Gee, I was right. Browsing with JS not enabled, in Opera 12, was a much smoother and much more enjoyable experience

Gee, I was right. Browsing with JS not enabled, in Opera 12, was a much smoother and much more enjoyable experience.

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.imagesync.org/b/thread/721687542
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

...

opera still exists? holy shit

Are we talking about something other than the active threadlist thing? Because if not you literally might be browsing with a toaster.

...

Nigga is this s or gfur?

I'm talking about this page.
archive.imagesync.org/b/thread/721687542

It can be anything your heart desires, but it's probably sfur.

s/fur but with huge cocks

...

Literally a toaster. Consider spending more than $50 on your next computer.

...

that new 64$ Pentium is suppose to be a great for the price, better than i3s

He doesn't have the money because he's a NEET and refuses to get a job because "muh capitalism". He's that one edgy anarchist that you see every now and then.

...

It's not a toaster, dude.
AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 965 Processor, 3400 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
And 8 GB memory.

...

...

Even a Pentium is too much.

Is he also a time traveler from the 80s?

Maybe stop installing so much malware then, I dunno.

...

...

Possibly.

...

lol "slurt"

...

Why do you hate freedom?
N'aww, javascript is just a slowdown. You probably experience it too without noticing it. I notice when browser slowdown occurs relatively easily, since I have no plugins or extensions already slowing down my browser.

I don't hate freedom. I dislike anarchism just as much as I dislike capitalism.

So you want socialism?

...

Javascript is a slowdown in the same sense that a GUI is a slowdown over terminal.

Source: I write JS (in part) for a living.

COCKS?!

flash is the worst

...

Not exactly, no. In a perfect society where there is no corruption, I believe that National Socialism would be best. But that would never happen, so I settle for Libertarian Socialism. I like freedom, but there is such a thing as too much or too little. The people must have a say in things, but too much is just as bad as too little.

...

...

flash is satan

thank you adobe

...

you mean Macromedia?

common economic protocol and microclaves

...

...

I've seen okay uses of JS before, it's just more rare to find than uses of JS that visibly slow down the tab or browser for me.
I only know HTML, no CSS or JS.
It's also closed-source, so I can almost never use it anyway.
I see. Why do you think freedom is not an inherently good thing: that there is a thing as too much freedom?

Because the people don't always know what's best.

...

Then why should they be alive rather then dead?

...

Again, sounds like a you problem. Because at least 90% of the web today uses JS.
>I only know HTML, no CSS or JS.
"I know a markup language, that's like programming". Classic. Now I think you're just messing with me.

That's an entirely different argument. Some people are born to lead, and others are born to follow. That's just how it is. If we're talking about their value and contribution to society, those who refuse to work for their community in one way or another inherently have less value than those who do. But again, that's something else entirely.

myself, i just get out of the way

He's not messing with you. This guy has said multiple times that he wants to die, but doesn't want to kill himself. He literally tried to tell me to kill myself instead of taking meds. He has some problems.

...

that's a false dichotomy

one doesn't necessarily have to lead brazenly
or choose to follow slavishly

Tiem for pokebox thread??

Classic.

...

>??
dammit, pulled of my finger 1sec too late.

...

...

...

>Again, sounds like a you problem. Because at least 90% of the web today uses JS.
And 90% of web pages have severe problems.
>"I know a markup language, that's like programming". Classic. Now I think you're just messing with me.
Woah dude, I don't even know HTML that well, and I know it's not programming.
I program in C. Used to program in Java. Also know some shell scripting and awk.
It's not an entirely different argument. When, in a married couple, one is in a coma and doesn't know what's best, the other member of the marriage can pull the plug.
Why shouldn't euthanasia be applied to people who "don't always know what's best"?
>doesn't want to kill himself
That's a lie. It's rude to lie to people.

True. There are those who fall outside of that. However, a true "lone wolf" is few and far between because it's an inherent trait to work with others. The need to be a part of society is innate within the human psyche, and very, very few people can truly live without some kind of aid. Take currency for example. We need currency to survive in this society. That doesn't mean that we can't literally live without it, but living off the grid as it were, is technically illegal as far as I know, and the vast majority of people need income. Those who can live without some sort of aid are very rare. To sum it up, my point is that most people need to be either a leader or a follower. They can be a "lone wolf", but very few are true to that in this day and age.

Then kill yourself.

As soon as I have a foolproof, 100% guaranteed way, I will. I want to die, I just don't want to fail when I try, so I succeed on the first time.

Stab yourself in the heart or slice open your aorta. You'll bleed out in seconds.

individual freedom is necessarily tempered by communal strictures

Life is a series of compromises between the individual ego and a given societies' demands of it's citizens

you never know if you don't try

...

...

you can stop eating
or breathing

...

>people don't always know what's best
>let's instill NATIONAL SOCIALISM, a hardcore populist ideology

...

That's true. But I would like to see how the people actually lead themselves. I still think it's very unlikely than anything would ever get done.

...

True. But I'll try with something as close as possible to certainty.

National Socialism, not Nazism. National Socialism, at its core, means to support the people by means of leaders giving to the followers, and in turn the followers work for the leaders.

Of course, this is assuming that the leaders are 100% correct in their leadership, and lead without corruption. And that would never happen because power itself corrupts people. That's why I'm not a true National Socialist, but a Libertarian Socialist.

How do you have libertarian socialism without people in power?

...

people lead themselves every day
every small/rural/backwoods community effectively practices self-governance
The powers of an overarching "federal" governments largely deal with killing people in elaborately contrived ways or trading money/goods over long distances

This has been the traditional draw of the United Sates, and why there have been so many utopian/alternative governmental experiments. cults, religious governance groups (mormons, etc.)

No one really gives a shit how you live your day to day life as long as you cough up to the tax man now and then - really this is mostly for city folk, as they're the most likely to be shot/bombed

Artist?

>The powers of an overarching "federal" governments largely deal with killing people in elaborately contrived ways
That feel.

The people decide what's best for each other. The community comes together, forms ideas, and works towards those ideas coming to fruition. The popular vote decides what stays and what goes rather than an individual. Yet that by itself can also lead to incorrect leadership. That's where the chosen individuals come into play. Both National Socialism and Libertarian Socialism have their pros and cons as with any form of society. That's why I generally stay neutral in politics.

...

...

Purplepardus

The majority often makes terrible decisions. And what exactly do you think the pros are for National Socialism, a system of government that completely relies on terror and complete obedience.

>popular vote
Since it supports a state, how is is libertarian, then?
All my images are too big to post under this 2 MB limit. I have almost nothing anymore.

...

...

awwww yisss
it's that time
that time when I get to get high
420blazeityoeverydayfaggotduuuude

...

Yep. Sadly, the federal government has enough power to control what even small societies do. And the rich capitalists control the federal government. I do wonder how society would be without currency. The cities I mean. I feel that they would all collapse, and only the small societies would remain as they had little to do with the cities.

Precisely. But the pros are that the leaders lead, and the followers follow. And National Socialism isn't about "terror and complete obedience". Again, it's about working back and forth between the leaders and the followers, the former being elected by the latter by means of a popular vote. It's really a republic system of government. At least that's what I wish for. But anyway, what you're thinking of is Authoritarianism, not NatSoc.

Because the people are the ones who decide it? Of all the questions you could have asked, that is the most easily answered.

...

I envy the chick in that pic.
Looks like way more fun than the work I'm doing right now.

>I do wonder how society would be without currency. The cities I mean.
They'd continue manufacturing and designing products, but things would be designed to last. There would be no planned obsolescence, and products would be designed to be more easily repaired by the users, so that users don't have to throw away their products and (((upgrade)))

Don't people supposedly decide things today?

National Socialists only follow the legal process as far as it suits them. Once they have enough power they dismantle the system and replace it with one that allows no dissent towards the leader. There's no back and forth involved, look up how people like Hitler and Saddam Hussein kept their own governments in check by playing different factions out against each other, meaning the ultimate decision and power always remained at the top. It's always a government of a small inner circle making most decisions and locking out any opposition opinions.