이 사이트는 자바스크립트를 사용합니다.
브라우저에서 자바스크립트를 활성화 해주십시오.
클래식 테마
Thottbot 테마
News Articles
답글 달기
보드 인덱스로 돌아가기
Squishalot
의 게시글
When we are talking about a group of people that have no issue with blowing up 8 year old kids, I am going to draw that line only after I am 100% sure, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this person is nothing less than a model citizen. I would have needed to go no further than his Facebook page or YouTube channel to have more than sufficient "reasonable doubt".
Plain and Simple...if you want to follow radical islam, then, if I had any say in the matter, you would be watched every minute of every day. And you so much as buy more than 1 box of matches, and I am going to want to know why.
How would you define 'follow'? For example, should someone educated who is researching into comparative theology be followed regularly?
How would we define 'radical'? I think that you would consider WBC to be a 'radical Christian' group. How about Hillsong? Or any of the other pentecostal / evangelical churches? How about your church? What if someone monitored Wowhead for violent comments about people? As an example, we've written about the awful things we'd do to someone who harmed our daughters. Would that be considered radical?
I appreciate that we might like to talk about people after they've committed terrible acts as 'people that have no issue' with X, but the statistics would suggest that of the tens of thousands of US citizens who would be in a similar place, follow similar videos and post similar remarks to the guy, a remarkably low proportion of them actually represent any sort of risk or take any sort of action.
In analytics, you look at your hit rates per population who meet said criteria. When we're putting definitions together, we want to maximise X%, being the proportion of people that we get in contact with who will actually buy a product, while also maximising Y/Z, being the total number of people who will actually buy a product because we asked them to (Y), out of all the people out there who would be willing to buy our product if we only got in touch with them (Z). X is a key number for us because it determines whether we're being efficient at our targeting procedure.
Now, for the FBI - you want to maximise Y - the people who you catch preparing to carry out evil acts - you want that to be as close to Z as possible. The problem is, increasing Y results in X decreasing - the wider you cast your net, the more likely you're going to get a lot of false positives, thereby wasting your resources investigating people and targeting people who aren't actually going to be trouble at all.
What, in your mind, would constitute 'beyond reasonable doubt'? A 90% chance that they're not going to do anything? 99% chance? How many people are you investigating, watching, following, who will actually end up doing no wrong, in order to get to your 99% chance?(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
134377
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Magician22773
의 게시글
<removed>
432158
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Hyperspacerebel
의 게시글
Well
this
is just stupid.
Is it fairly obvious that they are peanuts? Yes.
Is it stupid for a company to make things as safe as possible and try to keep public relations high? I don't think so.
134377
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
MyTie
의 게시글
Archbishop of Brussels calmly prays while pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, activists from group FEMEN storm stage naked, and
dump water on him
while shouting curses at him.
They certainly taught that man a lesson. Never again will he be so bigoted toward the opinions of others.
134377
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
MyTie
의 게시글
Freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of expression? What the hell is that?
Squishalot
의 게시글
Did anyone see what Magician wrote before he removed it?
Well
this
is just stupid.
Is it fairly obvious that they are peanuts? Yes.
Is it stupid for a company to make things as safe as possible and try to keep public relations high? I don't think so.
I'll be honest - I never knew that 'monkey nuts' = 'peanuts with the shell intact' until I read that article, even if I do recognise them as peanuts because that's how I used to eat them. Someone who's only ever eaten shelled peanuts wouldn't know what they look like.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Hyperspacerebel
의 게시글
Did anyone see what Magician wrote before he removed it?
A fairly long post making an analogy about an American church killing people in Australia and whether it would be okay to profile them. It was inline with the discussion, though I didn't really agree with it.
Adamsm
의 게시글
Next, you'll be throwing your hands up in horror because someone threw a custard pie.That happened to John Chrétien and he took it with good faith....course we are talking about the prime minister who attempted to strangle a paparazzi...
Gone
의 게시글
Freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of expression? What the hell is that?
A nonverbal expression of thought.
MyTie
의 게시글
Freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of expression? What the hell is that?
A nonverbal expression of thought.
So, everything that is done that isn't speech. So, basically, freedom to do anything you are thinking about doing, under a trendy word like "expression". I just needed to "express myself", so I dumped water all over some dude I don't know. So, if I went to a homosexual convention, ran up onstage, and dumped a bunch of water on a homosexual, and screamed profanities at him, that would be cool, because of....
freedom of expression
, and it's just a
harmless protest
, and he should set the example by
just taking it
? I think everyone in this forum would think those actions were worth several years of jail time, restraining orders, etc. But, when done to someone they don't agree with, it's freedom of expression, and I get a reaction of one or two people supporting it, and it is largely ignored. Nice.
Squishalot
의 게시글
I actually think the water dumping is assault, technically. The invasion of a conference is a separate security issue - possibly tresspass?
There are right ways to express, and that's not one of them. Picketing outside a convention centre is perfectly fine.
Gone
의 게시글
Freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of expression? What the hell is that?
A nonverbal expression of thought.
So, everything that is done that isn't speech. So, basically, freedom to do anything you are thinking about doing, under a trendy word like "expression". I just needed to "express myself", so I dumped water all over some dude I don't know. So, if I went to a homosexual convention, ran up onstage, and dumped a bunch of water on a homosexual, and screamed profanities at him, that would be cool, because of....
freedom of expression
, and it's just a
harmless protest
, and he should set the example by
just taking it
? I think everyone in this forum would think those actions were worth several years of jail time, restraining orders, etc. But, when done to someone they don't agree with, it's freedom of expression, and I get a reaction of one or two people supporting it, and it is largely ignored. Nice.
No, dumping water on people isn't freedom of expression, it's assault (dammit, ninjad by Squish). And screaming profanity is verbal, so idk why it was brought up here.
Freedom of expression means you can dress how you want, or decorate your home and yard the way you want, or produce whatever kind of art you want. It covers a lot.
Squishalot
의 게시글
I'm pretty certain MyTie's original question was intended to be answered in the context of Pikey's comment though, so I can understand why he's frustrated at your (earlier) response.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Gone
의 게시글
I wasn't siding with Pike, just explaining what freedom of expression meant.
MyTie
의 게시글
I wasn't siding with Pike, just explaining what freedom of expression meant.
And my comment is directed at Pikey's understanding, not you giving the meaning. Applying your definition to pikey's comment makes for some pretty stomach turning conclusions. He doesn't come back to these threads very regularly, and he doesn't read past comments, so I just posted that under the assumption he wasn't going to return.
240140
의 게시글
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
답글 달기
로그인이 되어있지 않습니다. 답글을 달려면
로그인
하거나, 계정이 없다면
회원가입
을 해 주세요.