This is going to be a short post because the topic is really so mind numbingly simple, and it bugs the living shit out of me that people refuse to fucking see it. Topic: Celebrities' nudes got hacked from the iCloud and distributed throughout the Internet, including Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, and Kristen Dunst. There seems to be two camps of opinion on this issue.
One: It's the celebs' fault that this happened.
Two: The celebs didn't do anything wrong, and it's all the hackers fault.
What I think of it: The hacker committed a huge crime, but, BUT, the celebs could've taken easy, god damn easy steps to make this significantly less likely to happen to them.
The people in camp two will immediately and without question condemn me as a victim blamer, a women hater, a "privileged" male, etc, etc, all the usual feminist bullshit insults they sling around without even listening to what the other person has to say.
But just fucking read what I wrote: A crime happened. The hackers committed a crime. <----- Okay?! It is not victim blaming to say that the celebs could've done a couple of things that would've prevented this. It's just like if a person walked down the street of a crime ridden neighborhood, waving handfuls of cash to people, saying "Wow, just look at how much MONEY I have!" If I was a police officer responding to that person getting robbed, I would say to him "Wow, you are a dumbass, what did you think was going to happen?! But, BUT, these robbers have committed a crime against you. You are a victim of robbery, and I will pursue them with all of my resources."
This is just common sense. There are plenty of actions that can reduce the likelihood of a certain crime being committed against you. Our parents teach us this, teachers tell us this, the police tell us this, etc. Saying a simple concept of common sense is not victim blaming, nor is it denying a crime took place.
The concept of the Cloud is a horrible, terrible idea. To store sensitive, personal, or top secret information in the Cloud is just like wearing a T-shirt saying "Rob me." Hackers always can adapt faster than industry standards and defenses. You wonder why you hear of a massive credit card breach or the stealing of sensitive information more and more every day? You wonder why identity theft is rising and rising each year? Because more and more companies and organizations are storing their information in the Cloud because it is cheaper, completely forgoing the fact that it significantly more at risk to be stolen just to save a few bucks. Once again, people trade convenience for security in a heartbeat, then get all surprised when their personal information is stolen.
Taking nude pictures of yourself is stupid, and quite frankly, narcissistic. Who the fuck are you gonna send them to? Your boyfriend/girlfriend? Why the fuck would you do that? Just do it in front of them, that's what people have been doing for thousands of years and no one's had a god damn problem with it. Are you going to send them to a co-worker, classmate, etc? Even a dumber idea! Your morales are out the fucking god damn door! Taking nude pictures of yourself and posting them to a storage place that is so god damn easy to hack into is even more stupid.
What the people in camp two want to do is to do whatever they want to do in life, whether it be taking nudes of themselves, getting shitfaced at a party, or showing thugs a bunch of money, and not face any consequences for their dangerous and risky actions. Sorry, the world is suddenly not going to rid itself of all criminals just to fit your happy "the whole world is sunshine and butterflies" outlook. Everyone has to take actions to defend themselves against criminals. Stating this basic fact of life is not victim blaming. Get that through your god damn heads. Take responsibility for your risky and stupid actions. Man the fuck up.
Again, a reminder for the people in camp two, hacking peoples' information is illegal. IT IS A CRIME. The police should catch these criminals and bring them to justice. Nothing in those past three sentences contradicts the fact that the celebs did something really stupid.
Showing posts with label dumb hipsters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dumb hipsters. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Thursday, January 30, 2014
People are obsessing over the wrong type of diversity
It seems everywhere I turn, people, (mostly young dumb clueless liberals who think of their whining as "activism"), are nerd raging about how so and so institution needs to hire more minorities, how such and such place needs to have more women leading the place, how this and this school needs more minorities taking classes from it, how that and that business has too many white men working for it, etc, etc, the list goes on and on but they are all along these lines.
While any business or institution needs to be fair to every race, gender, religion, etc, and while diversity is an important aspect of any group, it is not the main goal of the business/group.
A car shop's job is to fix cars. A car shop's job is not to make sure it hires enough Hispanic people so liberals won't call it a racist business.
The minute a business or organization starts to care more about "being diverse" than to deliver the product or service it is designed to give, that is when their quality of work goes down. That is when they don't perform as well. That is when they're not doing as good as they could. And this is one of the many contributing reasons why our country is starting to suck more and more. It isn't by far the main one, but that's not the topic of this post. Let me show a simple and quick example to illustrate what I mean.
Let's say 2 grocery stores wants to hire 6 cashiers. 10 people apply to it, and the business ranks them by how good cashiers they are. 1 being the best cashier out of the 10, and 10 being the worst. Next to each number is the race of the person. For the simplicity of the argument, out of the 10 people, all of them are either Black, White, or Hispanic.
1. Black
2. White
3. Hispanic
4. White
5. White
6. White
7. Black
8. White
9. Hispanic
10. White
Grocery store #1 has been brainwashed by liberal media. They think having a diverse staff is more important than being a good cashier. So they hire 2 people of every race, being "fair." So they hire numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9.
Grocery store #2 respects all races, and doesn't give a flying shit what race you are. They want good cashiers, so they do the logical thing and hire numbers 1-6.
Now compare the two stores. Grocery store #1 skipped persons 5 and 6, even though they were better cashiers than 7 and 9. They passed up better applicants to be more diverse. So they end up with a worse workforce vs grocery store #2.
Worse workforce=less work=less products/services= crappier products/services=worse company.
Now, this one example might not seem like it can cause America to become a less desired place to live. But picture thousands of companies doing this for decades and decades. Over that time we have a huge percentage of the working population who are doing their job worse than someone else who applied. We have people entrenched in their positions who are lazy, rude, horrible workers who lower the quality of a company or organization. You wonder why the government can't get anything done? You wonder why the local restaurant consistently fails to do basic things like have a schedule for their workers, know of their own hiring process, have rude and horrible waiters, yet is still standing? You wonder why the store clerk can do things slowly on purpose just to irritate you, and talk to you in a demeaning tone, yet still is able to keep his/her job throughout the years? You wonder why the office worker is head of her/his department yet takes an hour everyday to log into his/her computer because that simple task completely bewilders them everyday?!
It's because we have people in their positions not because they were qualified for their jobs, but because of the color of their skin. By definition, that is racist: judging someone by the color of their skin. It's exactly what Martin Luther King. Jr deplored and spoke out against for years. And now people who claim to be inspired by him are doing the one thing he worked so hard against.
Absolutely fucking disgusting.
P.S. Not all white people are racist. Not all white males hate everything that is not male and white. Not all males wake up every day and think "Oh how can I keep women down today?" Judge people by their statements and actions, not their gender or the color of their skin.
While any business or institution needs to be fair to every race, gender, religion, etc, and while diversity is an important aspect of any group, it is not the main goal of the business/group.
A car shop's job is to fix cars. A car shop's job is not to make sure it hires enough Hispanic people so liberals won't call it a racist business.
The minute a business or organization starts to care more about "being diverse" than to deliver the product or service it is designed to give, that is when their quality of work goes down. That is when they don't perform as well. That is when they're not doing as good as they could. And this is one of the many contributing reasons why our country is starting to suck more and more. It isn't by far the main one, but that's not the topic of this post. Let me show a simple and quick example to illustrate what I mean.
Let's say 2 grocery stores wants to hire 6 cashiers. 10 people apply to it, and the business ranks them by how good cashiers they are. 1 being the best cashier out of the 10, and 10 being the worst. Next to each number is the race of the person. For the simplicity of the argument, out of the 10 people, all of them are either Black, White, or Hispanic.
1. Black
2. White
3. Hispanic
4. White
5. White
6. White
7. Black
8. White
9. Hispanic
10. White
Grocery store #1 has been brainwashed by liberal media. They think having a diverse staff is more important than being a good cashier. So they hire 2 people of every race, being "fair." So they hire numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9.
Grocery store #2 respects all races, and doesn't give a flying shit what race you are. They want good cashiers, so they do the logical thing and hire numbers 1-6.
Now compare the two stores. Grocery store #1 skipped persons 5 and 6, even though they were better cashiers than 7 and 9. They passed up better applicants to be more diverse. So they end up with a worse workforce vs grocery store #2.
Worse workforce=less work=less products/services= crappier products/services=worse company.
Now, this one example might not seem like it can cause America to become a less desired place to live. But picture thousands of companies doing this for decades and decades. Over that time we have a huge percentage of the working population who are doing their job worse than someone else who applied. We have people entrenched in their positions who are lazy, rude, horrible workers who lower the quality of a company or organization. You wonder why the government can't get anything done? You wonder why the local restaurant consistently fails to do basic things like have a schedule for their workers, know of their own hiring process, have rude and horrible waiters, yet is still standing? You wonder why the store clerk can do things slowly on purpose just to irritate you, and talk to you in a demeaning tone, yet still is able to keep his/her job throughout the years? You wonder why the office worker is head of her/his department yet takes an hour everyday to log into his/her computer because that simple task completely bewilders them everyday?!
It's because we have people in their positions not because they were qualified for their jobs, but because of the color of their skin. By definition, that is racist: judging someone by the color of their skin. It's exactly what Martin Luther King. Jr deplored and spoke out against for years. And now people who claim to be inspired by him are doing the one thing he worked so hard against.
Absolutely fucking disgusting.
Now let's move onto the second part of this post. Does anyone know why diversity is important in a company, organization, school, etc, whatever the case may be? Because people coming from different walks of life have different ways of solving problems, different outlooks on things, different ways of approaching a goal or challenge, different personalities, etc, etc, you get the idea. This leads to people being exposed to ideas, concepts, outlooks, etc, that normally they would not be exposed to if they were in a group of everyone who was the same.
More choices: a better opportunity to choose a better choice. Diversity brings increased worker productivity, increased profits, higher worker morale, etc, etc, because they are able to do things better, faster, more efficiently, due to the diverse pool of thought and ideas that they have available in their workforce.
Look at history. The high points of many countries and empires were at the time that they had many immigrants come together within their borders. This diversity brought profit and power. Islamic Caliphate, Roman Empire, Renaissance Italy, America in the 20th century, all had extremely diverse populations. These people brought their different experiences, life lessons, perspectives, etc, to the important industries: science, manufacturing, the arts, math, which made the country/empire more prosperous.
The problem with today's society that throws that diversity concept out the window is the emergence of total near encompassing, mainstream, bandwagoning culture that the vast majority of Americans are included in. So today, a company might have a diverse employee base by race, but by diversity of the mind, they are near monotonous. They all have the near exact same political beliefs, near exact same hobbies, near exact same way of thinking, near exact same personality, near exact same outlook on life, near exact way of working, etc, etc, the list goes on.
That is a workforce that doesn't think outside the box, that can't come up with a minority dissent on an issue, that everyone gets stumped on the exact same problem because they all think the exact same way and they can't picture thinking any differently, that is not adaptive, that cannot have a different opinion on an issue that is not the mainstream opinion, etc, you get the idea.
Monotonous workforce=less work=less products/services=crappier products/services=worse company.
In conclusion, you notice how I didn't put up any links or citations for anything I wrote. That's because I don't need to. You can understand everything I wrote using logic, reason, and a rational and linear thought process. Any verifiable facts can be easily found using a simple Google search. To reiterate, my two main points in this post are:
- It is NOT the goal or requirement of an organization or business to have a diverse workplace. It's goals is to provide the product and/or service it was made to provide. If the best workers I can hire happen to be mostly of one race, I'm going to hire every single one of them, and not hire other people who aren't as good but are of a different race. That is not racist at all, it is common sense business practice.
- Diversity of the mind is WAY more important than diversity of race.
P.S. Not all white people are racist. Not all white males hate everything that is not male and white. Not all males wake up every day and think "Oh how can I keep women down today?" Judge people by their statements and actions, not their gender or the color of their skin.
Thursday, November 21, 2013
Why pay to play online games suck (and other subscription based cloud software)
This post will be a bit different than normal. Usually I talk about politics but today I'm going to be talking about video games. Video games is another big interest of mine; I started playing them in 1st grade. They're a good stress reliever because it allows someone to completely detach themselves from this fucked up world for just a little bit, and focus on something fun.
The traditional way of selling and playing video games has been like buying 99% of all other products: you pay for it upfront, a one time deal, and then it is yours forever. This is the way it has been ever since video games were able to be sold to customers and they could take it home. This happened from the 1980's to about the mid 2000's. That's when things started to change, slowly at first, but now, this new way of selling video games is becoming more and more prevalent, and analysts say that eventually, all video games will be sold in the way I'm about to describe. This is rather annoying for me, because this new way completely fucking sucks.
This new way is that you pay per month to log onto a company's server online to play a game. You no longer have a physical copy of the game. You just have a subscription, a log-in that you use. This sucks for us, the customers, for a number of reasons.
But let's say you and your 3 friends are smart and get the actual CD for Microsoft Office 2013. Guess how much that costs each of you? $13.75. I know critics of this idea will say "But the box software of Office 2013 will only let you put it on one computer!" To which I reply "Then install it without internet access and never register it. That way, Microsoft will never know how many times you've installed it!" It's a simple and easy way to save money. My siblings and I did this with Office 2010. We've had it installed on 5 different computers, all for way less than if we did Microsoft 365.
In conclusion, this is very troubling for gamers like me, because if all video games start to be sold like this, then I'll simply not buy anymore new video games, and I'll just continue to play old video games. I refuse to go through all that BS just to have a little fun. If I spend my hard earned money to buy a game, then I better damn as well be able to play it when I want, how I want, and install it on as many systems as I want to. Combine this problem with the fact that the quality of storyline, gameplay, and the music of video games on a whole has substantially gotten pathetically worse since about 2008, (Skyrim is the one exception, and the only game since 2008 that I'd consider to be one of my favorite games), and we could possibly have the death of the video game industry as we know it.
The traditional way of selling and playing video games has been like buying 99% of all other products: you pay for it upfront, a one time deal, and then it is yours forever. This is the way it has been ever since video games were able to be sold to customers and they could take it home. This happened from the 1980's to about the mid 2000's. That's when things started to change, slowly at first, but now, this new way of selling video games is becoming more and more prevalent, and analysts say that eventually, all video games will be sold in the way I'm about to describe. This is rather annoying for me, because this new way completely fucking sucks.
This new way is that you pay per month to log onto a company's server online to play a game. You no longer have a physical copy of the game. You just have a subscription, a log-in that you use. This sucks for us, the customers, for a number of reasons.
- The cost of subscription based software will rapidly become more expensive than buying a physical copy, starting in just the first few months of owning the software. For example, let's say I bought Hellgate London in 2008 for $50. That's all it would cost me to play that game till the day I die. Now, let's look at the second example, where I would pay $10 a month to play Hellgate London online, through the company's servers. In just half a year, it would be more expensive for me to subscribe to that game versus if I had paid a one time price to have a physical copy of it. Fast forward to November of 2013. In the first example, guess how much money I've spent on Hellgate London? That's right, still $50. But how much would I have paid in the second example? A whooping $900. For one fucking game. That is absolutely mind-boggling how expensive it would be, in addition to how mind-boggling it is that band-wagoning swag fags think this subscription based software is cool and hip and so much better than the "old way."
- If you want to avoid paying that astronomical amount as described above, you have to constantly subscribe and un-subscribe to all your video games, based on the ones you're only currently playing at the moment. Let's say you only play 2 video games at a time. So you subscribe to those two for a while, then once you beat the game or tired of playing it, you have to unsubscribe to those 2 games, (to avoid being charged monthly for a game you don't even play), and then subscribe to 2 new video games. What if one of your friends comes over and wants to play a game you're not currently subscribing to? "Oh sorry man, can't play that one, I'm not subscribing to it at the moment."
- If your internet goes out, bam, there goes your game. This is critical for people with shitty internet, like me. (Xfinity is ripping my landlord off like a motherfucker. She's paying for 55 mbps and I'm sitting on the fucking computer and can clearly see I'm only getting 5 mbps). Meanwhile, I'm having a blast fighting sand monsters in Prince of Persia, while you're sitting on your ass, not being able to play any of your games, because your internet went out.
- If the company goes under and gets rid of it's servers, then bam, there goes your game. I play a few games, like Hellgate London and Titan Quest, whose companies who made them no longer exist because they went out of business. Guess what, I'm still having a blast playing those games. But if you subscribed to one of these games online, then you lost your game. Sucks for you.
But let's say you and your 3 friends are smart and get the actual CD for Microsoft Office 2013. Guess how much that costs each of you? $13.75. I know critics of this idea will say "But the box software of Office 2013 will only let you put it on one computer!" To which I reply "Then install it without internet access and never register it. That way, Microsoft will never know how many times you've installed it!" It's a simple and easy way to save money. My siblings and I did this with Office 2010. We've had it installed on 5 different computers, all for way less than if we did Microsoft 365.
In conclusion, this is very troubling for gamers like me, because if all video games start to be sold like this, then I'll simply not buy anymore new video games, and I'll just continue to play old video games. I refuse to go through all that BS just to have a little fun. If I spend my hard earned money to buy a game, then I better damn as well be able to play it when I want, how I want, and install it on as many systems as I want to. Combine this problem with the fact that the quality of storyline, gameplay, and the music of video games on a whole has substantially gotten pathetically worse since about 2008, (Skyrim is the one exception, and the only game since 2008 that I'd consider to be one of my favorite games), and we could possibly have the death of the video game industry as we know it.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Why do people care so much about having the latest version of everything?!
The I-phone 5s recently went out on sale, and Apple reported they sold 9 million of them in 3 days.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/23/iphone-5s-5c-apple-record-nine-million
Today is going to be a rant against people's wasteful and self-hurting spending habits that hold them back from moving up in the economic ladder. I'm using the I-phone as an example, but it can be used in a variety of situations where people habitually, routinely spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on luxuries a year, which adds up over time.
Let's see what I'm talking about. The I-phone 5s is currently selling for anywhere between $400 and $800, https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=shop&q=iphone+5&oq=i&gs_l=products-cc.1.2.0l10.1574.1574.0.4757.1.1.0.0.0.0.63.63.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.1.QerQhbyll6k#hl=en&q=iphone+5s&safe=off&tbm=shop
Apple comes out with a new I-phone or improved platform for an I-phone every 6 months to a year. But there are many people, many poor people, who are obsessed with having the latest version of the I-phone as soon as they can possibly get it. They HAVE to have it ASAP, otherwise they aren't "hip" and their whole world is shattered. So every year, they blow $800-$1200 on a new phone. Every year. That is a huge chunk of their earnings, a huge chunk that could be used for much better purposes.
First of all, they can flat out just save that money. Put it in a bank. Save it for an emergency. Currently, 67% of Americans have little to no savings. They live paycheck to paycheck, http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2013/09/18/majority-of-americans-still-living.html
That is partly due to the crappy economy, but it is also augmented by peoples' incredibly poor spending habits. It wouldn't be a problem if someone splurged and got a new phone as soon as they could get it just once. But I know many people, whose finances are not so good, who do this every time a new I-phone or upgrade comes out. Just over 3 years that could be $2400-$3600 they spend. And that's not even counting the early contract termination fee, or data plan per month, etc. Do you really need a new phone every 6 months? Can you not wait for your two year contract to expire? Is there really that much of a difference between the I-phone 4 and I-phone 4S to warrant such an outrageous expense??
You could use that money to pay for a college class at community college. You can make a much needed car repair. There's a whole list of things your money could be better spent on.
Now, this wouldn't be a huge financial burden on people, if this was the only thing they put a lot of money down on. Like, if they were financially smart in all other areas of their life, to make up for this big splurge. That's not a problem. What's a problem is when this is coupled with several other constant luxury spending binges. Again, I know many people who do this. They're mostly young people, anywhere from 17-upper 20's. In addition to spending that much money on a new phone every 6 months, they spend dozens of dollars on alcohol, every week, and dozens of dollars on cigarettes, every week, dozens of dollars on gas for their car on trips that are not necessary, etc, etc, the list goes on and on. At the end of the month, they've spent all the money that they've earned, so they save nothing, and they stay being poor.
Several months and/or years of smart spending and saving can yield thousands of dollars in your bank, that can help you make purchases to move you up on the economic ladder. You know can qualify for a loan to get a new car, because you have enough money to make the down payment. You can afford to move to a nicer apartment, you can pay medical bills, buy school supplies, etc.
That's all I'm advocating. I'm not advocating not buying any luxuries, I'm advocating spending your money wisely. Indulge a bit, but not to the extreme where you're blowing hundreds of dollars every month on luxuries. I like to party hard as much as the next guy, probably even more. The more craziness there is, the better. But I'm also not an idiot. (Aren't those two sentences an oxymoron lmao?!) I know I can only afford to do this once a month. So that's how often I do it. I don't do it every weekend like some of my idiotic friends do, because then I would be even more poorer than I already am. You'd be amazed on how much you can save by limiting a few luxurious expenses.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/23/iphone-5s-5c-apple-record-nine-million
Today is going to be a rant against people's wasteful and self-hurting spending habits that hold them back from moving up in the economic ladder. I'm using the I-phone as an example, but it can be used in a variety of situations where people habitually, routinely spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on luxuries a year, which adds up over time.
Let's see what I'm talking about. The I-phone 5s is currently selling for anywhere between $400 and $800, https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=shop&q=iphone+5&oq=i&gs_l=products-cc.1.2.0l10.1574.1574.0.4757.1.1.0.0.0.0.63.63.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.1.QerQhbyll6k#hl=en&q=iphone+5s&safe=off&tbm=shop
Apple comes out with a new I-phone or improved platform for an I-phone every 6 months to a year. But there are many people, many poor people, who are obsessed with having the latest version of the I-phone as soon as they can possibly get it. They HAVE to have it ASAP, otherwise they aren't "hip" and their whole world is shattered. So every year, they blow $800-$1200 on a new phone. Every year. That is a huge chunk of their earnings, a huge chunk that could be used for much better purposes.
First of all, they can flat out just save that money. Put it in a bank. Save it for an emergency. Currently, 67% of Americans have little to no savings. They live paycheck to paycheck, http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2013/09/18/majority-of-americans-still-living.html
That is partly due to the crappy economy, but it is also augmented by peoples' incredibly poor spending habits. It wouldn't be a problem if someone splurged and got a new phone as soon as they could get it just once. But I know many people, whose finances are not so good, who do this every time a new I-phone or upgrade comes out. Just over 3 years that could be $2400-$3600 they spend. And that's not even counting the early contract termination fee, or data plan per month, etc. Do you really need a new phone every 6 months? Can you not wait for your two year contract to expire? Is there really that much of a difference between the I-phone 4 and I-phone 4S to warrant such an outrageous expense??
You could use that money to pay for a college class at community college. You can make a much needed car repair. There's a whole list of things your money could be better spent on.
Now, this wouldn't be a huge financial burden on people, if this was the only thing they put a lot of money down on. Like, if they were financially smart in all other areas of their life, to make up for this big splurge. That's not a problem. What's a problem is when this is coupled with several other constant luxury spending binges. Again, I know many people who do this. They're mostly young people, anywhere from 17-upper 20's. In addition to spending that much money on a new phone every 6 months, they spend dozens of dollars on alcohol, every week, and dozens of dollars on cigarettes, every week, dozens of dollars on gas for their car on trips that are not necessary, etc, etc, the list goes on and on. At the end of the month, they've spent all the money that they've earned, so they save nothing, and they stay being poor.
Several months and/or years of smart spending and saving can yield thousands of dollars in your bank, that can help you make purchases to move you up on the economic ladder. You know can qualify for a loan to get a new car, because you have enough money to make the down payment. You can afford to move to a nicer apartment, you can pay medical bills, buy school supplies, etc.
That's all I'm advocating. I'm not advocating not buying any luxuries, I'm advocating spending your money wisely. Indulge a bit, but not to the extreme where you're blowing hundreds of dollars every month on luxuries. I like to party hard as much as the next guy, probably even more. The more craziness there is, the better. But I'm also not an idiot. (Aren't those two sentences an oxymoron lmao?!) I know I can only afford to do this once a month. So that's how often I do it. I don't do it every weekend like some of my idiotic friends do, because then I would be even more poorer than I already am. You'd be amazed on how much you can save by limiting a few luxurious expenses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)