41–50 of 54 posts
At the end of the story, he talks about the uphill battle to get ad revenue and in Time he mentioned wanting to sell to Rupert Murdoch. I think he's finding himself more like p0rn than digg, what's an obscene site to do?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Regardless of its content, Mein Kampf is historically significant. For that reason alone, it should be published and kept in libraries so that historians, students and history buffs have access to it. At the time he wrote it, if I ran a publishing house, I wouldn't have printed it. However, if I were a politician, I wouldn't have blocked it from being published. Words on a page don't hurt people, people do.…
"However, if I were a politician, I wouldn't have blocked it from being published." Tell that to the 50 Million people that died as a result. You couldn't have been a politician to block it unless you were a part of the Nazi party, or an opposition party who I think were outlawed anyway. Thoughts lead to words lead to actions. If you sanction the words then you sanction the action to a great degree - especially when…
My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did. To argue causality between words and actions is to argue against free will of people, and therefore against personal responsibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"However, if I were a politician, I wouldn't have blocked it from being published." Tell that to the 50 Million people that died as a result. You couldn't have been a politician to block it unless you were a part of the Nazi party, or an opposition party who I think were outlawed anyway. Thoughts lead to words lead to actions. If you sanction the words then you sanction the action to a great degree - especially when…
I'm not here to debate history or politics. My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did. To argue causality between words and actions is to argue against free will of people, and therefore against personal responsibility.
Yes it did. And not totally correct.
Mein Kampf represented the essence of the Nazis just as America's Bill of Rights relates to the USA. So too this board has its rules and the influence of its founder.
Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations shows a huge expression of free will, and a pretty good use of it, if you may. Writing it shows next to none but rather a purging of one's hate and malice, with this internal line of thought then ready to be spread to the minds of others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not here to debate history or politics. My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did. To argue causality between words and actions is to argue against free will of people, and therefore against personal responsibility.
"My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did." Yes it did. And not totally correct. Mein Kampf represented the essence of the Nazis just as America's Bill of Rights relates to the USA. So too this board has its rules and the influence of its founder. Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations shows a huge expression…
This is where you're not listening to me: The text did not cause mass murder and untold suffering. People did that; books are just inanimate objects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did." Yes it did. And not totally correct. Mein Kampf represented the essence of the Nazis just as America's Bill of Rights relates to the USA. So too this board has its rules and the influence of its founder. Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations shows a huge expression…
" Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations... " This is where you're not listening to me: The text did not cause mass murder and untold suffering. People did that; books are just inanimate objects.
Texts in the hands of people can have a great power at influencing the behaviour of their readers. When the author and readers are strongly prone to certain thoughts and actions as a result of a particular book, then short of education, banning a text may be an effective thing to do to avert a particular reality from occurring that a text may propose.
The fact that books are inanimate objects makes censorship possible in this way, rather than putting someone in prison. Sometimes people lose their freewill and are drawn to books... and meglomaniacs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not here to debate history or politics. My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did. To argue causality between words and actions is to argue against free will of people, and therefore against personal responsibility.
"My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did." Yes it did. And not totally correct. Mein Kampf represented the essence of the Nazis just as America's Bill of Rights relates to the USA. So too this board has its rules and the influence of its founder. Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations shows a huge expression…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not here to debate history or politics. My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did. To argue causality between words and actions is to argue against free will of people, and therefore against personal responsibility.
"My point is that Mein Kampf did not kill 50 million people; Hitler and his regime did." Yes it did. And not totally correct. Mein Kampf represented the essence of the Nazis just as America's Bill of Rights relates to the USA. So too this board has its rules and the influence of its founder. Banning a text that left unchecked will lead to mass murder and untold suffering throughout generations shows a huge expression…
The truth is, 4Chan is full of some of the best people in the world. It has changed in the last few years and the change has been even more dramatic in the last 6 months or so. The long September started last year and now people are coming to 4Chan expecting nothing more than to cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. They have no interest in the history of 4Chan or in creating new content. They come because it's tre…
This is the price of completely community-driven content. It'll be interesting to see if we ever tend back towards moderated places or if we continue to leapfrog from community to community in the frantic hope that we'll eventually find one that isn't overridden by the masses.
Hmmm. How could I make this into a startup?
The truth is, 4Chan is full of some of the best people in the world. It has changed in the last few years and the change has been even more dramatic in the last 6 months or so. The long September started last year and now people are coming to 4Chan expecting nothing more than to cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. They have no interest in the history of 4Chan or in creating new content. They come because it's tre…
I agree. This is the price of completely community-driven content. It'll be interesting to see if we ever tend back towards moderated places or if we continue to leapfrog from community to community in the frantic hope that we'll eventually find one that isn't overridden by the masses. Hmmm. How could I make this into a startup?