This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Mr Jive
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
31
« on: November 24, 2012, 07:17:26 AM »
To be honest the Internet doesn't really belong to everyone, it belongs to the corporate business men who keep it running and they belong to the Governments in which they're situated. By this I mean they have to follow the laws set forth by the Government and that's the same with all businesses from McDonald's to your local supermarket. Even websites like The Pirate Bay still rely on big business to interconnect them across the world, did you really think that everyone just jumps onto the internet free of charge completely on their own? Even the website builder in his basement is still relying on other people to give him access to the internet, on top of this you do already have to pay to use the internet and your internet can be restricted from you if you abuse it.
This idea that the Internet is a free haven that the government had no control over is complete bullshit. Any major organizations have to follow the laws of their land and the Government can control this in anyway they want, especially if a business is damaging their country in anyway. BUT on the bright side its not all doom and gloom, luckily the internet is one of the largest contributes to economy in the western world and the benefits that come with being interconnected are limitless. So for this reason the Governments are never going to suppress your internet, but it is still in their right to make sure that the Internet is not an illegal place that is damaging to its people, its business, or its foreign affairs.
I don't see why all of you assume the worst of your governments or that every time the Internet and the words Government are bought into the same sentence you all go batshit crazy. Yeah, in some countries where the government isn't so good and they don't want people to get any ideas they might censor it, but in America and England and the rest of Europe the only censoring they do end up doing is for the best intentions, not just to piss gamers off. The world is slightly larger than you trying to get things for free (which is what I assume you are worried about loosing). Try to think what people have been doing for generation before you, you know, buying things and stuff?
32
« on: November 23, 2012, 03:28:11 PM »
75% of all Americans believe every bullshit they read.
You need to understand the internet better and figure out that it's impossible to censor it.
Pretty much all that needs to be said. There's no way they can censor Billions of websites, and monitor everyone's activities on the internet.
Technically they could block billions of websites, quite easily. But there would be no real reason too and it would make whoever did it very unpopular.
33
« on: November 23, 2012, 01:30:02 PM »
This information is copy pasted. The petition is not one that I made on my own. The picture to me is skeptical, it may very well be horse shit.
The only thing that I found viable about this is that Google.com is promoting this information, as it can be found on their website.
I highly doubt www.google.com would just lol make something like this.
When I discovered this, I didn't want others to feel ignorant so I decided to copy paste the information to you guys, from exactly what I saw.
Putting the picture was a major mistake, it INSTANTLY deknowns the entire aspect.
Sorry if this inconvienced any of you.
No problem and I get what you are saying about Google. Google has become something of an omniscient force in the Internet world in recent times, we trust Google and we use it constantly. But Google is still a private business that is out looking for profit, no matter what your philosophical view points on Google are this is fact. As long as an action won't cost too much (and I doubt much costs too much for Google) and as long as it doesn't have any negative effects on their value. So Google either made this simply to secure their interests and make sure that this convention in Dubai, also to bring to attention that their interests are important - Google is a huge contributor to the American economy and the American Government would be wise to do as they say. Still I really don't think any major concerns are being bought up by this Convention - it seems more like a standard convention for a complicated subject, the only bit of censorship is where they are trying to deal with Illegal activities on the Internet.
34
« on: November 23, 2012, 10:59:10 AM »
After a quick google search didn't see much related to this, honestly if you want me to sign your petition your going to have to give a little more information and try not to be so unambiguous. Who is actually attending this "convention"? The first image says the Worlds leaders, what does that mean? Representatives of each country that would attend the UN? Or perhaps their actual elected leaders, so are the presidents and premiers from over 200 countries going to all head over to Dubai to discuss something as trivial as Internet Censorship, especially in light of all the other issues the Governments are having trouble with at the moment. Last point I googled the first line that you wrote and it appears to be showing up on numerous websites so I can assume that this is a copy pasta that people are spreading around. Either you are too lazy to post on more information so we can all get the big picture or that you heard the words Internet censorship and petition and you automatically jumped on the band wagon. In fact another point, the information put forward makes little sense. Firstly we have 'leading technological experts', this conflicts with the point in the image which states leaders, on top of that if they are technological experts then they probably have a much better idea of the situation then all the people who have access to the internet. Alright I now looked further into the website and its the International Telecommunication Union event ( http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Pages/overview.aspx) link there if you are interested. After looking at that I can confirm that this post is speculating bullshit. With a tad of racism! Nice that you bough Russia into this despite being fairly relaxed about Internet policy. Honestly let the experts talk and quit speculating about a 1984 government where God forbid you might not be able to get data for free that is intellectual property of others. How horrid our lives might be  EDIT: Another point this is taken from their website on the matter of censorship.  Internet enforcement I believe covers more along the lines of - Keeping hackers out of foreign affairs, stopping spamers, phishers and all other manner of internet scam rings and trying to prevent anything illegal that is actually harmful - as in actually stealing money from people banks or whatever. Try to be open minded about these things and always do your homework first.
35
« on: November 12, 2012, 04:02:40 PM »
"Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." - J. Robert Oppenheimer on the first atomic bomb
Oh and also
"All my friends know the low rider, the low rider is a little higher" - Low-rider by WAR
See what I did there :3
36
« on: November 04, 2012, 07:01:32 PM »
Disliking homosexuality isn't even really a personal opinion, you are not born hating them in the same way that you are not born straight or gay your views are put forward by the society around you. As an individual growing up the majority of your opinions are based around what is the norm in your society and so it is only logical that many people in America would dislike Gay people. They follow the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc.) and these religions specifically say that homosexuality is bad, among over things and so in societies based off these beliefs there will be hatred towards these people. But it is in no manner the norm because these are pretty much the only religions that follow this belief system so strictly. In many other societies not defined by these beliefs, throughout time, homosexuality is not even thought of as an issue, it isn't even a thing because it is so normal.
For example in Ancient Greece Beauty was not gender specific, which is why there is paintings and statues of both beautiful men and women. In ancient Rome it was common for many men to be Bi-sexual, many emperors would have a wife for political reasons and to reproduce but they would also have sexual intercourse with men as well, for pleasure and intimacy. Hadrian famously had a male lover who he loved even more so then his own wife, and when that lover died he erected many statues in the memory of that man. My point is that homosexuality is in fact the norm throughout Human history, it is Christianity (and the other beliefs) that are abnormal. It is our western viewpoint that we have tainted on the rest of the world that is wrong and that is bizarre. In most other cultures past and present that are not subject to Abrahamic beliefs homosexuality is often accepted.
Which leads onto my second point, I do not understand the need for Gay marriage. I myself am Bisexual and I would never want to get married in a church or anything like that, however I do believe that the benefits of marriage should be available to anyone, which is why we have civil partnerships. If a religion says something that you disagree with you should not try to change it, you should accept it as wrong and find a new religion. I do not want to be married under a religion that disagrees with my opinion, but that doesn’t mean I don't mind having a religion marriage, if it was part of a religion that is accepting of what I am doing.
I also believe that it is not in our right to change a religions rule because we disagree with them; it makes more sense to ignore that religion for its views are warped and wrong. Take the Ku Klux Klan, their views are wrong and I strongly disagree with everything they stand for. That doesn’t mean I should try to change them so that I can be part of the KKK, it means they are wrong and I shouldn't let that continue/associate myself with it. But this is just my opinion, if you really want to stick to your beliefs despite what they say and think they can change then go-ahead, but I think the more rational choice is to accept it is wrong and leave it behind.
To sum up though, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and people should be allowed to love as they please, but we should not be allowed to change people’s rules and opinions to fit our own. And at the same time I must respect anyone’s opinion and anyone who disagrees with what I have said.
Except that the governing churches of Christianity and Judaism haven't actually put out any particular opinions, and it's actually not so clear cut.
Post Auto-Merged: November 04, 2012, 06:55:11 PM
This is very true, but my point is there is a definite correlation between nations founded on the Abrahamic religions and a negative opinion on homosexuals. And I do not want to insuate that the vatican, the Church of England or anyone other religious organisation is so clear cut on the matter, as it is with many matters that are considerd complicated for them (such as abortion, contreception, IVF etc)
37
« on: November 04, 2012, 06:44:33 PM »
Disliking homosexuality isn't even really a personal opinion, you are not born hating them in the same way that you are not born straight or gay your views are put forward by the society around you. As an individual growing up the majority of your opinions are based around what is the norm in your society and so it is only logical that many people in America would dislike Gay people. They follow the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc.) and these religions specifically say that homosexuality is bad, among over things and so in societies based off these beliefs there will be hatred towards these people. But it is in no manner the norm because these are pretty much the only religions that follow this belief system so strictly. In many other societies not defined by these beliefs, throughout time, homosexuality is not even thought of as an issue, it isn't even a thing because it is so normal.
For example in Ancient Greece Beauty was not gender specific, which is why there is paintings and statues of both beautiful men and women. In ancient Rome it was common for many men to be Bi-sexual, many emperors would have a wife for political reasons and to reproduce but they would also have sexual intercourse with men as well, for pleasure and intimacy. Hadrian famously had a male lover who he loved even more so then his own wife, and when that lover died he erected many statues in the memory of that man. My point is that homosexuality is in fact the norm throughout Human history, it is Christianity (and the other beliefs) that are abnormal. It is our western viewpoint that we have tainted on the rest of the world that is wrong and that is bizarre. In most other cultures past and present that are not subject to Abrahamic beliefs homosexuality is often accepted.
Which leads onto my second point, I do not understand the need for Gay marriage. I myself am Bisexual and I would never want to get married in a church or anything like that, however I do believe that the benefits of marriage should be available to anyone, which is why we have civil partnerships. If a religion says something that you disagree with you should not try to change it, you should accept it as wrong and find a new religion. I do not want to be married under a religion that disagrees with my opinion, but that doesn’t mean I don't mind having a religion marriage, if it was part of a religion that is accepting of what I am doing.
I also believe that it is not in our right to change a religions rule because we disagree with them; it makes more sense to ignore that religion for its views are warped and wrong. Take the Ku Klux Klan, their views are wrong and I strongly disagree with everything they stand for. That doesn’t mean I should try to change them so that I can be part of the KKK, it means they are wrong and I shouldn't let that continue/associate myself with it. But this is just my opinion, if you really want to stick to your beliefs despite what they say and think they can change then go-ahead, but I think the more rational choice is to accept it is wrong and leave it behind.
To sum up though, there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and people should be allowed to love as they please, but we should not be allowed to change people’s rules and opinions to fit our own. And at the same time I must respect anyone’s opinion and anyone who disagrees with what I have said.
38
« on: October 17, 2012, 05:33:58 PM »
39
« on: September 08, 2012, 12:00:54 PM »
The video and song describe me most of the time :3
40
« on: September 08, 2012, 08:01:39 AM »
Well first off you are with out a doubt too young to be worrying about this yet, as am I and unless you have a terminal illness I really don't think many people on this forum really need to be worrying about the life ending quite yet, you have many, many days ahead of you. Still like you I too am interested in the thought of it, but less so worried about it as such. Personally I am without religion and as such I see the afterlife as unrealistic. There is no soul, scientifically your conscience being is simply an illusion of different senses and different 'chemicals' working away in your brain. Once we die our brain stops working and this conscience illusion falls apart.
However its still nice to believe that something MUST happen, even if it seems illogical, to me though it is not heaven. Heaven makes so little sense to me and it is illogical in so many ways. I prefer the belief in reincarnation, it's slightly less ridiculous. Not to mention that the elements of your brain make up who you are, so in theory if some of those elements eventually became apart of a different brain would that conscience belong to you? Or would it just be a new illusion that isn't really controlled by anyone? Who knows.
On the other hand if there is no form of afterlife just hope you live to an old age and have fun I guess. If you are old your standard of life will be much worse then it used to be and so as long as you have no (or little) regrets then death can be seen as a chance of relief, a period of rest where you no longer have to worry about the struggles of life. Or perhaps it will be a real bitch and you will wish you could go back and do it all again, if so I hope that there is some afterlife for you. To be fair it's just something that will happen and you shouldn't try to get worked up about the inevitable.
But once again, you shouldn't get worked up about it because you are still so young and death is still so far away. On the note of missing friends and family, be grateful for what you still have and that you are still in good company of the living. Best not to make good company of the dead, if you know what I mean.
41
« on: September 03, 2012, 07:35:47 PM »
Got liek 7 A*s, 1 A and 2 bs apparenty , yee buddyyyyyyyyyyyy
I swear you didn't even do that much revision before hand, you just ended up winging it  But anyway GG (even though I already told you this, I just don't want to be a dick). I ended up getting a 3 A* 4 As and the rest Bs so Im pretty happy about all that, however my biggest achievement was in history. I got 100% in my Nazi Germany exam and I barely did any revision whatsoever. How the fuck did that happen (also it seems weird directing someone I know IRL over a forum (wait do I know you IRL properly?))
42
« on: August 09, 2012, 08:10:59 PM »
First Video Game Console - N64 First Console Game - Super Mario 64 First PC Game - Age of empires 2 First FPS - Goldeneye 64 First RTS - Age of Empires 2 First MMO - Runescape First Online PvP - Does age of empires count? I played that PvP with my friends over Lan and stuff First RPG - Fallout 3 (Unless you count FF: Tactics) First Fighting Game - super smash bros melee First Music Game - Never really got into this genre First Pokemon Game - Pokemon blue Worst Game Ever Owned - Most of my games I enjoy(ed) a lot so I couldn't really say. Any I didn't like I can't remember Best Game Ever Owned - Thats a tough one In terms of time put into a game Gmod wins. But I still have fond memories of Super Mario 64 and LoZ: Ocarina of time
43
« on: August 08, 2012, 06:53:56 PM »
I personally think you are getting confused. The earth is home to trillions of micro species which will long surpass our own existence (assuming we can't escape from this rock). Earth is also home to many other forms of life; mammals, plants, fish and shit. Humans make up a small portion of Earth history and we will eventually die out, through whatever way it happens (assuming we can't get off this rock). If we do die though that does not mean the end of the world, because the world is not made for humans. So if we die in the next 100 years because lol oil war, that means humans are dead, it does not mean the world has ended (and even then humans would probably live on in certain places). No to answer your question specifically its is roughly 1 and half billion years till life on earth ends (if that's what you mean) and it is roughly 8 billion years till the earth is engulfed by the sun.
There its a simple as that, that IS how the world will end, all other theories would have to be coincidence. For example a meteorite large enough to knock us out of orbit and/or completely destroy the planet would not be predictable and could even be preventable depending on our tech.
However you may have meant when will human life end. Well gee again that is a very hard question to answer (sort of). Assuming we live long enough and don't make it off the planet and don't get a dooms day war we have time limit of roughly 600 million years. After that due to carbon dioxide levels rising (assuming this doesn't happen early because of global warming or something) plant life will no longer be sustainable and there will be an unbalance of oxygen causing majority species to die out (including us, assuming we don't come up with some fancy way of artificially converting oxygen and holding back the suns rays, or some bull shit like that). But we could die early? Perhaps, but it would be difficult. The largest known disease ever wiped out roughly 5% of the human population, bearing in mind that this was at a point where medical science was less developed and the human population was much smaller. So we can kind of scratch that out
Then there is nuclear warfare, for whatever reason. This again is unlikely, if you wondering why, do some research on the cold war and look up MAD theory. Seriously, unless the world leaders all had negative IQ nuclear Armageddon that cause full extinction is an unlikely scenario and shouldn't be looked at as something that is likely.
But who knows, perhaps a 'skynet' scenario will take place, or maybe shit tons of zombies will appear for some reason (but then in some senses that would simply be an evolutionary step backwards and it would just be another form of humans, a homo immortui if you will. And we can't forget that on the verge of discovering Fusion and other great leaps in science we could probably sustain ourselves in a different region of space. If that is the case though we have a maximum of 10^10^120 years (give or take) before the universe is fully black (lol racism) and there is no chance then of survival (assuming we can't figure out how to leave the universe, but I could go on and on).
tl;dr Earth has minimum of 8 billion years before destruction
Humans have anywhere between 600 million years (earth become uninhabitable) to 10^10^120 (universe become nutin') years before definite death (assuming we are not killed sooner)
Here is the problem with the MAD theory, and I'm not trying to sound like some propagandist, by some of these Islamic zealots are willing to crash themselves into buildings to fulfill their sick agendas. Pakistan has nukes. I am very worried that some nutjob can get their hands on a weapon like that and take a city out. Or Pakistan could just start a global war on its own. Pakistan isn't even in control of its own territory. Honestly, I think the U.S. doesn't acknowledge this because we have no idea how to stop it.
This is a very good point, if defeat does not bring fear to someone then MAD theory is cancelled out. However you have to understand that most countries do not have the religious zealots in charge, most of the leaders, even if they are religion, don't want their country to get obliterated. Perhaps a country would be ballsy enough to launch a nuke, but they wouldn't have enough nukes (and their nukes wouldn't be 'good' so to say) to do much damage to the west and so it would be a pointless endeavour. Not to mention they would be more likely to nuke their neighbouring states who they bicker with. Still I think we need to make sure nukes don't fall into the wrong hands, but I think it is still an unlikely scenario.
44
« on: August 06, 2012, 11:56:09 AM »
There are a variety of ways that the world will end itself, mostly by the human beings today. One possible way is World War 3 with nuclear missiles and war-on-war in countries, both citizen and soldier. After that, countries start to decay the eletrical buildings to start to be unmanned, therefore blacking out most cities. In my opinion, people will be using mobile generators and will fight against other citizens aswell and then the old world turns on itself, the environment growing in places that aren't suppose to be there in a few more years from then. Plants begin to grow here and there in unexpected areas like going through the cracks of cement. Just take Tschernobyl and the future Fukushima, do you really think we want them but in other regions of the Earth aswell? Apparently, a mad man will start this all by the click of a button. Radiation will be lurking under your feet everywhere you go. You are not safe no more.
Hear of mad scientists? Yeah, they will cause epidemics on the world today with diseases that are fatal. We probably won't have a vaccination. Remember the epidemic back somewhere in the 18th - 19th century that killed a massive population in the world ranging from China to North America to Europe? It will probably be much more worse than we expected. Although, there is many disastererous things like cancer to flesh-eating bacteria to diabetes to flu to even chickenpox. We never know what is going to happen.
Probably aliens... or zombies... or robots... or humans?
The environment. Not caused by humans but the world itself. Probably in a billion or so years from now. The world will start to crack in half to the villages, towns, city being flooded by a massive loads of water. a lot of signs are predicted by a lot of people. Fuck conspiracy theorists, let's move on!
Oh wait, I have no more. That's all I have left. I guess that's the only announcement I had.
I guess we have to wait and found out. Also, the above users that commented are probably right about it too.
WW3 probably (and I mean seriously) won't happen. I have said this before and I will say it again but the cold war is all you need to look at to understand why WW3 probably won't happen. Even if it does happen there won't be human survivors, anyone within a blast radius would turn to dust, anyone within the fallout radius would be dead within 6 months. It would be the end of civilized human society in 1st world countries. However in more out of the way places that are not effected by super power relations life would go on as normal, until they figure out what went down. It wouldn't equal the end of the world, or humanity. Well perhaps humanity but life would go on. I don't see why in a ww3 scenario every country will be nuked? Unless of course countries have "hostage countries" but still, it seems unlikely. Mad scientists? Seriously? Do you think that a scientist in this day and age would be able to manufacture a super virus that could wipe out 7 billion humans, a virus that could spread itself globally and a virus that could bypass all forms of medical science without being noticed? The largest natural virus only killed less than %10 of the human population, this was before modern medicine and when (I think) there were less than 2 billion humans. Super viruses are pretty much out of the question in terms of dooms day events. Unfortunately, aliens is the only logical one because aliens would be the only thing capable of destroying our entire planet, but still, that's just silly. Zombies would be fun but it is scientifically impossible, it would have to be some sort of primitive virus that causes madness, but again see my mad scientist post. The earth will eventually end by its self, but it will take billions of billions of years, and humans will probably be gone by then anyway (well unless space travel is perfected they will definitely gone by then).
45
« on: August 06, 2012, 09:00:51 AM »
I personally think you are getting confused. The earth is home to trillions of micro species which will long surpass our own existence (assuming we can't escape from this rock). Earth is also home to many other forms of life; mammals, plants, fish and shit. Humans make up a small portion of Earth history and we will eventually die out, through whatever way it happens (assuming we can't get off this rock). If we do die though that does not mean the end of the world, because the world is not made for humans. So if we die in the next 100 years because lol oil war, that means humans are dead, it does not mean the world has ended (and even then humans would probably live on in certain places). No to answer your question specifically its is roughly 1 and half billion years till life on earth ends (if that's what you mean) and it is roughly 8 billion years till the earth is engulfed by the sun. There its a simple as that, that IS how the world will end, all other theories would have to be coincidence. For example a meteorite large enough to knock us out of orbit and/or completely destroy the planet would not be predictable and could even be preventable depending on our tech. However you may have meant when will human life end. Well gee again that is a very hard question to answer (sort of). Assuming we live long enough and don't make it off the planet and don't get a dooms day war we have time limit of roughly 600 million years. After that due to carbon dioxide levels rising (assuming this doesn't happen early because of global warming or something) plant life will no longer be sustainable and there will be an unbalance of oxygen causing majority species to die out (including us, assuming we don't come up with some fancy way of artificially converting oxygen and holding back the suns rays, or some bull shit like that). But we could die early? Perhaps, but it would be difficult. The largest known disease ever wiped out roughly 5% of the human population, bearing in mind that this was at a point where medical science was less developed and the human population was much smaller. So we can kind of scratch that out Then there is nuclear warfare, for whatever reason. This again is unlikely, if you wondering why, do some research on the cold war and look up MAD theory. Seriously, unless the world leaders all had negative IQ nuclear Armageddon that cause full extinction is an unlikely scenario and shouldn't be looked at as something that is likely. But who knows, perhaps a 'skynet' scenario will take place, or maybe shit tons of zombies will appear for some reason (but then in some senses that would simply be an evolutionary step backwards and it would just be another form of humans, a homo immortui if you will. And we can't forget that on the verge of discovering Fusion and other great leaps in science we could probably sustain ourselves in a different region of space. If that is the case though we have a maximum of 10^10^120 years (give or take) before the universe is fully black (lol racism) and there is no chance then of survival (assuming we can't figure out how to leave the universe, but I could go on and on). tl;dr Earth has minimum of 8 billion years before destruction Humans have anywhere between 600 million years (earth become uninhabitable) to 10^10^120 (universe become nutin') years before definite death (assuming we are not killed sooner)
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
|
Garry's Mod
Show Posts