Care to join the rest of us in the 21st century?

Oh wait, there's this little 'religion' thing going on, eh? My bad.

According to religion, it's okay for a court to punish people by chopping body parts off, and it's okay to blow up schools for girls while indulging in your religious psychopathic crusades. It's even better yet when such religious inanity is legally permitted due to theocratic bloodthirsty loonies.

This shit isn't funny, it's fucking scary - regardless of what religion is perpetrating these crimes against humanity.

*shudder*

You would think that after getting the date of the rapture wrong over 9000 times, this idiot would learn to design a fucking webpage. Apparently not.

I wonder what he thinks of the Time Cube guy. Those two should meet...or maybe not. The internet may never recover from that certain web design FAIL.

If you haven't watched this already, you should. Way to fail at reality again, Hollywood.
"IRC. It's how hackers talk when they don't want to be overheard."

"They speak in leetspeak."

Yes, those are actual quotes from the clip. I cringed, then I LOL'ed.

We are all used to the religious kiddy-fiddlers who hide behind the mask of godliness while simultaneously being criminal pieces of scum. However, this particular theistard takes it to a whole new level, by harassing a child and encouraging other perverts to rape her.

The 45-year-old, who served as a pastor with the Church of Nazarene in Guildford until last year, used pictures from the teen's Facebook profile to create a video willing people to sexually assault her, the BC Integrated Child Exploitation Unit said.

"It's just so wrong on so many levels," Const. Rosiane Racine told CTV British Columbia.

"The video included sexually explicit scenes. As the video plays there is writing -- words of encouragement to rape a child."

Racine would not provide specifics about what was contained in the text, only saying "it's very harsh."

15 months in jail getting assraped by Bubba is too light a sentence for this fuckwit.

Crazies like the girl in the video make me ashamed of my own gender. :(

Okay, folks. I've finally sat down and watched the entire '60 Minutes' segment on OMG HAXORS CAN PWN ELECTRICAL GRIDS AND FUCK THE SHIT OUT OF A WHOLE COUNTRY BUT SOMEHOW THEY HAVEN'T DONE SO, HURR DURR "Cyber War".

A few thoughts:

1. Why do people still think that critical system control loops should be exposed to the internet, and then whine about "hackers"?
   
2. WHY ARE CRITICAL CONTROL LOOPS EXPOSED TO THE INTERNET?!! ARGH! ARGHHHHH!
   
3. If such a thing were feasible at this point and is actually as easy as claimed in that segment, someone, some organization, some country out there...or even E/b/aums...would have done it by now, don't you think?
   
4. I'm not denying that such threats are real, and that things should be done to improve security. However, such threats are often hyped up by certain parties who seek to impose draconian restrictions on the internet.
5. The Brazilian blackout was caused by soot, not hackers.
   

Before any of you start snickering, pointing, and laughing at the FAIL, I would like to direct you to the actual FAIL - which shockingly is not the segment itself - but this analysis by Nick Selby. His whole premise is that it doesn't matter - as far as the public is concerned - if the blackout was caused by soot or by hackers, as long as people get the message that security is srs biznes important.

Folks, he thinks that journalistic accuracy and basic fact-checking isn't all that important after all. On top of that, his shilling for security awareness without, well, awareness sets off my cynical alarms over the fact that whitehats stand to profit if people are more security conscious (security consciousness is a good thing!), but hell - why would a whitehat care what exactly it was that set off the hysteria security consciousness of the general public in the first place?! Why care? Why care as long as the public is semi-aware, ie. aware enough to pay for 'security', or the illusion thereof?

Of course, Nick Selby is way smarter and educated than lowly me, but lowly me is of the opinion that the public should know the truth. Not only because if the average person realized that soot, and not OMG EVIL HAXORS was the cause of the blackout, (s)he wouldn't have a nice ready-made reason to call for the blood of 'hackers'. Said person would also be more likely to think twice before (s)he is led like sheep to support the locking-down of the internet due to hysterical propaganda over 'evil hackers attacking our electrical grids!"

What Selby is advocating - basically, awareness without awareness - would sell more whitehat security products, but as far as truth is concerned, and as far as educating the general public is concerned, I have this little demotivational:

Jonathan Turley has a nice article in the Washington Post about how faith should never be used as a justification for letting child murderers get off scot-free or on greatly reduced sentences. Parents who mumble words to an imaginary sky-daddy instead of seeking medical help for their sick children are no better than parents who murder their children in cold blood, and should be legally dealt with as such.

He comments on a case in which loony vegan child murderers were IRL b&hammered but the religious murderers got off with a slap on the wrist:

The key to the use of such a defense is that it must involve belief in a divine being, not a particular lifestyle. In 2007, Jade Sanders and Lamont Thomas of Atlanta were convicted of malice murder and given life sentences for the death of their 6-week-old child. The defense attorneys cited the couple's strict vegan lifestyle to explain why they fed their newborn son a diet of soy milk and organic apple juice, though during the trial Sanders said she had also breast-fed her son, who died in an emaciated state at 6 weeks, weighing just 3 1/2 pounds. The prosecutor and court had no qualms in treating this couple's beliefs as a poor excuse for murder, calling a nutritionist and vegan expert as a witness to show that a vegan diet can be safe for an infant. The prosecutor even told the jury: "They're not vegans, they're baby-killers."

So why aren't the Christian loonies treated as such? OH WAIT RELIGION OH LAWD NOW THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE...not. If we allow the religious loons to directly harm their children by denying them access to medical care, we are no better than enablers and accomplices to murder. It is fine and dandy if a religious whackaloon chooses to remove himself from the gene pool by trusting in his imaginary sky-god, but when children are murdered at the altar of their parents' lunatic stupidity, the parents deserve no better than to be treated like the murderers they are.