5 ms·

John McAfee on the US $1,000,000 bill?

jacquesm 7y ago
I don't think either of those deserve to be mentioned in the same way as Alan Turing, and no amount of time passing will change that. Note that Alan Turing was persecuted for what he was, not for what he did. I also don't think there will be an ACM award named for either.
- Throw_Away_5382 7y ago
  > Note that Alan Turing was persecuted for what he was, not for what he did. No, he was prosecuted for having sex with other men. That is something he did. Being homosexual was never illegal.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    The law against homosexual sex does nothing to increase the welfare of their fellow man and prevents individuals from finding fulfilling love. It was an evil law and people should be proud for defying it not ashamed because their love was stronger than your hate.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    What a crap comment, I can see why you chose to use a throwaway account. That's about the same as saying that a law against breathing would make all of us illegals because it is something that we did, rather than that breathing is a direct result of being alive as a mammal. Sex is a natural thing. If you outlaw sex then you are by definition creating criminals, and you might as well name it for what it is: a law against certain groups of people. The act itself is merely the stick used to hit them with in a legal way.
    - heavenlyblue 7y ago
      Well, morally speaking having sex with a man went against the “morals of the time”. We changed our collective opinion since then. Now what Ross Ulbricht did is amoral today - but are you so sure we will not change our opinion about this act in a few decades? If people didn’t continue with their “amoral homosexuality” we could have never accepted it to be he norm. They are the heroes of their times. In many ways, what Ulbricht had done may become a viable method of policing organisations that are “too big to be policed”.
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        I'm going to guess that you weren't aware of this: https://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss-ordering-5-assassinations/ https://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-bos...
    - Throw_Away_5382 7y ago
      > What a crap comment, I can see why you chose to use a throwaway account. I always use throw away accounts. I also don't understand why people are so sensitive to this. I have once been permanently banned from r/de for making a similar point (although I could reverse it with the help of another Redditor). > That's about the same as saying that a law against breathing would make all of us illegals because it is something that we did, rather than that breathing is a direct result of being alive as a mammal. Sex is a natural thing. If you outlaw sex then you are by definition creating criminals What about laws against incest or sex with animals? Although admittedly, if one wants to have sex with a relative, one is usually still attracted to other people. Also, one could say that it does indeed criminalize the existence of zoophiles, but that this is worth it. (I better don't talk about more controversial examples to not derail the conversation.) Also, some American states make it illegal for minors to have sex. Does that mean they can be persecuted for being minors? > you might as well name it for what it is: a law against certain groups of people. The act itself is merely the stick used to hit them with in a legal way. Are you sure that they didn't just find gay sex disgusting, but would find "non-offending" homosexuals tolerable?
  - Stunting 7y ago
    Hot take from a person too scared to comment from their their main internet handle. People who so badly want to strike a win for their values over human empathy, equality, and compassion have to steer common sense arguments into the arena of pedantic details. They have so routinely gotten their butt kicked in the arenas of empathy, equality, and compassion so often they’re ashamed to say what they feel out loud, even with a made up internet handle. They should embrace the shame, it might be the only thing left that tethers them to humanity.
    - philwelch 7y ago
      > They have so routinely gotten their butt kicked in the arenas of empathy, equality, and compassion Ah, gloating about "kicking butt", truly the pinnacle of empathy and compassion. Look, I agree with you, but there's no reason to descend to this guy's level. As old Fred once put it: > He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.
      - Stunting 7y ago
        Yes dude, I feel you. “Butt kicked” = getting definitely out debated = society recognizing those ideals of hate are not valuable; however you want to phrase it. Sometimes you don’t feed the trolls. Sometimes I read a thing on the internet that is so absurdly hateful and spiteful that nobody responds to and I worry “who out there is reading this, and might be on the fence about some human values. If they don’t see anybody responding to it at all, will they think it’s an acceptable view point?” I’m not gonna save the world, but occasionally I can offer rebuttal to cultural biases. It ain’t much, but it’s something however small.

I don't think either of those deserve to be mentioned in the same way as Alan Turing, and no amount of time passing will change that. Note that Alan Turing was persecuted for what he was, not for what he did. I also don't think there will be an ACM award named for either.

Throw_Away_5382 7y ago
> Note that Alan Turing was persecuted for what he was, not for what he did. No, he was prosecuted for having sex with other men. That is something he did. Being homosexual was never illegal.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  The law against homosexual sex does nothing to increase the welfare of their fellow man and prevents individuals from finding fulfilling love. It was an evil law and people should be proud for defying it not ashamed because their love was stronger than your hate.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  What a crap comment, I can see why you chose to use a throwaway account. That's about the same as saying that a law against breathing would make all of us illegals because it is something that we did, rather than that breathing is a direct result of being alive as a mammal. Sex is a natural thing. If you outlaw sex then you are by definition creating criminals, and you might as well name it for what it is: a law against certain groups of people. The act itself is merely the stick used to hit them with in a legal way.
  - heavenlyblue 7y ago
    Well, morally speaking having sex with a man went against the “morals of the time”. We changed our collective opinion since then. Now what Ross Ulbricht did is amoral today - but are you so sure we will not change our opinion about this act in a few decades? If people didn’t continue with their “amoral homosexuality” we could have never accepted it to be he norm. They are the heroes of their times. In many ways, what Ulbricht had done may become a viable method of policing organisations that are “too big to be policed”.
    - jacquesm 7y ago
      I'm going to guess that you weren't aware of this: https://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss-ordering-5-assassinations/ https://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-bos...
  - Throw_Away_5382 7y ago
    > What a crap comment, I can see why you chose to use a throwaway account. I always use throw away accounts. I also don't understand why people are so sensitive to this. I have once been permanently banned from r/de for making a similar point (although I could reverse it with the help of another Redditor). > That's about the same as saying that a law against breathing would make all of us illegals because it is something that we did, rather than that breathing is a direct result of being alive as a mammal. Sex is a natural thing. If you outlaw sex then you are by definition creating criminals What about laws against incest or sex with animals? Although admittedly, if one wants to have sex with a relative, one is usually still attracted to other people. Also, one could say that it does indeed criminalize the existence of zoophiles, but that this is worth it. (I better don't talk about more controversial examples to not derail the conversation.) Also, some American states make it illegal for minors to have sex. Does that mean they can be persecuted for being minors? > you might as well name it for what it is: a law against certain groups of people. The act itself is merely the stick used to hit them with in a legal way. Are you sure that they didn't just find gay sex disgusting, but would find "non-offending" homosexuals tolerable?
- Stunting 7y ago
  Hot take from a person too scared to comment from their their main internet handle. People who so badly want to strike a win for their values over human empathy, equality, and compassion have to steer common sense arguments into the arena of pedantic details. They have so routinely gotten their butt kicked in the arenas of empathy, equality, and compassion so often they’re ashamed to say what they feel out loud, even with a made up internet handle. They should embrace the shame, it might be the only thing left that tethers them to humanity.
  - philwelch 7y ago
    > They have so routinely gotten their butt kicked in the arenas of empathy, equality, and compassion Ah, gloating about "kicking butt", truly the pinnacle of empathy and compassion. Look, I agree with you, but there's no reason to descend to this guy's level. As old Fred once put it: > He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.
    - Stunting 7y ago
      Yes dude, I feel you. “Butt kicked” = getting definitely out debated = society recognizing those ideals of hate are not valuable; however you want to phrase it. Sometimes you don’t feed the trolls. Sometimes I read a thing on the internet that is so absurdly hateful and spiteful that nobody responds to and I worry “who out there is reading this, and might be on the fence about some human values. If they don’t see anybody responding to it at all, will they think it’s an acceptable view point?” I’m not gonna save the world, but occasionally I can offer rebuttal to cultural biases. It ain’t much, but it’s something however small.