Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
The Onion

At 0/00/00 00:00 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: Everything written

You are a bigot in every sense of the word.

I don't know what you mean by "core" of the internet, but, Reddit is probably your best bet for finding anything that's interesting. It's a massive site with >100 million monthly users posting links to a link aggregator and then voting up/down and posting comments which help each other understand those links.

Reddit, a user and algorithm based page listing with medium length article summaries. 100+ million.
Compare with Google, an algorithm based page listing with automatically generated summaries. 1+ billion.
And Wikipedia, an alphabetical page listing of user edited encyclopedia content linking outside sources. 450+ million.

Need to find something? Google it, read the Wikipedia about it, and find a Subreddit about it.

At 5/25/14 08:32 PM, MrPercie wrote: I agree MRA is dumb and wrong, but people can still be convinced by them and lead to believe a lot of stuff if thats all they hear.

Do you even know what MRA is? Have you done any research into gender inequality? Or are you talking out of your ass?

Here's an example of a men's rights movement PSA that's in the spotlight this week.

ITT:

People don't know the first thing about Men's Rights Activists and Feminists, use pseudopsych to generalize both.

You realize this kid wasn't an MRA, right? He made posts about his fantasy of releasing a virus to kill every man except for himself, making him the only possible choice. That's almost identical to some extremist within Feminism who advocate for turning male disposability into a near-complete genocide.

At 5/21/14 04:17 AM, TheKlown wrote: Actually it's the complete opposite, and I hope you're being sarcastic otherwise you're the idiot not Nuclearinfected. South Park creators have been quoted saying "We don't like Conservatives, but we HATE Liberals". South Park has mocked both liberals and conservatives, and it's usually liberals that get butt-hurt when they get mocked such as Sean Penn, Tom Cruise, and many other celebrities. There's websites online where Liberals are complaining about South Park making fun of them. They're upset that South Park has made fun of Al Gore and Global Warming.

Not really. Try again.

Of course they're upset that South Park takes nothing seriously on a platform that some really idiotic slackers use to inform their entire worldview. Global Warming is a serious topic to people who take life seriously.

These guys have a moral obligation to use their entertainment platform to improve the world. They should be held responsible when they make the mistake of misinforming a very impressionable public.

And for your other post,

Here's that letter from Sean Penn to Trey Parker and Matt Stone. He's absolutely right.

To Trey Parker and Matt Stone,

I remember a cordial hello when you guys were beginning to be famous guys around Hollywood at some party. I remember several times getting a few giggles out of your humor. I remember not being bothered as you traded on my name among others to appear witty, above it all, and likeable to your crowd. I never mind being of service, in satire and silliness.

I do mind when anybody who doesn't have a child, doesn't have a child at war, or isn't or won't be in harm's way themselves, is encouraging that there's "no shame in not voting" "if you don't know what you're talking about" (Mr. Stone) without mentioning the shame of not knowing what your talking about, and encouraging people to know. You guys are talented young guys but alas, primarily young guys. It's all well to joke about me or whomever you choose. Not so well, to encourage irresponsibility that will ultimately lead to the disembowelment, mutilation, exploitation, and death of innocent people throughout the world. The vote matters to them. No one's ignorance, indcluding a couple of hip cross-dressers, is an excuse.

All best, and a sincere f**k you,

Sean Penn

P.S. Take this as a personal invitation from me to you (you can ask Dennis Miller along for the ride as well) to escort you on a trip, which I took last Christmas. We'll fly to Amman, Jordan and I'll ride with you in a (?) 12 hours through the Sunni Triangle into Fallujah and Baghdad and I'll show you around. When we return, make all the fun you want.

At 5/20/14 10:01 PM, NuclearInfected wrote: So you hate on a fanbase because they're not the childish liberals you're used to from childish liberal shows?

Are you really so stupid that you don't know South Park is an extremely liberal show which mocks conservatives while beating their shitty ideas into the dirt?

That is fucking awesome!

At 5/16/14 09:53 PM, Voltage wrote: alright, that's my opinion, not fact (just stating)
At 5/16/14 10:43 PM, Voltage wrote: science dickbag

You're entitled to your opinion. You're given the right to exercise free speech and to share the opinions you hold in your free society. You're reminded of this during school: you're allowed to be loud and wrong.

That doesn't make you worth listening to, however. And it makes realists like me righteously angry to see people going around the internet spouting obscenely ignorant hippie misinformation that they came up with the last time they took a bong rip, feeling entitled to do so because "it's just my opinion, dude!"

Fix your stupid opinion or you're going to get kicked to the curb for the rest of your life.

At 5/16/14 10:10 PM, Voltage wrote: good luck topping a .gov reference

No ice cream for you. It doesn't count as a link if you don't understand it.

Here's a Dot Gov link:
NASA - Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agree

The cool thing about that one is that it's not a single author blog (your Iceland Glacier blog is), it cites not only 3 sources representing the research of publishing groups, but 11 different research societies staffed by PhDs representing tens of thousands of scientists. Oh, and a composed statement from 18 scientific associations. All of those scientists conbined each have the ability to publish to 97% of the world's *.gov and *.edu sites.

Good luck trying to convince any sober individual with an IQ above 90 that the "[…]earth gets to decide when it's going to become a greenhouse asshole[…]".

At 5/16/14 10:02 PM, Voltage wrote: Okay, "profanity"

The ice glaciers were meant to fucking melt, and humans do not outsource enough heat in general to actually cause more than a fractional amount of melting to ice glaciers compared to active volcanoes in and under the water

Fuck off, come back with a real question for me

What's your scientific literacy? Second grade? Here you go lil buddy.

I'll bring you out for ice cream if you manage to read the entire thing!

At 5/16/14 09:53 PM, Voltage wrote: The earth was built to be an oven for itself, i think it's laughable that glaciers will "collapse" - like heat doesn't fucking affect the inside of a giant ice cube unless the human flame has been sleeping in the middle of the glaciers for thousands of years.

alright, that's my opinion, not fact (just stating)

Holy shit. You're like a brand new species of drug addled retard.

Please tell us (uh, State) more about how the scientists are wrong about "human flames" or whatever.

Your threads are retarded because you suck at getting aggressive. You don't back when people start to tar and feather you. They started to beat on some twisted and misconstrued version of your OP and you just sat there dumbfounded.

At 5/9/14 10:44 PM, stevenman36 wrote: Tell you what, when this starts affecting you and those you know on a personal level (IE people forcing you to pray, get outcasted if you don't, and overall makes you feel unwanted and insignificant and you have proof of this all) then we can talk.

Listen up, you. Good people do their best to hold the United States to a higher moral standard. That includes keeping a separation of church and state that doesn't allow the government to favor one religion over the others.

Shit like this is a direct affront to the rights of religious minorities in the United States simply because it is an erosion of the basis of free government which the Union was founded upon.

And if you are too blind to pay attention to the socipolitical climate you live in and need an excuse to rail against Christian activists trying to assert their dominance over other religions in public settings which by the declared basis of our union should be secular, look no further. maybe you are completely ignorant. But the rest of us are well aware that positions of power are being created and destroyed in order to create religious control within governments.

At 5/9/14 03:06 PM, temp6116 wrote:

At 5/9/14 03:03 PM, Cordyceps wrote: Case study: never stick your dick in crazy. I hope we can all learn from Sanjay's mistakes.

Oh my God.... shame on you...

Jesus Christ, lady. You can't expect much from a website that selects Goofballs, Fake Indians, and pretentious college freshmen for community management.

At 5/8/14 02:57 PM, freaksy101 wrote: Don't forget conservative.

In Australia, where the OP lives, and the political climate he's referring to, "Liberal" is the party which resembles the American conservative movements ideologically.

At 5/2/14 03:27 PM, Dean wrote: "Sharing", yea I'm the delusional one.

"Brainwashed" might be a better word for it. You believe yourself to be 100% morally right, don't you? Or as you emphasized it, you believe peer-to-peer digital media sharers are 100% morally wrong.

People are obviously aware they're taking something without paying for it, but don't like being reminded that what they're doing is what I'd consider stealing.

It's maddening when people use so little thought when they try to vilify your character using laws that haven't kept up with the times. As a black man who lived in America for most of my life, I also don't like to be reminded that a black man living in America "should be" worth 3/5 of a person in accordance with old law. Fancy that.

No I don't. I was making a comparison. Digital media is a product. Someone made it, that person made a deal with a distributor, distributor sells the product, customers buy the product. Taking the product without paying isn't how it works. I'd argue that's comparable to theft. You're taking something that someone is selling without paying for it. I'd be pretty shocked if distributors sold a copy and were quite happy for people to duplicate it and dish it out to everyone. If that were the case, why would any more than one copy ever be sold?

That's precisely the way capitalism works. That single copy of the product is sold to the distributer. That distributer's job is to sell the product at the value calculated by the market and absorb the loss if the product doesn't yield a profit. The value calculated by the market for old music, movies, games, and books was barely above zero for people paying ISPs for access to the internet. Why? Because those things are inherently easy to manufacture and distribute using modern technology. The industries started declining and did what all dying companies do. They pulled all the stops and started suing everybody for infringing on their intellectual property rights. They went on an international campaign to convince open minded consumers that 'piracy' was evil and get laws changed in their favor.

Let's use film as an example.

What we've actually seen here is that new technology in the late 19th century made it possible for live performances to be captured using photography, video, and eventually sound. The era of traveling performance art came to a close and was replaced with widely distributed duplicate performances. That industry grew over a century into a giant media network which sold access to those performances on a distribution platform which could be produced for pennies and sold for 1,000%-30,000% markup. Their most successful workers became jet setting, globe trotting elite capable of putting in a few months of hard work every couple of years and then living luxuriously on the generated wealth for decades.

And now that era of lavishness may be coming to an end. Entertainers have to adapt, and there are many ways to do that. They can solicit donations in exchange for their continued services. They can charge lower prices for access to digital media online, making it easier for a greater number of consumers to access their products. They can provide the products for free by bundling them with advertisements for tangible goods. Or they can approach their audience before making the product, ask them to pay for the production costs, and then go forward when they have enough money.

I see people making the counter argument that it's not theft, it's sharing. Again, I disagree with that. It's not like someone bought a copy of something and is passing it around his friends. Someone bought something and other people are making duplicates of it, resulting in them taking their own copy. That's not sharing, that's taking a product without paying. Just because you're taking it from someone who paid for it doesn't make your copy any more legit.

Let's just say that only one person can use media at a time, ignoring the fact that most media is meant to be shared by groups of friends. Or the fact that traditional products can be divided up by several people and each of those parts can be used individually.

When you possess a physical copy of some form of media, do you use it constantly? No, of course not. You use it for a few hours of a day, and it sits on a shelf for most of the day. Even if you wake up at 5 am and play until midnight, the media goes unused as you sleep. So for every day that you possess it, that single copy of the media accumulates anywhere from 5 hours to 24 hours of shelf time.

I'm glad you brought this up. If I borrow a game from my friend, that copy of the game isn't duplicated. We don't both end up with copies. If my friend shares a game with me, he loses access to that game until I give it back to him. If my friend buys some form of digital media and "shares" it with me, he doesn't lose access to his copy. He doesn't loan me his copy. He duplicates his copy and then we both have a copy. An illegitimate copy has been spawned. I'd argue that that isn't sharing at all, to me that's counterfeiting.

What would happen if you loaned your single copy of the game to other gamers during that shelf time?

Your friend provides a free service for collecting games during their shelf hours and sharing them with other players without a copy. But since every customer only plays the game for 1 hour a day, your friend can move that game between two dozen people in 24 timezones without any of them even realizing that the game has been missing from the shelf.

Your morally superior friend hasn't spawned duplicates of the game. No two people are accessing it at the same time. Nobody is missing their copy during the hour they want to play. But the distributer only earns 1/24th of the profit they would have seen if all 24 players had bought their own copy.

Now, your friend does so well at this advanced form of sharing that he expands his free service. Any time you pause a game, the DVD moves to another gamer. If you leave the room to grab a drink, the game leaves your city and lands in the disc tray of the next gamer in the train. When you return, you get someone else's disc instantly. Your friend becomes so efficient at skimming hours and transferring DVDs between a large pool of gamers that the entire English speaking world is sharing just a thousand copies of a game which would have otherwise sold millions.

This effect is actually possible using peer-to-peer networks and digital copies of media. Without duplicating the game, you can juggle the same unique file around the internet during every millisecond of downtime. You can make the same mechanism you use when you're sharing a DVD with your friend into a service which doesn't deviate from your moral values, doesn't spawn an illegitimate or counterfeit copy, yet doesn't help to increase the profit of the manufacturer.

That is just one small example of how the old world's laws simply can not accurately describe the evolution of digital media. But I think you get my point.

At 5/0/14 00:00 PM, Dean wrote: those of you who steal digital media are so easily able to accept it as the norm. So tell me, pirates of Newgrounds, how do you justify your regular thefts?
Part of me was interested in seeing how many people lie to themselves about their reason for illegally downloading media

You think that sharing intangible media is theft. There's your problem. You're delusional.

If anything, if you have to find some bizarre old world analogy to make this act illegal, then it's forgery to share media that's been uploaded by a customer and theft of services when that media has been uploaded by an attorney or DRM entrapment firm which is tracking IP addresses.

The next time you borrow a video game from one of your friends, be sure to send the government tax office a check for a small percentage of the "calculated revenue loss" value of that game and twice that to whoever owns the rights to distribute it. Don't send and money to the game designers, programmers, audio, and digital artists who actually made the game; they don't earn from distribution.

Fuselage of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370 drifted all the way to the Atlantic?

A Monteray County police officer went to Air Force captain and Naval Post Graduate School student Nicolas Aquino's home, demanding to see identification, and then tackled him to the ground. Now his career is in jeopardy and he has been charged with Resisting Arrest.

http://www.ksbw.com/news/carmel-air-force-captain-arrested-after-burglary-call-at-his-home/25486372

http://www.reddit.com
Look I copy pasted from Reddit XD

fuck you Tox

At 4/25/14 02:12 PM, Scintillating wrote: It seems like police are hired on the basis of having bad judgement and not being able to keep calm and collected. I know that some manage to get hired despite being level headed, but by god, they're trying their darndest!

Not all cops are idiots. But the job definitely doesn't attract the sharpest and most upstanding sorts. America sees hundreds of these stories every week.

Plainclothes cops shoot pizza delivery driver. Names of officers withheld but victims criminal history is not
Wisconsin passes first law in the nation aimed at preventing police from clearing themselves in officer involved deaths by requiring outside investigation.
Stay classy Philadelphia! Police who terrorized bodega owners will not face any criminal charges or even job action.
North Carolina Man Detained by Berserk Deputy Records Revealing Conversation with Sheriff
If you won’t suspend a police officer charged with murder what would you ever suspend one for?
Federal court finds upright driving, acne suspicious.
County sheriff deputy charged with rape, aggravated sodomy of underage girl
Deputy fired for misusing driver's license database
Fired Dallas PD officer indicted in December shooting of an unarmed man.
Police Dashcam Captures Texas Woman Being Shot by Officer
Man who says Dallas police fired at him 14 times without cause sues the city, officers in federal court
Iowa Cops Seize Almost $50,000 from a Couple, Didn’t Charge Them With A Crime: "...in Iowa, law enforcement can keep 100 percent of the proceeds from forfeited property, creating an immense incentive to police for profit."

At 4/24/14 02:41 PM, NewgroundsMike wrote: Not everyone is selfish enough to start a war. I certainly am not.

Then you can never be a leader.

There can be different ways to eliminate threats; killing people over it should, if anything, be the absolute last resort, and even then it isn't justifiable.

But it is, yet you're still complaining.

There we have it. What did the people they were sharing homes with ever do to you? Now you are basically on the same level as them.

They fed and sheltered international terrorists.

That's what infuriates me the most about this. Not so much that he died, but the people that just go ahead and say, "Fine. So?" That guy was murdered. That's the worst crime there is. You can't just treat it as if it were nothing.

Be realistic. He doesn't deserve the same respect as the people we're protecting from war mongering third world farmers. He doesnt even deserve the respect we give to our criminls. He wasn't there to solve world hunger or cure cancer. He's dead because he went there to consort with the sworn enemy of a powerful nation. Men who would kill any Kufr if they had an excuse.

At 4/24/14 02:07 PM, NewgroundsMike wrote:

At 4/24/14 01:15 PM, Profanity wrote: You are so naïve. Like a crying baby fresh out of the womb, the light of the real world hurts your eyes and you are scared to keep them open for too long.

How anyone can see anything good in war is beyond me. There are different ways to help the economy, some of which don't involve killing people. No sane person can argue that "war is the answer".

Choices aren't divided between "good" and "bad", or right and wrong. Not even " sane" and "insane". Everyone sees himself as the good guy and does what he can do to survive and protect his own future. War can be seen as just the elimination of a threat.

Both the Taliban and Al Qaeda declared themselves as our enemies, so we destroyed them and the people they were sharing homes with.

Journalists understand the concept of war, and the danger of their jobs. They take those risks because it excites them to be on the opposite end of the gun barrel. This Australian took a risk and lost.

At 4/24/14 01:12 PM, NewgroundsMike wrote:

At 4/23/14 07:56 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Human civilization at present times wouldn't survive without the economy, but that's besides the point however.

Still, the economy is nothing to kill over. Especially since there are alternatives.

You are so naïve. Like a crying baby fresh out of the womb, the light of the real world hurts your eyes and you are scared to keep them open for too long.

Also a reminder:

Never take advice from Xenomit. You'll just end up straining the wrong muscles doing what he said to do.

Switch mouse hands.

At 4/23/14 05:09 PM, Gobblemeister wrote: I wish Kid was here

Don't you ever. Ever. Mention Kid again.

At 4/22/14 02:05 PM, NewgroundsMike wrote: 1. War in itself is bad.

Wars are good for the economy, meaning they're inherently good.

2. You kind of started it, they're just fighting back.

America didn't go back in time and ask the Ottoman Empire to take over the Mediterranean. We didn't find Osama Bin Laden as a teenager and convince him to become a radical Jihadist, and then convince him to declare war on us.

Not that it matters. Even if we had: war is about the stronger nation dominating the weaker nation to ensure its own survival.

3. I don't care how, but if possible, avoid killing them, because killing them eliminates the chance to put them on a proper trial.

They're not American citizens, they're criminals who declared War on America. Why should they be given a fair trial, costing American lives to hunt them down and extradite them, when our own judicial system is flawed and they're likely to go free for lack of evidence?

How to play:

Visit a link aggregator site, copy/paste some interesting links, and instead of making a new thread: post them in this one! Be sure to add a single line of text about your single link.

Great link aggregator sites:
Google
Digg
Buzzfeed
Upworthy
StumbleUpon
Reddit

At 4/20/14 08:26 PM, Ragnarokia wrote: I think threads can be art, because they can be argued to be able to exist in multiple places they don't fit in.

Stuff a sock in it. Threads don't magically need to be posted in Video Games because they have the word Video Gane in them. That forum's for getting ridoif the mundane shitposting about new releases that used to clog up General 24/7.

Same goes for Politics. It's just there to keep people from spamming news stories and sharing theîr parents' "genius wisdom" every ducking election season.

I swear, you backseat mods get dumber every fucking year,