No, no of course not all thoughts are ego based and I was not asserting that at all. There is so much more to a man (Or women) of course than just an ego. We are all of us complex machines with many parts and our desires might guide us, but it is reason that gives us the power to truly be more than just a slave to our programming.
You mean her giant spammy forehead doesn't freak you out. That's brilliant and is funnier than the gif. I am now going to commence with childish mocking. (Sung over and over again) "Seeds likes spam heads, seeds like spam heads." [:Qlol]
I had no idea who Eckhart Tolle even was so had to go and look him up. Hardly surprising really because new age self help books filled with supposedly wise but ultimately derivative and pointless mantras are something I avoid like the plague. I prefer to do my own reasoning when it comes to how the world works rather than have some self appointed guru inform me that all I need to be happy is to let go of the things in my life that make me unhappy. Really is that what I need to do? Maybe it would be more useful for everyone if we all worked together to actually get rid of the things in life that make us unhappy, rather than ignore them so that we can all wander around in a docile state of perpetual vacuous bliss. The quote from him in this blog is an example of exactly the kind of claptrap that these pedlars of the truly mundane so frequently produce. (Please be aware though [user="bmoviebimbo"] that my vitriol is aimed at Mr Tolle and not at you or your blog)
Suffering does not have a purpose, (It is a reaction to external stimuli not an independent thing so it cannot have of itself a purpose) it can motivate us to change things so in that respect we can take something positive from it but it most certainly has nothing at all to do with burning up our egos. And why is an ego such a bad thing anyway? without ego we would all still be cowering in the entrance of the cave and peering out anxiously at the lightning that was being produced by the angry gods. Ego is what made some people believe that they had what it takes to go out into the world and explore and discover. Ego is what drives us to achieve and to push forward the boundaries of our understanding. Without Ego half baked philosophers like Mr Tolle would not have the luxury of sitting still for hours on end doing nothing but contemplating their own navels, while fixing beatific smiles on their smug little faces in an attempt to convince the gullible that they have found the secret of happiness and the meaning of life. They [b]can[/b] do that though because people with egos built the world around them.
Reading a little about the man himself I discovered that he claims that he woke one night and asked himself, "Who is the ‘I’ that cannot live with the self? What is the self?" This moment of seeming clarity was apparently the instant that his ego died and he became a truly enlightened being. Garbage! He had studied philosophy at university in London (And Cambridge) and read a great many books written by mystics and philosophers, so his moment of clarity was no self realisation at all and was actually just a hideous over simplification of the work of real Philosophers like Descartes and Nietzsche. Sorry Mr Tolle but your horribly simplistic and pointless drivel makes me think that ego is the thing that you probably possess more of than anything else, and makes me want to punch you repeatedly in the face to stop you from further pontification. (I feel so much better now for getting that off my chest, it's a miracle, he really has made me feel happier)[:Qbiggrin]
Are you kidding me! Of course I was not referring to metal files when I was talking about availability, I was only talking about guns. (Why the hell would I be suggesting metal files are illegal, that doesn't even make sense!) And what do you mean guns are available in every country. [b]Hand guns most certainly are not available to ordinary people in every country[/b] so I have no idea what you are talking about. (Or what the hell you mean by "Where are you getting your information from?" I live in a country where hand guns are not legal to own and I think I would know if it was otherwise)
I will commend you on your choice of site for getting your statistics from but I don't know how you are interpreting the data because it quite clearly backs up my point. In my country (Britain) the most recent date for total deaths as a result of homicide with a hand gun was for 2008 and [b]only four[/b] people were killed. Four, in an entire year. In the United states for the same year the number was 6,800 homicides by hand gun! We do not have access to hand guns in this country that is a fact, (Which is why I am objecting to people being able to make them) and it is a fact for a great many other countries as well. I see no point in any further discussion with you whatsoever because you are not going to actually address any of my points and you are just going to keep stating that I am wrong without ever backing that assertion up with anything even remotely coherent. Let's not waste any more time on this, our discussion has gone as far as it could and will not be continuing.
True I am here so I am one of those people who bucks the system and breaks the law but that does not mean I am prepared to break every law so you can't really make a comparison between us and those who would make guns. Also true that some of those who have the desire to kill will find a way to do it whether they have a gun or not, but how much easier is it with a gun? If you want to kill someone with a knife or a blunt instrument you have to get up close and it is messy and personal and there are plenty of people who would never kill because of that, but a gun puts distance between you and your target. It is instantaneous and to some degree impersonal. The ability to end a life by simply moving one finger a quarter of an inch rather than having to push a knife into someone's body makes one form of killing substantially easier, and so more likely to happen with greater frequency. Yes information will always find another route but that does not mean to say we should not try in some situations to limit it as much as we can.
It will be interesting to see how many people here today who are advocating this particular freedom, will still feel the same when the first child gets killed in a school in a country that does not already allow its citizens to legally possess firearms. [:Qsad]
You do realise that a gun is more than just a gun shaped object don't you, it is not as simple as just laying strips of stuff out. (And yes I know how that stuff works, my stepfather was a fibreglass boat builder and used to come home every night stinking as though he had bathed in glue)
Are you even reading what I'm writing? I explained in detail how people would have access to 3D printers so why are you asking how the average person will get access to them? Quite clearly the average person will get access to these weapons the way they get access to traditional firearms at the moment, they will filter down from criminals to the ordinary man on the street.
And I keep on hearing people in this blog talking about how much easier it is to get a real gun and how easy it is to make them untraceable. Do you really think that America is the only relevant country in the world! Just because you have a gun culture and so hand guns are easily obtained that does not mean it is true for the rest of us. At the moment hand guns are rare on the streets in most of the rest of the world because they have to be smuggled into the country, but being able to produce them like this could drastically change that. Just because the consequences of this are relatively small for you that does not mean the same is true for the rest of us, we don't all live in America!
You understand don't you that when you make a statement like, "Who, today at least, can afford the technology to create the weapon but can't afford to buy a "real" gun in any of our major cities, illegally." You are talking about America and not what is true for most of the rest of the civilised world. (Third world countries are of course awash with guns) In my country (Britain) and most of Europe it is extremely hard at the moment to get hold of a hand gun and you need to be connected to do so. Hand guns must be illegally brought into the country which means they are expensive and extremely limited. This information being out there and freely available is a really big deal for those of us who live in countries where we do not want people to be able to easily obtain concealable deadly weapons.
You might be surprised at how quickly knowledge is lost if it is not constantly being circulated. Even if the genie is out of the bottle and it is too late to do anything about it now I reserve the right to feel bloody annoyed at the position GP is taking in this blog that knowledge should never be kept out of the public domain because to do so is an attack on our freedom. What about my freedom? Why don't I have the right to live in a world where something that is clearly going to be used for only wrong doing is prevented? Surely nobody at all can justify a legitimate reason for anyone being able to make their own gun. In countries where having a hand gun is legal (There are not very many) almost anyone who wants one can have one so this is not the production of an object that is furthering our knowledge or is helping to save lives. GP would have us believe that this is all about the noble fight for freedom, bollocks! It's about egos and precious little else and I get sick and tired of people dressing up what they are doing as though it is some sort of fight for freedom and justice. The designer of this gun thinks what he has done is funny and he could barely contain his glee as he demonstrated the weapon, and TPB don't give a damn about my freedom or anybody else's freedom they do what they do for themselves not for us.
Working with carbon fibre takes skill and is not something that the average person could do and making a working gun is not straightforward. And I am not suggesting for a second that criminals are going to enter a business during working hours and start printing out dozens of hand guns, that would be ludicrous. Such things would take place at night with one or maybe a couple of employees or even the owner of the business taking money for the rental of their machine. hell for big criminal organisations they can just buy their own machines! These guns are going to be made now and they are going to be almost impossible to stop from falling into the hands of anyone who wants them, the least we should be doing is making it as hard as possible for people to do it.
Right so the actions of those who make the guns and the actions of those who use them and the actions of those who allow the printers to be used for that purpose are all the responsibility of the people making those choices, but for some reason TPB is not accountable for their own actions, funny how that works out. And your analogy is not very good, because if someone takes your car who is drunk then of course it is their fault if they run someone over, but this is more like making your car freely available to any drunk who wants to take it for a spin.
As for what you say below, of course reason is subjective but actually common sense is something that is by its definition 'Common' which means it is what is generally accepted. Most people would take the view that allowing deadly weapons to be made without any checks or balances in place that prevent those weapons from falling into the hands of the murderous or deranged is a good thing. And defending the indefensible is just nonsensical. You can't do it, that is what 'indefensible' means. Choosing to push to one side or ignore something is not defending it.
Free speech is really about people being free to debate things and being able to speak out against their governments. It is not something that should give people the right to incite racial hatred or people the right to be verbally abusive and there are many examples in history when secrecy and the control of information was a good thing. In war time it saves lives and a man developing a new piece of technology or drug has the right to do so without sharing his work with other people who will steal what he has worked so hard to produce. You cannot take away the right of people to keep their own secrets and if you were to try to do so you would be a dictator of the worst kind. Things are very rarely as black and white as you seem to suggest they are and some of your freedoms encroach on some of my freedoms.
[b]And let me make this very bloody clear to you in no uncertain terms [user="GreenPirate"] I did not suggest that child pornographers should not be dealt with because I stated that your position that nothing should be censored falls apart when applied to things like child pornography. So don't try to deliberately misconstrue what I said by trying to make out that I am somehow a part of that problem, which is exactly what you did when you accused me of doing a disservice to society by ignoring the sickos responsible for it![/b]
You do a very good job of expressing yourself [user="missix"] and I always read your comments because they are well reasoned and you have the advantage over me of making your point without losing your cool. (I am far too emotional)
(What month do you want to wed? Spring or summer is what most people do but I love the reds and russet browns of autumn, but I will let you decide) [:Qboo] [:Qtitter]
Maybe if you spent a little bit less time rating peoples comments down and actually took the time to share your own opinions then people would know what you think. Instead though you are rating down every comment I have made and now you are accusing me of trying to suppress other peoples thoughts. (Simply because you don't like my opinion) If you have a view that is contrary to mine then please do share it because this is a discussion, if you want to be a part of it then have the courage to be a part of it.
The only appropriate response to freely available untraceable privately manufactured objects designed with the sole purpose of ending a life, is a fear based response.
And how can you speak of respect for TPB for as you put it "Sticking to their guns" over something like this! Do you really think they are principled for refusing to take down a torrent when it is one that serves the purpose of making it possible for people to more easily kill? How the hell is that a demonstration of principles! It is the act of ego maniacs and nothing more and has nothing to do with them fighting for our freedom. And yes just like energy once information is created it's created and you cannot undo it, but you can make it bloody hard for people to find it so it is just not good enough to say once a thing is done we have to live with it.
"What if?" scenarios are how you prevent anything bad from happening so it is not at all unreasonable for action to be taken and it is hardly guesswork about what this is all going to lead to is it. How do you think terrorist plots are foiled? That's right, people wonder what would happen and then they design contingency plans to deal with that situation and counter measures to shore up exploitable weaknesses. Hell, just about every thought you have is a "What if?" thought (What do you think your imagination is) and your whole site is based around the "What if?" proposition so it is frankly ridiculous to make the statement you have.
Printable gun designs being available for anyone to have access to is an unbelievably stupid thing to try to defend and TPB are behaving like a bunch of children who have no ability to reason out what the consequences of their actions are, and who refuse to take any responsibility for their decisions. I understand that people want to fight for the free flow of information but common bloody sense should kick in at some point surely! Yes 3D printers are expensive and it is going to be an awful long time before they are within the reach of ordinary people (Though they will one day be common in our homes, but not for a long time) but they are used by company's who manufacture custom parts, (Largely auto industry) so these 3D printers will be used to mass produce these guns. Criminals will have free access to the printers and it will not be long before so many of them are on the streets that we are going to see children pulling them out in playgrounds in schools and shooting at teachers and other children. If that thought is not enough to make your blood run cold then it can only be because you either have no children of your own, or do not have any in your family. (Which I think is unlikely)
So all information should be free? What about the information to construct a nuclear bomb? (Which I know has been on the internet in the past) Or perhaps instructions on how to grow lethal biological cultures? What about child pornography? Not all information should be protected under freedom of speech and at some point you have to ask the question, "What about my right to be free to live my life in a world that does not actually enable those who would cause serious harm?" And yes I know that protecting us from harm is how a great many things are justified, but [b]why should reason and common sense become the first fatality of the fight for freedom of thought and expression.[/b]
She's in the basement, you can have her back in a couple of days....assuming I correctly calculated the quantity of air in a buried box of a set cubic capacity, maths never was a strong suit of mine.[:Qlol]