it seems like people are looking for my twitter account.
@deathtokoalas
on twitter is NOT me. that person appears to be into anime, online rpgs
and defending the fascist state of israel. i'm not interested in any of
those things. i'd like to see a one state solution, but under the
auspices of a democratic, secular "israel" that does not have religious
or nationalist concepts written into it's constitution. i'd also like to
see some land redistribution, but i recognize that this is a very
delicate process. if you were to sit me down and really have me analyze
it, i'd have to come to the conclusion that the only way to "set things
right" is to temporarily abolish the state and have it run by an
international body like the un for a period of 50 years or something,
then have it transferred to a secular, pluralist governing body.
i
simply don't use twitter. however, for the sake of clarifying the
situation, i'll point you to this sarcastic profile as the only twitter
profile that i've ever set up.
https://twitter.com/dgkfgjklgjkgjka
i
know that deathtokoalas comes off as a unique marker, but it seems like
it isn't. as far as i can tell, this other person stole my name, but i
can't prove that.
that brings up another point, though.
the handle i'm using there is @dgkfgjklgjkgjka. i'm all over the
internet with variations of this. it was chosen to be impossible to
search for, as it's picked uniquely each time, but easy to identify when
it's found.
i'm very open about my politics. if you
see some right-wing ranting under a similar moniker, and it's not
sarcastic, it's not me. but if you see variations of the sort with a
lower case d, a random string of mashed characters of no fixed length
and a lower class a such as...
dfdgKDT789rft8efyYKa
dBJUR8fduKDE7IekdcGJKFHYJO5a
dDTdkGDITKDtktYa
etc
then it's probably me.
"impossible"
is an exaggeration. but searching all possible combinations is time
consuming. it requires some scripting, at least.
there's lots of smart ways to circumvent the fuckers, if you know a little about the technology they use....
obviously, i don't want it to be hard to find my youtube account.
but the fact that deathtokoala starts with a d and ends with an a is no coincidence:)
i am somewhat of a bond villain.
it doesn't matter any more, i don't use the technique.
(you'll
note that before you can script the trawl, you need to figure out the
trick, and i don't get the impression anybody even got that far)
i mean sum (35 C i), 3<i<20 is a very big number.
Friday, October 17, 2014
avoids newfie joke
remember: if there's a hurricane, don't go out for supper. get delivery instead.
remember: if there's a hurricane, don't go out for supper. get delivery instead.
at
07:17
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
deathtokoalas
judging from the slur in his voice, my best guess is he was late because he was snorting cocaine in the bathroom.
Pat
He was waiting for a stimulant to kick in perhaps, the slur in his voice is from alcohol intoxication. Correcting the effects of alcohol intoxication on the speech centers is nearly impossible, no matter what drugs might be employed to do so. And he's just tumbling all over his words, nearly an incoherent speech pattern, certainly under the influence of something.
Philip
Because cocaine is notorious for making people slur their words....
deathtokoalas
it's a very common side effect, actually.
Philip
I've heard of it with people who did huge amounts of cocaine at once, so I guess I've just never met a serious coke-head.
deathtokoalas
i've never tried it, but i've been around it. the immediate high - especially if it's a big line, or you haven't done much - is like a train slamming the side of your head. it's very disorienting. it doesn't last long, but you get most of the effects associated with inebriation for a short period.
most of the stereotypes of being jittery, paranoid, etc come from taking small dosages regularly. in that context, it's simply a strong stimulant.
it's possible that he may have taken a big hit knowing he was going on the debate, had it backfire and had to wait until he came down a little. cocaine is only a 10-20 minute high.
Philip
Which is why you should always stick with nature's wonder-drug: dextroamphetamine.
deathtokoalas
i'll stick with coffee, thanks.
Philip
Coffee is a joke compared to amphetamine. I hardly even consider caffeine a stimulant.
deathtokoalas
i suspect you're very stressful to spend time with, then.
Pat
When one has been stone cold sober for 20 years, spotting these kinds of things at age 50 is like saying ... "That's red, that is a circle it's round, that's a stick, it's made of wood, that's dirty, don't touch it ... the stove is hot ... etc ..." It really is totally obvioius he's whacked. The speech centers in the brain and body are a major function of conscious intelligence and it takes an awful lot to screw them up, heavy drugs, like alcohol or big time pharmaceuticals. Valium maybe, some type of downer perhaps as that is commonly taken before a high stress public appearance, especially for those that sweat a lot at public events.
deathtokoalas
i know you're pushing the downers thing, but, due to the fact that he's a republican, you're looking at two serious options: cocaine or oxycontin. but politicians tend to lean towards the coke. coke gives you that invincibility, that confidence. it's more what you want in a public speaking scenario than something that's going to knock you out or make you walk wobbly.
like i say, i'm convinced he took too hefty a line and had to sit down for a few minutes.
as people that know know, the "war on drugs" is just an absurd way to round up american blacks. the cocaine industry in the united states is basically interlocked with the republican party.
Pat
Bill Clinton ran billions of cocaine through Mena Arkansas for the CIA and the drug Cartel lords working together. Drug profits are so incredibly large the two major parties in the U.S. have to share the profits, or they would start a war, a civil war, there's just far, far too much money in the illegal drug trade for any one group to control it, they share. Like a pendulum swinging back and forth and they've been doing this for hundreds of years and it started with the Dutch East Indies company, opium, and cannabis.
TheBassAckwards
as It isn't just about being anti-black.. there's TONS of money is the industrial prison complex in America. Private, for-profit prisons? Noooo, I'm sure there's no corruption going on there! Our county is going to hell.. well, it's already pretty crazy now. I really wonder where what life is going to be like here in just 20 years, let alone 50 or 100. 1/2 of Florida will probably be washed away with Republicunts still saying climate change is a lie.
judging from the slur in his voice, my best guess is he was late because he was snorting cocaine in the bathroom.
Pat
He was waiting for a stimulant to kick in perhaps, the slur in his voice is from alcohol intoxication. Correcting the effects of alcohol intoxication on the speech centers is nearly impossible, no matter what drugs might be employed to do so. And he's just tumbling all over his words, nearly an incoherent speech pattern, certainly under the influence of something.
Philip
Because cocaine is notorious for making people slur their words....
deathtokoalas
it's a very common side effect, actually.
Philip
I've heard of it with people who did huge amounts of cocaine at once, so I guess I've just never met a serious coke-head.
deathtokoalas
i've never tried it, but i've been around it. the immediate high - especially if it's a big line, or you haven't done much - is like a train slamming the side of your head. it's very disorienting. it doesn't last long, but you get most of the effects associated with inebriation for a short period.
most of the stereotypes of being jittery, paranoid, etc come from taking small dosages regularly. in that context, it's simply a strong stimulant.
it's possible that he may have taken a big hit knowing he was going on the debate, had it backfire and had to wait until he came down a little. cocaine is only a 10-20 minute high.
Philip
Which is why you should always stick with nature's wonder-drug: dextroamphetamine.
deathtokoalas
i'll stick with coffee, thanks.
Philip
Coffee is a joke compared to amphetamine. I hardly even consider caffeine a stimulant.
deathtokoalas
i suspect you're very stressful to spend time with, then.
Pat
When one has been stone cold sober for 20 years, spotting these kinds of things at age 50 is like saying ... "That's red, that is a circle it's round, that's a stick, it's made of wood, that's dirty, don't touch it ... the stove is hot ... etc ..." It really is totally obvioius he's whacked. The speech centers in the brain and body are a major function of conscious intelligence and it takes an awful lot to screw them up, heavy drugs, like alcohol or big time pharmaceuticals. Valium maybe, some type of downer perhaps as that is commonly taken before a high stress public appearance, especially for those that sweat a lot at public events.
deathtokoalas
i know you're pushing the downers thing, but, due to the fact that he's a republican, you're looking at two serious options: cocaine or oxycontin. but politicians tend to lean towards the coke. coke gives you that invincibility, that confidence. it's more what you want in a public speaking scenario than something that's going to knock you out or make you walk wobbly.
like i say, i'm convinced he took too hefty a line and had to sit down for a few minutes.
as people that know know, the "war on drugs" is just an absurd way to round up american blacks. the cocaine industry in the united states is basically interlocked with the republican party.
Pat
Bill Clinton ran billions of cocaine through Mena Arkansas for the CIA and the drug Cartel lords working together. Drug profits are so incredibly large the two major parties in the U.S. have to share the profits, or they would start a war, a civil war, there's just far, far too much money in the illegal drug trade for any one group to control it, they share. Like a pendulum swinging back and forth and they've been doing this for hundreds of years and it started with the Dutch East Indies company, opium, and cannabis.
TheBassAckwards
as It isn't just about being anti-black.. there's TONS of money is the industrial prison complex in America. Private, for-profit prisons? Noooo, I'm sure there's no corruption going on there! Our county is going to hell.. well, it's already pretty crazy now. I really wonder where what life is going to be like here in just 20 years, let alone 50 or 100. 1/2 of Florida will probably be washed away with Republicunts still saying climate change is a lie.
at
04:20
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
well, let's take a step back. you shouldn't not be worried at all, and the political aspect might have something to do with the reaction.
what he didn't talk about was how it's spread from patient to worker. i think this is the key point that will probably calm people down: ebola is not airborne. it's less like the flu and more like aids - you have to be in close contact with bodily fluids. even if the worker was contagious on the plane, merely being on the plane with the worker is not enough to catch it. you need to be in contact with blood, feces, urine, etc. i hope that the bathroom was properly sterilized, though.
you should be careful. if you're into scatology, for example, you may want to put it off for a little while. but your death is not quite imminent; we're not at the "bring out your dead!" point quite yet.
---
RarityGamer
Why is the CDC assuming everyone onboard that flight from Cleveland to Dallas has a extremely low chance of catching it? Like, why isn't every single passenger on a 24hr call-in list? "No passengers have symptoms" ..... we don't know that, do we? Unless the CDC is in constant contact with each and every passenger....
deathtokoalas
because ebola is not spread through the air, it's spread through contact with bodily fluids.
what he didn't talk about was how it's spread from patient to worker. i think this is the key point that will probably calm people down: ebola is not airborne. it's less like the flu and more like aids - you have to be in close contact with bodily fluids. even if the worker was contagious on the plane, merely being on the plane with the worker is not enough to catch it. you need to be in contact with blood, feces, urine, etc. i hope that the bathroom was properly sterilized, though.
you should be careful. if you're into scatology, for example, you may want to put it off for a little while. but your death is not quite imminent; we're not at the "bring out your dead!" point quite yet.
RarityGamer
Why is the CDC assuming everyone onboard that flight from Cleveland to Dallas has a extremely low chance of catching it? Like, why isn't every single passenger on a 24hr call-in list? "No passengers have symptoms" ..... we don't know that, do we? Unless the CDC is in constant contact with each and every passenger....
deathtokoalas
because ebola is not spread through the air, it's spread through contact with bodily fluids.
at
04:12
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
deathtokoalas
it's not that they get away with it, it's that they expect they'll get away with it because they're taught they'll get away with it. so, perhaps they shouldn't be taught that they'll get away with it?
i'm not saying it's a good idea to shrug it off. i'm pointing out that it's well established that enforcement is not an effective prevention tactic, you need to get at root causes.
you look pretty frustrated. that's all the approach you're using is going to get you.
it's a losing battle; change your tactic.
in the broader scope of things, laci is a product of the failure of neo-liberalism. she's using very right-wing language, and i'm not entirely sure she really realizes it. it's just what she learned at school. i went through this somewhere else. all this stuff about victim rights is a product of the neo-liberal era. but, like everything else from the neo-liberal era, it's run into incredible problems in trying to reverse the decades of research that came before it on ideological rather than empirical grounds.
it's unfortunate to wake up in your late 20s or early 30s and realize everything you've been taught is bullshit. but, it's going to have to happen - and not just for laci, but for a wide cross-section of people her age that come face to face with it.
there may have been a sentence or two about weber and root cause analyses hidden in the back of your textbooks. your profs may have ridiculed it. but i'd really suggest picking up on that.
Samuel
I really don't think you can teach them "they won't get away with it" unless you actually provide a punishment for the act so they have real consequences for the act, and this wont happen unless there is a huge reform of the current system which protects and allows rapists to live free.
deathtokoalas
there's that "thinking" thing again. wrong way to try and interpret the world.
we're not rational creatures. we don't respond to incentives, and we don't respond to force. that is, enforcement has no effect on recidivism rates. it may seem logical to think that if you get "tough on crime" then the criminals will stop, but this has been proven wrong repeatedly. instead, what you get are smarter criminals. it's the most expensive, least effective approach. that's why conservatives love it so much - big contracts, no results.
yet, because the right-wing dominates the educational institutions nowadays and has since the rise of the "new right" in the thatcher-reagan neo-liberal revolution, what's being taught in schools nowadays is the kind of anti-science fundamentalist christianity that laci is articulating - without realizing it. it was presented to her as sociology, so she thinks that's what she's talking about.
but it isn't. it's christianity repackaged as science in this twisted orwellian manner. the sociological equivalent of "intelligent design".
the root of this starts when kids are young - it's the way they're raised. we need to get at the very root of the family unit, not just round people up for behaving the way the system expects them to behave. that is, when you live in a deeply stratified, hierarchical system you cannot be surprised when people treat each other poorly based on where they exist in the hierarchy or thinking that law enforcement is going to somehow abolish the hierarchy. it's only by abolishing the hierarchical system that produces the behaviour that we can expect the behaviour to cease.
again, that's not an argument for the legalization of rape. but the approach that laci (and the right, in general) is taking reduces to treating a corollary of a problem rather than treating the problem itself.
it's not that they get away with it, it's that they expect they'll get away with it because they're taught they'll get away with it. so, perhaps they shouldn't be taught that they'll get away with it?
i'm not saying it's a good idea to shrug it off. i'm pointing out that it's well established that enforcement is not an effective prevention tactic, you need to get at root causes.
you look pretty frustrated. that's all the approach you're using is going to get you.
it's a losing battle; change your tactic.
in the broader scope of things, laci is a product of the failure of neo-liberalism. she's using very right-wing language, and i'm not entirely sure she really realizes it. it's just what she learned at school. i went through this somewhere else. all this stuff about victim rights is a product of the neo-liberal era. but, like everything else from the neo-liberal era, it's run into incredible problems in trying to reverse the decades of research that came before it on ideological rather than empirical grounds.
it's unfortunate to wake up in your late 20s or early 30s and realize everything you've been taught is bullshit. but, it's going to have to happen - and not just for laci, but for a wide cross-section of people her age that come face to face with it.
there may have been a sentence or two about weber and root cause analyses hidden in the back of your textbooks. your profs may have ridiculed it. but i'd really suggest picking up on that.
Samuel
I really don't think you can teach them "they won't get away with it" unless you actually provide a punishment for the act so they have real consequences for the act, and this wont happen unless there is a huge reform of the current system which protects and allows rapists to live free.
deathtokoalas
there's that "thinking" thing again. wrong way to try and interpret the world.
we're not rational creatures. we don't respond to incentives, and we don't respond to force. that is, enforcement has no effect on recidivism rates. it may seem logical to think that if you get "tough on crime" then the criminals will stop, but this has been proven wrong repeatedly. instead, what you get are smarter criminals. it's the most expensive, least effective approach. that's why conservatives love it so much - big contracts, no results.
yet, because the right-wing dominates the educational institutions nowadays and has since the rise of the "new right" in the thatcher-reagan neo-liberal revolution, what's being taught in schools nowadays is the kind of anti-science fundamentalist christianity that laci is articulating - without realizing it. it was presented to her as sociology, so she thinks that's what she's talking about.
but it isn't. it's christianity repackaged as science in this twisted orwellian manner. the sociological equivalent of "intelligent design".
the root of this starts when kids are young - it's the way they're raised. we need to get at the very root of the family unit, not just round people up for behaving the way the system expects them to behave. that is, when you live in a deeply stratified, hierarchical system you cannot be surprised when people treat each other poorly based on where they exist in the hierarchy or thinking that law enforcement is going to somehow abolish the hierarchy. it's only by abolishing the hierarchical system that produces the behaviour that we can expect the behaviour to cease.
again, that's not an argument for the legalization of rape. but the approach that laci (and the right, in general) is taking reduces to treating a corollary of a problem rather than treating the problem itself.
at
03:14
Location:
Windsor, ON, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)