Victoria - The Place To Be Fined

[radiojake]

It's a saying that has been creeping into the Melbournian vernicular; a fine-happy police state where tickets for cycling infringements seems to be more expensive than motor vehicle offenses in other states - but it has now stepped up to a new low

Watch your potty mouth around Victorian Cops - (plus they are more likely to shoot you than an officer from another Australian state)


http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/big-f ... 1fctb.html

[SirSebstar]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

[radiojake]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

[kabuki.mono]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Even though in Holland and Germany A.C.A.B is widely used. More so that the rest of mainland Europe (at least to my knowledge) It is rather over the top getting sent to prison for it (!?)
Are people with 88's on their t-shirt going to be trailed under Nuremberg? Where does it end

Love the T-shirt though

[InkL0sed]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

[saxitoxin]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

[MeDeFe]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Even though in Holland and Germany A.C.A.B is widely used. More so that the rest of mainland Europe (at least to my knowledge)

I hadn't even heard of it before, and I live here.

It is rather over the top getting sent to prison for it (!?)
Are people with 88's on their t-shirt going to be trailed under Nuremberg? Where does it end

Love the T-shirt though

With this I agree.

And 1312 6 19 16 20 10 6 2 20

[InkL0sed]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

I don't see it. But that's OK! You can still do it.

[saxitoxin]

Jake, teach ink a lesson ...

... HE'LL NEVER FORGET!

[radiojake]

thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

Facebook is a legal (and completely voluntary) means of collaborating data on any given individual who has a profile. Obviously, the more information one puts up, the worse. Firstly, if you ever happen to become a suspect for any given crime, the first place the police will go is to look for your online profile. Secondly, there are even apps (from what I am aware) that ask people to 'check in' and 'out' of various events, restaurants and places. When you arrive you 'check in' on your stupid ipad app, so people can instantaneously know where you are. This is silly for a number of reasons.

Plus, there is the whole aspect of 'liking' which invariably results in company research data to try to find the latest trends in consumer habits - Some people may not have a problem with this, but I certainly don't want to be a part of it.

[InkL0sed]

thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

Facebook is a legal (and completely voluntary) means of collaborating data on any given individual who has a profile. Obviously, the more information one puts up, the worse. Firstly, if you ever happen to become a suspect for any given crime, the first place the police will go is to look for your online profile. Secondly, there are even apps (from what I am aware) that ask people to 'check in' and 'out' of various events, restaurants and places. When you arrive you 'check in' on your stupid ipad app, so people can instantaneously know where you are. This is silly for a number of reasons.

Plus, there is the whole aspect of 'liking' which invariably results in company research data to try to find the latest trends in consumer habits - Some people may not have a problem with this, but I certainly don't want to be a part of it.

I don't see how this amounts to "thought police". Your first point is really just a complaint about how it makes it harder for stupid people to commit crimes; your second is a complaint about how its easier for companies to market. I can sort of see how, as a communist (correct me if I'm wrong, but you are, right?), you'd find that distasteful, but in the end, I think you're just the one being silly.

[radiojake]

I don't see how this amounts to "thought police". Your first point is really just a complaint about how it makes it harder for stupid people to commit crimes; your second is a complaint about how its easier for companies to market. I can sort of see how, as a communist (correct me if I'm wrong, but you are, right?), you'd find that distasteful, but in the end, I think you're just the one being silly.

Facebook is still very new, and in all aspects, still in its infancy - In a decade I am sure even you will notice its 'thought police' shape.

As for being a communist, well - I have many problems with capitalism, as I'm sure you all know. If you were working from a binary opposite logic, I can see why you would call me a communist. I don't think I am a communist; I think a lot of what Marx wrote is completely relevant for today, but I don't think that inherently makes me a communist.

I don't have a label for myself - I think the most imperative change we need for our economy is to find a way so it is not based on perpetual growth - A steady based economy - That values quality and longevity over profits. We shouldn't be able to buy shit consumer goods that break in 6 months or have inbuilt obsoletism. If I buy a TV, it should be able to last 50 years, not 5.

Our economy is based on waste - I don't think the communist economies faired all that better in terms of wastage, so I would also have a problem with those models -

[saxitoxin]

thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Whoever has a facebook profile has already voluntered themselves to the thought police

Please explain

Facebook is a legal (and completely voluntary) means of collaborating data on any given individual who has a profile. Obviously, the more information one puts up, the worse. Firstly, if you ever happen to become a suspect for any given crime, the first place the police will go is to look for your online profile. Secondly, there are even apps (from what I am aware) that ask people to 'check in' and 'out' of various events, restaurants and places. When you arrive you 'check in' on your stupid ipad app, so people can instantaneously know where you are. This is silly for a number of reasons.

Plus, there is the whole aspect of 'liking' which invariably results in company research data to try to find the latest trends in consumer habits - Some people may not have a problem with this, but I certainly don't want to be a part of it.

When Saxi says "teach him a lesson" I mean "sodomize him with a broomstick" not launch into some big explanation, Poindexter.

[saxitoxin]

Facebook is a favourite tool of secret police forces around the world. The fact that it is not (though I'd question whether this is actually a fact) yet being abused in the U.S. today does not mean it won't tomorrow.

At any other point in history a request to provide a list of associates, political affiliation, religious preferences and detailed whereabouts, all of which would be meticulously cataloged in a permanent fashion, would be met by horror. That the U.S. capitalist marketing machine has been able to get people to voluntarily do what citizens throughout history have tried to resist is a testament to the totality of the consolidated corporation-state.

In the early '90's a U.S. private company, Inslaw, marketed a database software to governments around the world including Canada, Israel, etc. We now know that this software had a backdoor built-in that the U.S. has used to seamlessly access the most secret files of sovereign nations around the world - including its supposed allies. The only publicly revealed Canadian intelligence operation against the U.S. in the last two decades was over Inslaw.

They did that, are doing that, there is nothing that doesn't have a secondary (primary) purpose. Everything traces its genesis to the U.S. miltiary and secret police forces, from the Internet to Facebook to even benign tools of supposed subversion like onion routing.

[BigBallinStalin]

Facebook is a favourite tool of secret police forces around the world. The fact that it is not (though I'd question whether this is actually a fact) yet being abused in the U.S. today does not mean it won't tomorrow.

At any other point in history a request to provide a list of associates, political affiliation, religious preferences and detailed whereabouts, all of which would be meticulously cataloged in a permanent fashion, would be met by horror. That the U.S. capitalist marketing machine has been able to get people to voluntarily do what citizens throughout history have tried to resist is a testament to the totality of the consolidated corporation-state.

In the early '90's a U.S. private company, Inslaw, marketed a database software to governments around the world including Canada, Israel, etc. We now know that this software had a backdoor built-in that the U.S. has used to seamlessly access the most secret files of sovereign nations around the world - including its supposed allies. The only publicly revealed Canadian intelligence operation against the U.S. in the last two decades was over Inslaw.

They did that, are doing that, there is nothing that doesn't have a secondary (primary) purpose. Everything traces its genesis to the U.S. miltiary and secret police forces, from the Internet to Facebook to even benign tools of supposed subversion like onion routing.

Would you like to be Facebook friends, saxitoxin?

You don't have be so coy.

[BigBallinStalin]

@radiojake

Would you really want a TV that lasts 50 years?


You would have to be satisfied with technology that is 50 years old... How can one have relatively high quality over such a long period of time?


Then, you might say something along the lines of "50 years = hyperbole"

So, what should that length of time be? Should markets determine that, or should central planning? Or what extend in between those two should be used to determine what is the best length of time (i.e. mostly central planning).

[SirSebstar]

@radiojake

Would you really want a TV that lasts 50 years?


You would have to be satisfied with technology that is 50 years old... How can one have relatively high quality over such a long period of time?


Then, you might say something along the lines of "50 years = hyperbole"

So, what should that length of time be? Should markets determine that, or should central planning? Or what extend in between those two should be used to determine what is the best length of time (i.e. mostly central planning).

I must be missing a point, however there are tv shows that run over 50 years, so why not the device itself. I hope my house stands for longer then 50 years too...
perspective..

[BigBallinStalin]

@radiojake

Would you really want a TV that lasts 50 years?


You would have to be satisfied with technology that is 50 years old... How can one have relatively high quality over such a long period of time?


Then, you might say something along the lines of "50 years = hyperbole"

So, what should that length of time be? Should markets determine that, or should central planning? Or what extend in between those two should be used to determine what is the best length of time (i.e. mostly central planning).

I must be missing a point, however there are tv shows that run over 50 years, so why not the device itself. I hope my house stands for longer then 50 years too...
perspective..

What's so great about paying the much higher price to purchase a TV that would last 50 years?

A 50 year old TV would have to use 50 year old technology. Do you really want a TV that uses 50 year old technology?

Think of it this way: why aren't 1950s American television sets in high demand?


______________________________________


Houses? Sure, of course.

This what I'm referring to:

As for being a communist, well - I have many problems with capitalism, as I'm sure you all know. If you were working from a binary opposite logic, I can see why you would call me a communist. I don't think I am a communist; I think a lot of what Marx wrote is completely relevant for today, but I don't think that inherently makes me a communist.

I don't have a label for myself - I think the most imperative change we need for our economy is to find a way so it is not based on perpetual growth - A steady based economy - That values quality and longevity over profits. We shouldn't be able to buy shit consumer goods that break in 6 months or have inbuilt obsoletism. If I buy a TV, it should be able to last 50 years, not 5.

Our economy is based on waste - I don't think the communist economies faired all that better in terms of wastage, so I would also have a problem with those models -

[InkL0sed]

I don't know how old my TV is, but it's definitely over 5 years old (and it still functions quite well).

[kabuki.mono]

Truly a fine place to be....
In the Netherlands a person got set to jail for having a T-shirt with 1312 on it. It was viewed by the judge to be a clear sign of dissing the poliece. After all (??) everybody!! knows 1312 stands for ACAB that stands for All Cops Are Bastards, and its illigal to badmouth police officers...
thoughtpolice is next, mark nightstrike's words..

Even though in Holland and Germany A.C.A.B is widely used. More so that the rest of mainland Europe (at least to my knowledge)

I hadn't even heard of it before, and I live here.

Maybe it's a more used within a punk/anti authority group. At least I picked up the word while in Germany. They where German punks and they had A.C.A.B tattooed on their knuckles

[radiojake]

@radiojake

Would you really want a TV that lasts 50 years?


You would have to be satisfied with technology that is 50 years old... How can one have relatively high quality over such a long period of time?


Then, you might say something along the lines of "50 years = hyperbole"

So, what should that length of time be? Should markets determine that, or should central planning? Or what extend in between those two should be used to determine what is the best length of time (i.e. mostly central planning).

I think inbuilt obsoletism and the wastage produced from this is the biggest environmental problem that we face (more so than climate change)

I am sure it would be possible to produce a TV (or other electronic good) that has the capabilities to be upgraded as technology advances, instead of having to purchase an entirely new TV and throw the old one out into landfill -

When I rocked up to work last week, there were new phones at all the stations. Nine in the doctor's rooms, four on the front desk, and another three in various places around the clinic. 16 brand new phones when there was NOTHING wrong with the old phones - Now those old 16 phones are in land fill even though they were functioning completely fine. This is the problem with our system.

[InkL0sed]

I am sure it would be possible to produce a TV (or other electronic good) that has the capabilities to be upgraded as technology advances, instead of having to purchase an entirely new TV and throw the old one out into landfill -

Well, I'm not entirely sure what kinds of technological advancements are involved with TV's, but I'm pretty sure it's usually hardware-oriented, so I don't think that's very possible. It is probably possible to simply replace parts (if the TV's are modular), but that would require more expertise from the consumer.

[radiojake]

I am sure it would be possible to produce a TV (or other electronic good) that has the capabilities to be upgraded as technology advances, instead of having to purchase an entirely new TV and throw the old one out into landfill -

Well, I'm not entirely sure what kinds of technological advancements are involved with TV's, but I'm pretty sure it's usually hardware-oriented, so I don't think that's very possible. It is probably possible to simply replace parts (if the TV's are modular), but that would require more expertise from the consumer.

I'm no expert on TVs either, I was just using it as an example. Everyone lauds technological advances as if it will be our saviour, however if this perpetuates waste, then it will be our ultimate undoing - I'm just calling for a more efficient system that doesn't encourage constant 'upgrading' of goods -

[saxitoxin]

To be sure Jake is correct, however, it's not just about making technology expandable, it's about the technology itself.

For the current materialist economy (materialist intentionally as capitalism and socialism are both vectors on the materialist continuum) to operate, there must be ongoing production; but for production to continue there needs to be a steady rate of consumption. This requires transforming wants into needs. The technological differences between a 2001 mobile phone and a 2005 mobile phone were minor, but these differences are hyper-inflated to grandiose proportions by the media-state's marketing machine. Both the government and the corporation complex need people to believe these wants are needs. This transformation of perspective has a devolutionary impact on human psychology.

Human needs can be met by 3 hours of work per day. Humans work 8 hours per day to achieve the wants that the marketing machine has convinced them are needs. The time the humans would otherwise use to become aware and combat the police state ruling over them is, instead, spent in labor to purchase new mobile phones, televisions and fleshlights. Politicians have a vested, personal interest in keeping unemployment rates low.

[BigBallinStalin]

To be sure Jake is correct, however, it's not just about making technology expandable, it's about the technology itself.

For the current materialist economy (materialist intentionally as capitalism and socialism are both vectors on the materialist continuum) to operate, there must be ongoing production; but for production to continue there needs to be a steady rate of consumption. This requires transforming wants into needs. The technological differences between a 2001 mobile phone and a 2005 mobile phone were minor, but these differences are hyper-inflated to grandiose proportions by the media-state's marketing machine. Both the government and the corporation complex need people to believe these wants are needs. This transformation of perspective has a devolutionary impact on human psychology.

Human needs can be met by 3 hours of work per day. Humans work 8 hours per day to achieve the wants that the marketing machine has convinced them are needs. The time the humans would otherwise use to become aware and combat the police state ruling over them is, instead, spent in labor to purchase new mobile phones, televisions and fleshlights. Politicians have a vested, personal interest in keeping unemployment rates low.

Well, that's one way of looking at it.