues, but it doesn't matter. His stories don't require you to agree with his political views to enjoy them. It reminds me of a better time.
His love of the craft of bookmaking and the details of a well made book have kind of worn off on me. I've been trying to build a library of well made books for my kids.
Doug Tennapel is someone I strongly disagree with on political issues, but it doesn't matter. His stories don't require you to agree with his political views to enjoy them. It reminds me of a better time.
His love of the craft of bookmaking and the details of a well made book have kind of worn off on me. I've been trying to build a library of well made books for my kids.
@boilingsteam @Ertain I'm sure that soon you won't even be able to say the N-Word on discord. Heresy!
@boilingsteam If only there was some pithy three phrase motto that Microsoft was well known for employing.
Naw, they're just good guys being good guys because they're so good.
Naw, they're just good guys being good guys because they're so good.
Dear #fediblock, it is now several weeks since I self reported myself to the ministry of truth for erasure for wrongthink, and I have yet to be disappeared. This is doubleplus ungood and must be made doubleplus good immediately. I'm certain I have opinions you disagree with, let's do this shit so everyone can walk away now without any hurt feelings!
@Vivernu ngl I'm more interested in the story in the "up next" box than this one! That sounds hilarious!
@hund The new religious right just wants to destroy, just like the old religious right. It's just that now, instead of claiming someone worships the devil or is a witch, they'll claim that a long haired hippy who has dedicated his life to making the world a freer place is actually a nazi.
If egg salad sandwiches became a taboo, they'd accuse people they want to disappear of loving egg salad sandwiches. It's sad because I've grown up progressive, but these people aren't allies of that cause, they're remoras clinging to the most powerful force of the time. The same people saying RMS is homophobic in 2021, would have accused him of being gay in 1971 had they been alive. Anything to destroy.
If egg salad sandwiches became a taboo, they'd accuse people they want to disappear of loving egg salad sandwiches. It's sad because I've grown up progressive, but these people aren't allies of that cause, they're remoras clinging to the most powerful force of the time. The same people saying RMS is homophobic in 2021, would have accused him of being gay in 1971 had they been alive. Anything to destroy.
@fribbledom My first computer didn't have a hard drive. My first hard drive was 5MB and you had to calibrate it to the proper interleave. It was also large enough that it could be used as a lethal weapon in a fight.
Try explaining that to a kid who grew up with microSD cards!
Try explaining that to a kid who grew up with microSD cards!
Hey! Found my first brush with the societal rot that took over twitter on the fediverse.
You guys who go out of your way to argue with toxic bigots like that have different temperament than I do.
The scariest thing is that they think they're the good guys.
You guys who go out of your way to argue with toxic bigots like that have different temperament than I do.
The scariest thing is that they think they're the good guys.