Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

We're slow at work, and we're talking. All of the following could probably warrant their own thread, but no... I'm piling them all up, right here.


1. If you haven't heard about Ivory Wave, check it out. Man. Dangerous shit. It seems the mission of the masses for a cheap, legal high will never be accomplished. Would legalizing all drugs help stop this?

2. Is there anything wrong with a 15 year old sleeping in the same bed with a parent?

3. If we agree that someday the human race will have enough computing power at its disposal to create realistic simulations of the past, is our current world certainly a simulation?

4. If you could erase one person from this reality, either historical or current, without anyone knowing you were responsible for it, would you do it?

5. Are some Americans better off because of the slavery of their ancestors?

6. Does the work/contributions of an individual get unfairly upgraded if they die/are killed early, or spectacularly? It could be anyone. For examples: Buddy Holly, JFK, MLK, Lincoln, Lennon, Malcolm X... etc.

7. If God, Heaven, and Hell are true, could the terrorists from 9-11 be in Heaven?

8. Would a country with nuclear capability allow itself to be conquered by another country without using it?

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

The "drug war" will never be won. Just a waste of money and time. I think most substances should be legal except the truly horrible drugs (Meth, PCP, etc.).



I don't think there's anything "wrong" unless they are having secks with each other. Mostly it's just really weird/awkward



No one can be told what the Matrix is, you have to see it for yourself.



Yes. Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Also Hitler.



I don't think so, but I'm going to make a really politically incorrect argument here. In slavery, owners "bred" Africans to make sure they had the strongest/healthiest ones (take strongest female, mate her with strongest male - produce better slave children). In a sick way, this might have helped some African American Athletes today who can run faster, jump higher, and are stronger than many of their peers. Especially white people.



Oh god yes. Dying/Being Killed is a great career move. JFK was a mediocre president in my opinion...he got killed so now people say he was amazing. Heath Ledger -- really talented actor...but after he died it became ZOMG HEATH LEDGER. Same thing happened with James Dean. My mother is a huge James Dean fan, and one time I had this debate with her that he was way overrated. She basically agreed that his body of work is overrated, but she says that it was because of the "potential" that was lost. In any case, yes, death can be awesome for your career. Exhibit A:




Taking innocent lives - no way. Not in my heaven.



No.

1. Stop people from slapping together new compounds that get through loopholes in law/police and being legal or untrackable for a short time? Yes, probably. Why bother when you could do some blow. Is making all drugs legal a good idea? It could be. You'd have a whole lot less meth house explosions. And nobody is refraining from doing any drug solely because it's illegal. You're not going to see a massive increase in use because of legalization - until people start immigrating here.

2. No. I'm willing to bet a lot of poor people are forced to do this.

3. Not certainly, no. Closer to the opposite, it would be improbable.

4. No. That would piss off some women I know.

5. Yes.

6. I think they do a little bit. I think people kinda shape them to be a martyr in their minds. Tupac was a renowned rapper before he died. I think his death brings about his name more than others.

7. I don't even know how to answer this. Are we asking if christian God would let them in heaven? Probably not, but he's always been quite the prankster.

8. Nope.

Legalizing any drug curbs both usage and danger associated with use. If we as a society were to legalize and regulate all opiates, the sheep would flock to the biggest, safest product. Most heroin deaths, after all, are due to a lack of control when it comes to sterility and/or purity. Accidental heroin overdoses are usually due to a lack of information from the dealer's end in regard to the purity of the drug. Amphetamines (which is what we're comparing Ivory Wave to, no?) are the same way. Adderall is relatively safe to use because of its regulated nature. Your average street speed isn't.

To prove my point, we need to look no further than the Netherlands. Cannabis consumption, while a tourist attraction, is lower in regard to the entire population than the United States'. There's no gang violence centered around cannabis in Amsterdam, and it's safer (e.g. it's not laced) to use in general.

Not really. I mean, you could spin the story any which way, but unless something happens between the child and the parent it's acceptable. Certainly not normal, but still morally acceptable by most sane individuals.

Our current world couldn't be a simulation based on the principles of reality that we abide by. Unless people are placed into this simulation from the moment of their birth, it's not possible. While it's entirely possible that we could create a simulation of the past, it'd have to be relative to the present. While it'd be possible to simulate reality when aware of the actual present, one couldn't survive off of virtual food and water for their entire life.

Considering that I'd severely affect history by saying something predictable (e.g. Hitler, Stalin, Lenin) I'll play it safe and say Sarah Palin.

To a degree, yes. While I'm not going to say that the majority of blacks are better off relative to my situation, the African American community has been provided with more than enough opportunities since the Civil Rights Movement to be exempt from the work everyone else has to put in to be successful. There's an SAT scholarship for African Americans. I see nothing for Irish Americans.

So you could put it like this: as far as standard opportunities, some are better off than others. But success is on an individual basis. That's why about 5% more blacks drop out of high school than whites. Sure, they have opportunity on their side, but they're not educated enough to see the potential in that opportunity.
Pretty much. While they all had huge influences in their respective fields, some were better than others. Buddy Holly was pretty plain in my opinion. Other rockabilly acts at the time had more influence on the last five decades than he did. While I'm not going to argue that JFK certainly did a lot, as did MLK and Lincoln, their legacies have been blown up and commercialized over time.

The same goes for Lennon and the rest of the Beatles to an extent. Sure, they were influential, but I have no doubt in my mind that the decades that followed their breakup would have gotten on just as well without them. The same can be said for Michael Jackson, who really wasn't all that great anyway. Fucking pedophile.
It depends on one's perception of heaven. As a gnostic atheist, I don't have one. They did, and in their minds they went there. In a Christian's world view, they went to hell. But it's all personally subjective given that all they're really doing right now is living out their days as dust particles.
If we were to invade Iran right now, they wouldn't fire on us. I guarantee it. They have, at the most, three or four weapons, and that's being generous. We have a hell of a lot more than three. Sure, they could kamikaze their own cities, but their attacks would have little effect given that their only true ally is the comparatively-weak North Korea.

The high from Ivory Wave doesn't even seem worth the risks...

http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=458964

I wouldn't call this a "legal high," since it's being sold as something other than a drug/pharmaceutical in order to circumvent drug regulations. True legalization would be approving a product for consumption while regulating its content and distribution.



No, that's some sort of weird American/western civilization thing. There's still places in the world where whole families share sleeping quarters/bedding.



No.



The one person more responsible for misery and suffering (and general stupidity) than any other in history: Karl Marx.



As sad as it is to say, yes.



Yes, but with the exception of Buddy Holly and John Lennon, none of those people really fall into the category of "unfairly upgraded."



Not even according to the rules under which they're making the assumption that they'll go to heaven and be rewarded. The Koran actually has a section that explicitly outlines the rules for war, and suicide bombing doesn't qualify.


There are a lot of factors to consider in response to that question...in general, it would depend on the people being conquered. I think even in this country there'd be a serious lack of will to do so, just because of the consequences of using a weapon of that nature.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

The programmer.

PRGRMMR, disemvoweled. Oh, and the turtle? Logo? Logos, it's the word.

It's all a simulation in someone's eyes.

Legalizing all drugs won't stop the dangerous shit when people keep doing crack.



Nope.



Simulation implies you know it's not real. If you can't disconnect, it ceases to be a simulation.



No. I can't pretend to know what would happen in that person's absence. It's impossible to weigh all the variables. I also don't think myself personally capable of deleting someone for any reason. I would no more erase Hitler than I would erase a 14-year-old orphan dying of tuberculosis in the 19th century that absolutely no one would miss and history would overlook, because they're still people.



The ones who took on whitey slavemaster names like Johnson or Cooper might be better off, if for no other reason than someone reading their name off a list will think they're white. Beyond that, no.



Not always. It certainly happens, but I'd contend that the achievements of MLK, Lennon, and Lincoln, at the very least, were significant enough before they died. I mean shit, Lennon was more popular than Jesus while he was alive.



If God exists and those guys are in Heaven, is it really Heaven?



Have we progressed beyond pyrrhic victories? I'd say it depends on which country we're referring to, but all the ones which presently have nuclear capability are just belligerent enough to use them or they'd have dismantled their stockpiles.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

if i erased someone so thoroughly they never even existed, if i succeeded, I wouldn't have known who they were or had any reason to erase them, so that they would still exist.

Then, if they still existed, or existed again, I would have to erase them from existence in accordance with this forum topic

but then if i erased someone so thoroughly they never even existed, if i succeeded, I wouldn't have known who they were or had any reason to erase them, so that they would still exist.

Then, if they still existed, or existed again, I would have to erase them from existence in accordance with this forum topic

but then if i erased someone so thoroughly they never even existed, if i succeeded, I wouldn't have known who they were or had any reason to erase them, so that they would still exist.

Then, if they still existed, or existed again, I would have to erase them from existence in accordance with this forum topic

but then if i erased someone so thoroughly they never even existed, if i succeeded, I wouldn't have known who they were or had any reason to erase them, so that they would still exist.

Then, if they still existed, or existed again, I would have to erase them from existence in accordance with this forum topic

but then if i erased someone so thoroughly they never even existed, if i succeeded, I wouldn't have known who they were or had any reason to erase them, so that they would still exist.

Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming

No.

Drugs are illegal for good reason. There is no free lunch. People can and should seek fulfillment in other ways.



Yes. Emotional independence is part of maturity for both parent and child.



The precept is specious therefore the question is meaningless.

It's not possible to know the past in detail both because humans do not and never will know their past at any point because the past is continually being destroyed by the onward march of time, and also because human perceptions of their past are inevitably shaped by their perceptions of the present.

From a strictly technical perspective, no human recreation or simulation of the world at large will ever be a substitute for the genuine article. Better approximations may be made but if we can send men to the moon yet Larry Ellison has to hit on female employees rather than just building the $10 billion dollar woman, or at least a reasonably faithful rendition of the functional parts, I refuse to believe it's possible to recreate an entire world.



Meaningless question.

For those I wish to harm, oblivion is not enough.
For those things I wish to set right, erasing one man would accomplish nothing.



Loaded question and also meaningless.

People are the products of the worlds that created them.
The truest answer I can give is no, because slavery is inherently culturally, socially, and biologically degrading.



Another loaded question. And also meaningless.

You can't separate the death from what got the person to that point. It's no coincidence that movers and shakers have a way of winding up dead. If you are offending no one, you are getting nothing done. This is also why I view the painstakingly genteel with great disdain.



Meaningless question.

They are not real. Answering this question by way of suspension of disbelief and judging them according to their own philosophy, no, because their actions were selfish, cowardly and in bad faith. It's no different than asking such questions about Pat Robertson or Oliver North.



Meaningless question.

The motivations for having nuclear weapons and the mentality of those who control them are not uniform. Decision making processes are never collective and the answer would ultimately depend on the motivation of those who are part of the control system and chain of command. Obviously this was the premise of the movies Wargames amd Dr Strangelove. It is never so simple as one man, or the collective consciousness of the nation, having its finger on a big red button.

There are also real-life case studies such as the Soviet sub-commander who vetoed the launching of submarine missiles during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Luftwaffe officer who received a telegram from Hitler to fire V-2s at Paris after it was capped by the Allies and chucked it in the wastebin, or the fall of Saddam, and on the other hand, the French destroying anything of value as they left Libya, or spiteful American behavior towards Castro and his people that changed absolutely nothing. There is no hard-and-fast answer.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

All the questions were meaningless. That's part of the point of the exercise. They're meant to make you think and share your opinions.

Those were some long-winded responses to "meaningless questions."

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

I'm really torn on this. I can certainly see the benefits of legalizing drugs from the standpoint of consistency of product, lower cost, and availability, but even if drugs were comparatively inexpensive, would people continue to look for something cheaper?



I think it is odd, but not wrong.



If we establish that the creation of these simulations will be, then they are, and we must be. The simulated would not realize they are simulations.



There have been some pretty terrible people. Still, I would be afraid of how differently the dominoes might fall if they didn't exist. So, I don't think I would do it.



If I think of it in terms of them living in the current conditions in Africa, I'd say that many current Americans are better off because of the slavery their ancestors endured. Of course, not all slaves were black, or from Africa. I wonder how differently we'd answer if the question was: Are some Americans better off because of the sacrifices of their ancestors? Would probably be a unanimous "yes".



I think this is absolutely true. Their stories, and by extension their works, get over-analyzed and re-told because of how they died.



If their true motivation was service to God, I could see it. While most of us would say these guys were brainwashed zealots, how many of us would be willing to do what they did and give up everything for our beliefs?



I say no. If you're going to lose anyway, you'll go for it on fourth down.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

I don't know that people would look for "something cheaper." It's been my experience that when people pick up a vice, they're very loyal to their drug of choice. While there will always be a cost/benefit trade-off, most people that smoke will have a preferred brand of cigarettes, even if they settle for an off-brand due to price...and even then, they're smoking cigarettes, not cigars or pipes. Heavy drinkers usually stick to the same type of drink, be it beer, wine, or something made with liquor. Unless alcoholism is involved (and sometimes even then), a beer drinker isn't going to grab a bottle of whiskey to get their fix. Government studies (which have been buried since they didn't show the desired result, thank you ONDCP) have shown that marijuana is not a "gateway drug," and that those that prefer marijuana stick with marijuana. Heroin addicts stick with heroin, crack-heads stick with crack. The buzz/high they get and are addicted/loyal to isn't the same from different/cheaper products.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

The poison is in the dose, and there will always be addicts and idiots. You can't do anything about that.

For the rest of us, I for one enjoy the occasional joint, blotter of LSD or line of blow and would like to do so without fear of legal repercussion.