justratsinacoat

6 ms·

1.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>we've all got better things to do Yet you keep replying! You're a solid troll, though -- I especially like the way you're willing to descend into insulting me far before I insulted you, but I'm glad the gloves are of
2.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>What does it even mean for our positions to be 'reversed'? We are simply people who disagree with each other. What is there to 'reverse' about our positions? This is a pretty common English turn of phrase ("what
3.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
It's an intentional misrepresentation of an opinion, such as "So, [misrepresentation of parent opinion], huh?"
4.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
You're really concerned about my opinions, aren't you? Hey man, if you don't think the quoted bits of my comment weren't just evidence-free appeals to the poster's claimed superior knowledge of the military capabili
5.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Hmm. Big guns "that can be worked around with the correct doctrine" and unnamed "developed countermeasures to things like mortars and counterbattery fire and whatnot" and the assumption that the military loses its entire
6.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
You strawmanned me, and then accused me of strawmanning. Enjoy your victory!
7.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>Whether you believe it or not, the purpose of the US 2nd amendment is self-defense, including from government. If you don't feel that is necessary, be inellectually honest and advocate for its repeal If you feel that I'm being
8.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
So you claim, but anyone who opens up the "discussion" with "So, [misrepresentation of parent opinion], huh?"[0] is clearly not seeking a discussion and is instead seeking a clownfight. You had every opportunity to prove
9.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>a much-needed highway sign in the LA area before it was caught over a year later It's worth pointing out (because, for some reason, the coverage of this dude and his I-5 sign never emphasizes this) that when the sign was 'caug
10.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>I don't see any nuance Yeah, I can tell! >Are you saying anything that isn't straw men? Hey man, I'm just replying to things. >And considering your question of coming from the same culture - you are assuming that th
11.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>So your argument is based on the trope that gun owners in America are overweight? Yeah, that must be what my argument is. Don't bother reading any of the rest of my comment; you might become exposed to nuance. As long as you'r
12.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>It still reported like 1/100000 of what Win10 does daily Oh, absolutely, but if we're going to advise would-be Linux converts who are concerned with data leakage, may as well advertise actually-telemetry-free distros. >Afai
13.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Er, the military in question for this hypothetical example speaks the same language as the civilians they would make war upon and knows the terrain and is from the same culture and therefore understands the civilian social dynamic. I mean,
14.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>ubuntu Look, if we're trying to avoid OSes that call home with telemetry about what you've been doing...
15.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
I don't understand this. AFAICT, parent is implying it's meaningful to compare Middle Easterners sharing information about protests and violence, and Westerners sharing unverifiably truthy HuffPo/Breitbart/whatever artic
16.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Article is about modern human psychological well-being; comments are about how materially satisfied modern (Western) humanity is, so what's the fucking problem, gosh!? The best part is the latter doesn't actually discount the form
17.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
If the government can strip your citizenship away because of their suspicions of your ties to terrorism (ie, extrajudicially (ie, arbitrarily)) , then do whatever they want with you because you're no longer under the aegis of the law,
18.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
And we can't forget its recent weakening! [0] While my wiki link is barely two clicks away from yours, it's still important to highlight what's going on in re "public diplomacy information" now being deployable dome
19.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Usually, a new tab opens whose address is "view-source:$URL_OF_PREV_PAGE". Obviously, it's not terribly hard to replicate by hand, but that's weird. As has been said since the days of old, "it worked on my machine&q
20.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Moreover, I bet the author is ESL. I see there's some dropping of the definite article (ie, "the"), and the use of the word "intelligentzia" in quotes. I think the author isn't aware of the English word intelli
21.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Right, but consider the reason that an empty Android project is 38mb large with 1000+ files. How much does it have to do with the fact that Android uses the Linux kernel? I was under the impression that the (hand-wavy, two-second) explanati
22.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
And if that proposition rankles, we all pay Googlers' wages via " voluntarily "[0] using Google services and all that entails (ads, behaviour profiles, etc). [0] I say voluntarily here, because of course it is voluntary; put
23.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Eh, if you say I am personally attacking people who are disagreeing with me on threads, then I am. I don't see it, but who am I to disagree with you?
24.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>But he didn't [...] imply that the opinion of shareholders completely disposed of the question Quite so! What he said was 'their having committed fraud to bump up the numbers, y'know, as you do, was to please shareholders
25.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Eh, if you say so. Determining "the shareholders" to be the ultimate authority, the fear of whose disapproval drives you to not make "bad" decisions (which, the comment elaborates, eventually means committing fraud to &q
26.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
"Business ethics" means "keep the shareholders happy"? This explains so much...
27.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
Well, this should prove to be an unpopular submission!
28.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>I think you and I talking more is unlikely to be productive Eh, my goal has been reached. Your unbelievable perspective has been fully elaborated; several non-me comments clutter our discussion, each confused by your intransigence. For
29.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>You seem upset that I didn't address the entirety of someone else's comment, but instead only part of it I seem upset with you responding to an idea that wasn't actually in a comment. Conflating the ideas of the author of
30.
by justratsinacoat 10y ago
>What I don't acknowledge is that it's reasonable to comment about the "shitty behavior" of someone who makes a civil statement you happen to disagree with --- or, worse, a civil statement you actually do agree with,

More ›