DEAR WIRED.COM COMMENTORS,YOUR COMMENTS FUCKING SUCK. ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID. AM I SPEAKING IN SMALL ENOUGH SENTENCES FOR YOU. CAN YOU READ THIS WITHOUT CAPS LOCK. try this. oh, you can't. SORRY I MEAN OH, YOU CAN'T. ergh, i give up already.
-Case 01-
Ok lets start with todays one. It's an article about electric fish. You know, eels & stuff. Utterly fascinating. Anyway, the comments: You probably won't believe me so i took a screenshot:
..What the hell?
"Hi guys, just in case for some reason you can't read the last 4 comments, thought i'd just let you know 100hz is a low buzz and not a high whine, even though obviously, such descriptions are entirely relative."
I can't decide if these guys have some mental condition which makes them assume Wired can only read their comments; or if they all had some extreme derren-brown-subliminal-brainwash moment and just mindlessly re-iterated the first thing they saw in their peripheral vision, instead of whatever they meant to put. Any thoughts?
-Case 02-
Ok this is one that comes up every fucking time an article contains the word evolution in it. This article is on Darwin. Yeh, can you believe a science mag did an article evolution? Oh yeh! They so went there. Wired have - and i would normally disagree with censorship, but here i think it is totally justified- removed the bulk of troll comments. Never the less, odd gems remain:
Posted by: Kyle | 02/11/09 | 9:32 pm
may i suggest you leave this kinds [sic] of topics alone. bad move wired. i am a huge fan but not with this stuff.
Posted by: Anonymous | 02/11/09 | 6:54 pm
False TeachingPosted by: Anonymous | 02/11/09 | 8:21 pm“— and there are lots of big, unanswered questions”. That’s why it’s a therory, [sic] not a law.Posted by: Eternal | 02/12/09 | 12:21 am200 years later and 64% of the American populace still realizes that intelligent design makes more sense than evolution. Only 26% of the population is so close-minded they won’t look at the evidence that doesn’t support their theory.Posted by: Scott | 02/12/09 | 3:24 am
Science gone mad. Using scientific method, noone could be serious that evolution makes sense. Find a new theory and stop trying to be clever.
What.. the hell? What kind of magazine did these people imagine they were reading? Its got "WIRED SCIENCE" written across the top in full capitals, bright green ones at that. Were these people expecting some kind of creationist sermon? Ok so even you honestly believe your religion cannot co exist with evolution, that's not an excuse to be a moron.. right?
-Case 03-
Here's another one, that, being a SCIENCE magazine, wired cannot help but occasionally report on. It's about the environment, and how some scientists have been able to peg down environmental thresholds before human civilisation is threatened. Note, it is a SCIENCE magazine, reporting on what some scientists say they have found.
Ah, the good old 'We-armchair-readers-know-better-than-trained-scientists' brigade.. it wouldn't be a wired post without them. Again: what did they think they were reading? "Oh hey, look at this mag! they've got an article on earth science! What are they, some kind of SCIENCE MAGAZINE!?" I think you're getting my point by now.
-Case 04-
Finally, although by no means the last example- jeez, we've barely scratched the surface here- a potentially ethical article. The article basically says some scientists have found that torture is a flawed method of interrogation because stress affects recall negatively, as well as affecting memory function itself in prolonged cases. Note that the article doesn't really touch on any ethical or moral ideas about torture.
Not that wired commentors would have noticed.
Oh, i could go on and on. Take for example, how the comments on this and this article completely disagree about wired's ulterior agenda for Apple. It's just bizarre. Where the hell do these readers come from? Maybe they should do an article about that.
-Case 03-
Here's another one, that, being a SCIENCE magazine, wired cannot help but occasionally report on. It's about the environment, and how some scientists have been able to peg down environmental thresholds before human civilisation is threatened. Note, it is a SCIENCE magazine, reporting on what some scientists say they have found.
Ah, the good old 'We-armchair-readers-know-better-than-trained-scientists' brigade.. it wouldn't be a wired post without them. Again: what did they think they were reading? "Oh hey, look at this mag! they've got an article on earth science! What are they, some kind of SCIENCE MAGAZINE!?" I think you're getting my point by now.
-Case 04-
Finally, although by no means the last example- jeez, we've barely scratched the surface here- a potentially ethical article. The article basically says some scientists have found that torture is a flawed method of interrogation because stress affects recall negatively, as well as affecting memory function itself in prolonged cases. Note that the article doesn't really touch on any ethical or moral ideas about torture.
Not that wired commentors would have noticed.
For those of you who don't speak moron, I offer a translation: "dddduuugh, cant read."Posted by: PJW11 | 09/21/09 | 1:33 pmSo torture is bad. Alrighty then, we have the moral high ground. At least until it gets blown up from underneath us. It’s like being a pacifist yet expecting a police officer to defend you if you’re being burglarized, you can’t demand security from groups willing to torture you and then pick and choose how you will be defended.
Posted by: PR3DA7OR1AL | 09/21/09 | 2:59 pmAgain: Probably cant read. Yes, torture breaks people down to an emotional level. Congratulations. Now go back and read the article again and observe what it has to say about that emotional level interfering with memory reliability. You are looking for information remember.. not emotions.. remember? Oh, maybe you just didn't care. I get the feeling your interest in torture has absolutely nothing to do with military intelligence. So why comment on the article? Just get yourself on down to your local BDSM club!
Waterboarding, sleep deprivation, stress positions (such as seperating one from many) and the exploitation of phobias are all used TO BREAK A PERSON DOWN TO AN EMOTIONAL LEVEL.
Oh, i could go on and on. Take for example, how the comments on this and this article completely disagree about wired's ulterior agenda for Apple. It's just bizarre. Where the hell do these readers come from? Maybe they should do an article about that.
No comments:
Post a Comment