Uriel-238’s Techdirt Profile


About Uriel-238

Uriel-238’s Comments comment rss

  • Nov 22nd, 2017 @ 12:10pm

    Re: Re: big, powerful centralized government...

    Anonymous Coward, you sound like the officers from the Nazi party who argue how dull and primitive the Jews are. I'd advise that you stop going to your rally meetings and do some actual studying of who believes what.

    Hitler was a fascist, and based his rule off Mussolini's fascism and culture-of-personality. The same devices Stalin used, but I'm getting ahead of myself.

    The USSR never became a true Communist state, but was started as a temporary authoritarian regime. Eventually (hypothetically) the politburo would have been disbanded and the people would have decided everything. Of course, that never happened. But Lennin and Stalin were both authoritarians not above purging dissenters.

    2017 Democrats are like 2017 Republicans, corporatist. The difference is in their method: Democrats appeal to the people, preaching equality, and occasionally throwing the people a bone, where the Republican party looks for ways to exploit the system to reduce the power of the vot. Among their current tactics, they engage in nationwide gerrymandering, voter suppression, and demagogy in order to secure elections.

    GOP tactics belie the pretense that they could not win elections by the merits of their actual policies (when they have policies, nowadays they want to just undo what the last guy did), so they have to rely on subterfuge to secure their power. This suggests it's the Republicans who are more authoritarian than the Democrats.

    The DNC, granted, is still corporatist. And it's still awful and subject to what its campaign contributors want, but it takes profound skill to be even worse then them. The RNC has managed to do just that.

    Getting back to big government, we like clean meat. We like well-paved roads. We like working mail. We like a robust military. We like power and water and internet we can rely on. We like benefit programs for our infirm and disabled and those who've been too injured to work. All these things require big government. The only argument for small government, really is to eliminate those parts a given citizen doesn't personally benefit from. But that's ridiculous.

    And no, it doesn't lead to authoritarianism. In fact, our government is bigger for having parliaments and committees making decisions rather than a unilateral heirarchy, which serves as a defense mechanism against corruption.

    Anonymous Coward, Maybe you should consider a political science course?

  • Nov 21st, 2017 @ 4:22pm

    Sexual Predator, Incompetent and Extremist...

    ...and still Alabamaian conservatives are saying better Moore then any Democrat.

  • Nov 21st, 2017 @ 1:17pm

    This could be Trump's Magna Carta

    If I remember my history King John of England was a bit of a jackass and let the country rot without leadership, leading to a revolution of baronies (The First Barons' War), at which point John signed the Magna Carta at swordpoint, a moment taught to Americans that sometimes good things come out of tyrannical regimes.

    I'm sure if the rest of the world reformed IP to undo Disney's mess and assure that temporary monopolies have short terms (say five years), the US would sign on in about twenty years when its own industries were clearly falling behind.

  • Nov 21st, 2017 @ 1:09pm

    big, powerful centralized government...

    Is necessary to sustain that big honkin' military that the US loves to throw around. It also helps a great deal with large scale services like water and power.

    And then, if we downsize our government, expect the military or corporations to take over, and they'll run things, only they won't even pretend to have public interest at heart.

    You know, you could go to Namibia and join the San. They have about the size of government you might find suitable.

  • Nov 20th, 2017 @ 3:54pm

    Giving DJI the benefit of doubt

    They opened up the bounty program thinking their security was solid enough that it only needed tweaking, and then here comes a guy who proves it needs to be rewritten entirely.

    Truth is hard, and they should pay him and learn their lesson.

    But instead, it's so easy to litigate.

  • Nov 17th, 2017 @ 5:40pm

    "Big government supporters"

    Actually big government supporters like large infrastructure and services, and want our meat to be clean and our capitalism to be fair to small players.

    These things are what we like which result in big government, but not all big governments result in these things.

    Small government supporters like large infrastructure and services, clean meat and fair capitalism, but not at their expense, and not when they don't personally benefit from them (because fuck everyone else).

    People who like small government don't realize that the things they enjoy like power and running water and roads and liberty require big government to sustain them.

    Feel free to go start an agricultural commune in Guyana, then. Because we, here in the states like having internet and space programs.

  • Nov 17th, 2017 @ 11:42am

    [Fox News] is a good source.

    You said that with a straight face?

  • Nov 17th, 2017 @ 11:18am


    We already knew that we're being spied on.

    We also already knew that our government's agencies are totally inept when it comes to net and data security (on account of the many, many successful hacks).\

    2 + 2 = Oh fuck!

  • Nov 17th, 2017 @ 10:23am


    Which part do you think is the lie, that the US massacres in the name of capitalism and the American way?

    Because the US routinely massacres people by the thousands. The drone strike programs alone kill more innocent civilians than all the guns in the US.

    If we count US military action in the 20th century and Operation Iraqi freedom, victims of the US amount in the millions. In fact, according to Osama Bin Laden, that was why he orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. That was his Doolittle Raid.

    Truth is often horrific.

  • Nov 16th, 2017 @ 7:02pm

    Does anyone remember the "Talky Tina" twilight zone episode?

    I think at this point, it's due a technology-driven update.

  • Nov 13th, 2017 @ 5:34pm

    Gun culture really does suck. So does police culture.

    Actually I'd argue that the police murder culture is where they shoot dogs with impunity. You can call it the get home safe culture of you like. Our uniformed officers go to don't hesitate classes rather than situation deescalation. And contemporary officers understand they can shoot anyone or beat anyone or kill a dog and there will be no consequences unless there's a video. Even with a video they don't go to jail, but may have to get fired and rehired in another precinct.

    But I agree with you that our war on terror and our war on drugs have both failed to solve anything, including the terror / drug problems they were allegedly intended to solve.

    I'm not an advocate for gun control though, and believe we shouldn't ban anything to which the military and law enforcment have access. Incidents of police officers gunning down dogs demonstrates we cannot trust law enforcement with special privileges with which to police society, so either civvies get access, or agents of the state do not.

    But our gun culture does suck. The hypermasculinity of gun advertising in the US, the partisanship of the NRA, open carry and coffee table guns as political statements all are offensive not just to the rest of the US but to the the gun enthusiast community, as is this good guy with a gun hypothesis. It suggests those that are advocating for gun ownership don't use guns themselves.

    I remember in the 70s and 80s when gun owners were encouraged to practice striping their weapons in the dark. I remember that they pride in perfect posture and safety protocols.

    Coincidentally SWAT was only used for hostage/barricade situations and handled about 500 sorties a year nationwide in the 70s and 80s. Now it's 50,000 and they do casual house raids for drugs and warrants.

    Guns are dangerous, and it's stupid to make a political statement by treating them as if they weren't. And yet, that's what pro-gun activists do today (again, not to be confused with gun enthusiasts at the range).

  • Nov 11th, 2017 @ 7:28pm

    Hollowpoints sound like a conspicuous personal preference.

    The standard in the FBI is Glasier Safety Rounds, which are expensive. Glasers are franging, so like hollowpoints they tend to shred unarmored persons they impact.

    But they're used in law enforcement and anti-terror specifically for their tendency not to penetrate after impact. Where standard rounds can often penetrate through bodies and walls and take down unintended victims, flanging rounds will stop shortly after initial impact.

    I'm not sure if the FBI issues Glasiers to their special agents or expects them to buy them out-of-pocket but it is FBI policy to use the rounds either way.

    Maybe hollowpoints are a cheap substitute accepted in low-budget precincts?

  • Nov 9th, 2017 @ 7:50pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hollowpoint? WTH?

    I have bunches of pictures off Twitter from the 2015 Ferguson unrest that showed lines of police officers with their weapons trained on the crowd.

    And yeah, every Marine witnessing the event was probably facepalming what was a massive display of poor fire discipline.

    The police have demonstrated time and again they are too dim or too apathetic to be trusted with guns or badges.

  • Nov 9th, 2017 @ 1:53pm


    At what point is it the garrison and the occupying forces? At what point do we start calling it the occupying administration or the provisional government?

    It's certainly like the public is being represented not at all, or at very best, poorly.

  • Nov 9th, 2017 @ 11:39am

    Re: Riot-control pepper spray

    Ugh. This is why I need to preview and edit my posts.

    Bear-calibur pepper spray in a riot gun is reputed to have a better takedown rate than handguns, despite their shorter range. (The effective range of both in a CQB firefight is about the same.)

  • Nov 9th, 2017 @ 11:36am

    Riot-control pepper spray

    I had this very same question. When my roommate had a stalker I wanted her to have something to take with her on the street (concealed carry permits in San Francisco are super hard to get, or keep) and found bear-caliber pepper spray (essentially a riot control gun with a smaller cannister), which are reputed to have better takedown with handguns, and leave your target alive so you can laugh at them.

    It would have ruined the pooch's day and left him bright orange, but he would have lived.

    I'm pretty sure this is common issue in the precincts, and don't understand why this wasn't the officer's go-to solution.

    That is, unless he just wanted to watch that-there dog's head fall apart.

  • Nov 9th, 2017 @ 11:26am

    Unarmed police

    Pinkertons and early feds often conducted their duties unarmed or under-armed when door-knocking to conduct an investigation or serve a warrant. When they needed backup, they'd call on the local precinct or even deputize a posse comitatus.

    Generally, it was common knowledge that if you attacked a federal marshal your life was forfeit, and the (proverbial) Bolivian Army would come after you and hunt you down like a mad dog. The bandit gangs that rose from the Civil war knew to cooperate with Pinkertons and Feds, or at least run away, if they weren't yet surrounded.

    That changed (I believe -- not sure) with Prohibition and the organization of Mafia here in the US, when enough of the police were on the take that the feds couldn't count on locals to have their back.

    So it is possible to create a police force with unarmed officers backed by armed tactical teams, and it can work even in an armed society.

    It's not likely here in the US without a massive reform of police and gun culture, thought.

  • Nov 8th, 2017 @ 12:17pm

    Regarding treatment [for fetishes]

    In 21st century psychiatry, 90% of treatment is manangement, that is, we focus more on encouraging our patients to develop a skillset with which they can cope with their mental disorders. One doesn't cure insanity so much as make it manageable.

    Now, sure, we could totally Clockwork Orange pedos or any other fetishist we wanted to (gays! polyamorists! liberals!) but that makes for very miserable, often suicidal folk, essentially linking their fetish with a bunch of PTSD.

  • Nov 8th, 2017 @ 12:04pm


    There are a lot of weird, creepy, messy fetishes out there, many far crazier than wanting to do kids (which is exceptionally creepy specifically because we get a bit crazy about wanting to protect our young). But in the spirit of liberty we should let pervs be pervs so long as they aren't harming anyone.

  • Nov 8th, 2017 @ 11:55am


    Because, Wendy Cockcroft, many of the paedo-freaks already are willing to stop within the constraints of what is legal, and what is consensual, say, engaging in age-play with a consenting adult partner, or getting off to lolicon, or whatever.

    Granted, occasionally we have the hockey-mask cases like John Wayne Gacy (he was a clown-face case, actually), but they're super rare. Most chronophiles actually don't want to hurt anyone. And like violent video games, like trashy romance novels and like cannibis, porn is really not a gateway medium to pervier, more extreme deviance.

    (In fact, to the concern of some twentieth-century feminists, the reverse is the case, and porn consumers in the dating scene are often less desperate for first-night sex.)

More comments from Uriel-238 >>