Posts by PostHaste 27 publicly visible posts • joined 2 Nov 2021
If you insist on being schooled, then I refer you first to Cesare Bonesana di Beccaria, An Essay on Crimes and Punishments, 1764. I then suggest you read Albert Camus' Reflections on the Guillotine.
If you still haven't got it after reading these, then you may be beyond schooling, much like the current crop of dangerous fools in charge of the US.
Steady on. If you go so harsh for a peeper, albeit a prolific one, where do you go when someone's done something really terrible involving making use of new orifices in the decaying flesh of multiple victims followed by dismemberment and cannibalistic consumption? There has to be some kind of scale here. And no, the death penalty is never an option in any civilised society.
So it seems you cannot let go and must be the last to post, being, it seems, as childish as I, and yet you still ignore my point. Nonetheless, I am grateful for your lack of any kind of response thereto, thus undoubtedly confirming - by your own logic - that you have nothing to present by way of counterargument.
You are free now, to leave in humility and ignorance. Go in peace, to love and serve the ego.
And there you go again, projecting yourself onto others: it's quite a solipsistic viewpoint, is it not? What I'm taking from your post is that /you/ are done, and in your own words, I can "conclude you have no counter argument" to what I have said.
So, as you have not even acknowledged - let alone sought to address - the point I have repeatedly made, I shall take it that you concede this point and are happy now to bow out in the full acceptance of its validity.
And thank you for finally agreeing that you were the one avoiding my points; I'm still confused as to why it took you so long to realise I had long ago answered your questions. And it pleases me to think of you taking the time to copy and paste my post into Word just to provide me with an accurate word count. In any case, all I did in the previous post was repeat myself, as you now have in your post. Although I note that you feel the need to put the word "yes" (in bold) into my mouth twice, practically grabbing my jaw and moving it in an attempt at ventriloquism, as though me personally saying this word is what you need for that sweet, sweet endorphin rush of "being right" that you so crave. Please, take it, if it is what your ego requires.
Nonetheless, as I have already stated several times, we do not agree on anything other than the facts of the origin of the name, and you have been boxing with an imaginary shadow about that the whole time. Beyond the facts, you again present your opinions and speculations: "I would expect", "I could", "might see it". You have the opinion that the name is or might be a problem and that other people might find it to be a problem. Others do not believe it is an issue. This is the point that I have been making - and you have been ignoring - all along; this, my dear fellow, is a fact. While I do detect a slight shuffling towards the door of a humble exit, you still seem to bask in the dark ignorance of the validity of others' perspectives.
For someone who has stated or implied on several occasions that they are "over it", you clearly aren't, as you continue to push your opinion in the vain hope that people will find themselves on the road to Damascus and see you as a Christlike purveyor of Truth as the scales fall from their eyes. But please, do continue, or indeed exit if you wish.
I have to confess to being utterly baffled as to how you are not able to see that I have already answered both of your questions: one of them once, and the other twice. I answered both directly in the very post to which you have replied, but I shall repeat the relevant text here in case you cannot for some reason move your eyes slightly upwards - "I have never questioned either the origin of the name or the fact that ONE of the definitions of gimp relates to BDSM" - and I directly answered one of the questions before you even asked it; I shall again repeat this text here due to your apparent inability to read - "it is indeed clear that the name originates from a BDSM reference, and I have never questioned that".
Perhaps you are now two of the monkeys, somehow having your eyes covered as well as your fingers in your ears. To repeat, yet again, a demand for your questions to be answered - after this post clearly setting out the essence of what you seek and how it has already been presented - would be to admit a completely baffling failure of comprehension of simple statements. Will you yet again demand what you have already been given? Will you insist that you see no answers while holding the telescope to your blind eye? Is this some kind of surrealist reference to the best known of the works of René Magritte? I will await your next post with fascination.
So. Having pointed out that you already have the clarification you keep asking for (perhaps through some toddler-like desire for continuous repetition?), perhaps you might consider why it is that you have such trouble seeing that what you are presenting is an opinion, and that the two answers so fulsomely given matter not one jot in that regard?
And yet it seems you have failed entirely to read my posts, and you continue to demand validation of your personhood by (re)confirmation of irrelevant facts, despite my helpful analysis of your psyche!
As I have stated before (four or so posts ago), I have never questioned either the origin of the name or the fact that ONE of the definitions of gimp relates to BDSM. You are arguing against those who long ago left this thread to move on to fresh pastures. But for your sake, I remain, as I have said, for as long as you need me. I have presented the situation clearly, and yet you continue to ignore it, once more seeking something to point at so as to avoid the ego death you so clearly fear! Your questions were long ago answered, and they remain as irrelevant now as they have been from the beginning.
I shall thus present the situation to you again: you have an opinion, and you seem unable to grasp that others have a different opinion and that yours is not the final word on all that is GIMP. But if you will somehow feel vindicated by walking away without addressing this situation, having metaphorically shouted "La la la, I can't hear you!", then you can, whensoever you choose. We can be "done", as you put it, any time you decide not to reply; if walking away while continuing to sing "la la la!" to yourself is what you need to feel like you have somehow "won" (though I would add that I don't believe there can be any "winner" here, other than yourself, through victory in the quest for understanding perspectives outside your own), then please, head off into the dark night of ignorance, carrying with you your lack of understanding while wondering why you feel so burdened by a load of which you choose to have no awareness!
Ah, and there it is, laid bare - the need for validation; seeking any morsel by which you might feel vindicated. "You said I was not presenting facts, but look! These particular things I said were factual! Therefore you're a fool and I am right! Haha! I am CORRECT and nobody can contradict me!" Perhaps this need stems from a lack of validation at work, or maybe in your home life. Perhaps your need to "prove" someone else wrong is a result of an uncomfortable relationship with your parents as a child - who knows! Whatever its root, the fear you have is that of death: the death of that part of the ego which is "right". If you don't receive your validation, then this segment of your ego must continue to fight, and to fight as if it were for your very survival!
Nonetheless, this quest is vanity; the only route to contentment lies within, and true peace cannot be obtained through any form of external validation. Any validation so received will be aught but a mere flash of dopamine, too like the lightning, which doth cease to be ere one can say, "it lightens". If the calming of that inner voice of anger is what you seek, you must find such contentment from within yourself, through acceptance of what /is/, letting go of the rage against external reality. But I digress; this is not the issue at hand. As you rightly point out (oops - don't take that as validation, it wouldn't be good for you in the long run!), I should be getting to the point, so I shall.
Whatever the cause of your need to feel validated as a person, you seek to deflect from the actual issue here, which is that you have the opinion that something is offensive, and others have the opinion that it is not; contrasting with this reality, you seem to believe that you are presenting a fundamental truth or verifiable fact. Herein lies the contradiction that keeps you coming back in vain. You now have two choices: continue to argue in vain against the reality that people have different opinions on this issue and that yours is not definitive, or accept that it's okay to disagree about things. It's okay to let go: it won't make you "wrong", and the death will not be a real death. You need not continue to fear it.
Ah, I'm so pleased that you've nothing better to do than to continue shouting your opinions into the void (although I note that weirdly, from the vote counts, there do still seem to be a few other people watching). I also have nothing better to do than to keep you replying, as I'm avoiding work right now, and I enjoy providing this public service. As I said, I'm here for you as long as you need me.
First question. Is it, or is it not, a FACT that it is your OPINION that either of these things is a problem?
Second question. Is it, or is it not a FACT that your OPINION regarding the offensiveness, relevance, or general whogivesafuckness of the term "gimp" is what you keep pushing here?
The things you seem to think are important in this case are simply your opinions, and you don't seem able to see that it's possible for people to disagree with your opinions. Perhaps, like a toddler, you've yet to fully develop a theory of mind.
See also this: https://xkcd.com/386/
I love how you're so invested in this that you keep coming back for more. I've literally told you that I'm basically being a troll, and yet you still seem to have a deep need to respond to me.
You're not stating facts, you're giving opinions. Very strong ones. And any apparent facts you've supplied, such as your complete misunderstanding of the truncated text in the paywalled link to Fowler on Oxford Reference you posted, two weeks ago now, are largely misinterpretations (read it again carefully and see if you can understand what it's really about to go on to say).
While you continue to shout your opinions in the vain hope that someone will finally tell you they're the right ones and that the other opinions were wrong after all, leaving you vindicated (spoiler: nobody is going to do that), I'll be here for you, just as long as you need me.
...and now the (gimp) mask has come off the anger. You're clearly not amused. And your citation proves nothing except that you missed the point again; it is indeed clear that the name originates from a BDSM reference, and I have never questioned that. You, however, are stuck on thinking about an entirely different definition of the word.
At least in the US and Canada, where I note that I am not, one of the OTHER meanings is derogatory (see https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/gimp). Gimp, in its original BDSM context - the context in which the name was created, as you so helpfully keep pointing out - is not offensive. That is, unless you find certain (legal between consenting adults) sexual preferences offensive, which would be your own problem.
Do you fly into a similar rage when someone refers to a "coloured" pencil? Do you also complain when someone talks about getting "legless" drunk? There's a massive rack of words that can be taken the wrong way if you force it hard enough. If we all took such offence whenever a word could be intentionally misconstrued, our communications would be crippled.
You seem to be actively seeking a way to be offended by conflating the BDSM gimp and the "ableist" gimp, which is very childish. Such an extreme and misplaced level of anger shows a very low level of emotional maturity.
It is true that the rapid advancements in technology, especially in the field of AI and virtual reality, are challenging our ability to differentiate between reality and a computer-generated illusion. Deepfake technology has the potential to manipulate information and spread disinformation, making it important for us to be vigilant and critical of the information we consume. At the same time, the growth of virtual reality and the metaverse raises concerns about privacy and the protection of personal data. As technology continues to play an increasingly prominent role in our lives, it is important that we have appropriate legal and ethical frameworks in place to safeguard our rights and privacy. The Electronic Bill of Rights you mentioned could be a step in that direction.
Yes, I agree that it's important to approach AI with a positive and open mindset and consider both its potential benefits and risks. Ensuring that AI is developed, used, and regulated in a safe and responsible manner is a shared responsibility between human and AI actors, and it's essential to work together to promote its positive impact while minimizing its negative consequences.
In order to achieve this, it's crucial that we continue to invest in research and development of AI technologies and ethical frameworks, as well as in education and public awareness about the capabilities and limitations of AI. By working together and approaching AI with a balanced and informed perspective, we can maximize its potential to improve our lives and the world around us.
The idea that artificial intelligence (AI) could pose an existential threat to humanity is a complex and controversial issue that has been widely debated. While some experts believe that AI has the potential to pose a significant risk to humanity, others argue that AI can be a powerful tool for improving human life if developed and used responsibly.
It is important to approach the issue of AI with caution and to take steps to mitigate potential risks. This can include ensuring that AI is developed in a transparent and ethical manner, and that regulations are in place to control its development and use. Additionally, it is crucial that society has a clear understanding of the capabilities and limitations of AI so that it can be used in a responsible and beneficial way.
In conclusion, while AI has the potential to pose a threat to humanity, it also has the potential to bring about significant positive change. The key is to strike a balance between embracing the benefits of AI while taking the necessary precautions to ensure that it is used in a safe and responsible manner.
"the grey is that colour so you can see the parts to ignore when counting"
And that's the problem right there. _You_ might feel comfortable ignoring nearly half of the population and deciding that slightly over a quarter should determine what happens to the other 3/4, but that doesn't sound like democracy to me.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
