3 ms·
It's not worth it. The terrorists won.
by unepipe 13y ago
It's not worth it.
The terrorists won.
- oscargrouch 13y agoBy terrorists you mean those illusionary guys that the politicians use as the boogie man, to beat down the rationality of ordinary people by provoking fear, so they are legally allowed to do virtually anything without nobody to stop them?
- mildtrepidation 13y agoI want to downvote this. I really do. And I think when I feel justified in doing so that things will have improved.
- lotsofmangos 13y agoIt would be cool if there were a globally inclusive political movement that continuously stood for election in multiple countries simultaneously. It could then be called the Terraists and possibly solve the whole issue through discordant namespace collision.
- TeMPOraL 13y agoWhether illusionary or real, their goals are the same, and they're winning because people exchange their rational thinking for illusions of safety.
- rockyleal 13y agoNo I think he means the terrorists that want to kill you because you are free to pay for everything.
- oscargrouch 13y agoMuch more likely we gonna be killed by diabetes, or falling from the stairs.. the propaganda is unproportional to the size of the threat.. meanwhile, other types of "predators" may scape from our sight.. not minimizing the problem.. just saying that there are bigger ones that deserve more attention .. and overreacting wont help, i think, anybody.. so, back to the original topic..
- tptacek 13y agoOr we could talk about nuclear fusion.
- yen223 13y agoWhy talk about what might be the biggest scientific breakthrough of the year, when we can regurgitate snarky comments about Elsevier again?
- collyw 13y agoWell if Elsever would make it easier to access, we wouldn't have to. $32 to read about what might be the biggest breakthrough of the year?
- icebraining 13y agoSounds cheap.
- collyw 13y agoYou would be happy to pay that, if after you read it, you noticed some glaring inadequacies with the science and decided it is a non-article?