not only that but deciding their fate for them, period. that's like the definition of control, lol.

the kind of thread that gets a subreddit muted

lmao so adventurous and your cat so picky

do you even words, bro

You'd probably have to purchase in batches with certain details removed, no? But you could probably narrow it down to some degree.

Anyway, you maybe could also fish for internet history via FOIA requests, certainly some of them are foolish enough to use workstations for such unsavory activities.

I guess it depends on whether their history counts as a record.

in the scenario we were discussing, torture is legal. there's nothing to go to court about.

Serial killers have lied about locations and then offed themselves

Ok. Similarly, victims of torture have honestly confessed to committing crimes and given true pieces of information. It's happened. See how that works?

Unless you'd like to also dispute that it's even possible that could happen, lol

Let me preface this by saying I believe torture should be illegal just like I believe the death penalty should be illegal. I don't think there's any system that exists which could apply it effectively without seriously compromising human rights.

It was a mistake for me to even entertain the hypotheticals, but here's one last one: let's say torture is on the table. I know it's ineffective, I'm not going to do it, but it's legal and I can. For me, I'm going to find out where Ted Bundy buried the bodies, at no cost of justice. For you, you're going to barter with a confirmed serial killer and compromise the sentencing that due process would have otherwise decided on in a plea deal.

I just want situations like these acknowledged, rather than "torture bad and also purposeless, never ever ever could produce positive results ever." It reeks of disingenuousness for the sake of condemning torture. Obviously torture should be condemned, but this makes the case weaker, imo.

Let me preface this by saying I believe torture should be illegal just like I believe the death penalty should be illegal. I don't think there's any system that exists which could apply it effectively without seriously compromising human rights.

It was a mistake for me to even entertain the hypotheticals, but here's one last one: let's say torture is on the table. I know it's ineffective, I'm not going to do it, but it's legal and I can. For me, I'm going to find out where Ted Bundy buried the bodies, at no cost of justice. For you, you're going to barter with a confirmed serial killer and compromise the sentencing that due process would have otherwise decided on in a plea deal.

I just want situations like these acknowledged, rather than "torture bad and also purposeless, never ever ever could produce positive results ever." It reeks of disingenuousness for the sake of condemning torture. Obviously torture should be condemned, but this makes the case weaker, imo.

Let me preface this by saying I believe torture should be illegal just like I believe the death penalty should be illegal. I don't think there's any system that exists which could apply it effectively without seriously compromising human rights.

It was a mistake for me to even entertain the hypotheticals, but here's one last one: let's say torture is on the table. I know it's ineffective, I'm not going to do it, but it's legal and I can. For me, I'm going to find out where Ted Bundy buried the bodies, at no cost of justice. For you, you're going to barter with a confirmed serial killer and compromise the sentencing that due process would have otherwise decided on in a plea deal.

I just want situations like these acknowledged, rather than "torture bad and also purposeless, never ever ever could produce positive results ever." It reeks of disingenuousness for the sake of condemning torture. Obviously torture should be condemned, but this makes the case weaker, imo.

more like if I've got nothing, absolutely nothing, except for an involved person. and I ask them for associates, names and torture them out of them, am I really in a worse spot than I was before? I could see that going somewhere productive. I could never use their coerced words as evidence of anything, but I could possibly use them to further my own investigation. the worst that could happen is a dead end because they didn't know/give anything.

but obviously I agree the violence isn't the best way to obtain information. obviously real torture means someone will say anything just to make it stop. but if you did know something, if you did know the information your torturer is seeking, then that information is included in the list of things you might say in order to make the torture stop. that's not the part up for debate, that's a fact. I just feel like pretending it could never be the case makes me less confident in conclusions drawn. it makes the conclusions just seem like an anti-torture agenda and not objective. (which is a noble agenda worthy of our support, obviously)

I think all the usefulness cones from the work surrounding the interrogation, but I don't see any benefit betond the ethical for leaving torture off the table. if I'm pretending to be the interrogator with no direction beyond an individual.

I gave an exact hypothetical example where that would not be the case...a lead which may be followed up on. Just a small weak example to try and take off the tunnel vision goggles.

I'm glad you piped up! I felt too fatigued to respond to the people who didn't understand my point and just read my comment as "torture can be effective though" which is ridiculous.

My issue is that there must be a difference depending on the context of the information being sought, even if small. And if the that difference isn't noted, then how can I have confidence in their conclusions?

That's exactly what I referred to in my comment, that's what makes torture just purposeless sadism. But what about information that can't be "just made up" and is verifiable? If you go in expecting your victim to make things up, wouldn't you only employ it in order to confirm or verify?

Why do none of these discussions ever make a distinction between types of information being sought? Wouldn't it matter?

Like if you're seeking information where the torture is all you got i e. a confession to committing an act, I would say torture is totally useless. But what about torture for verifiable information such as leads? What about torture to confirm information, such as when you withhold from your victim that you already know partial information?

I'm not saying torture must be reliable in these cases, but I am saying that surely there's a difference there worth noting.

Yeah and I dunno I guess I won't deny it's trashy but sometimes partying oughta be trashy. So long as you're not hurting anyone, what's the big deal?

Plus, that shot of the lady with her dog grimacing does not hit me the way I think she intended, lol. It really just screams the stereotype, "and here's me, judgmental postmodern woman judging the barbies who is absolutely no fun at parties."

like damn, you really gonna set yourself up for your critics huh

YEAAAAA

oh. funny joke

"OOOOOH THERE I GO

man we're just blowing right through naptime, huh?"

I'm with OP 100% these people are full of it

GETTEM OP WE'RE BEHIND YOU

is it really a scam if it's free? you were already playing the game and hoipoi costs nothing...

similarly, slot machines don't seem like a scam if they're free to play. just my opinion

wasn't that the position of the film? that, for some ridiculous reason, the machines used a carrier wave that was possible to be received to some degree by a human with a certain brain setup? I'm not saying it isn't ridiculous, but isn't that the plot?

it reminds me of Snow Crash. same idea of taking the brain software/wetware concept and running crazy with it. I don't dislike it, though I wouldn't mind a more sensible middle ground in good scifi.

Not only is he wearing a crop top, but he confirms for the viewer that he sees it that way.

My parts are showing!

that exposed area is indeed what he considers his analogous nudity. He's wearing a crop top with awareness.

And he fuckin rocks it.

hold the specie in your hands and ask yourself: "does it spark joy"

yeah for sure, but the rest of the team is easy to get. except nappa but I could swap him out for lots of options, he's in the leader slot.

I'm just glad LoE seems to be eating fine as always. I haven't had much trouble with fusions or any other monkey bs

I play super aggressive am liberal with the "Are you just gonna lie there or are we gonna fight" message. I do just fine.

mono pur frieza force UGF/Nappa/LL 1st form frieza. I'm not good either but I'm eating plenty of players with the new units.

Let me have a crack. Some single songs from the previous winner cover much wider muscial and themes than his album altogether.

What songs?

not much of a crack. why do you repeat and reference these "other songs" over and over but refuse to name any artists or songs?