Re: virus: Tabacco mind virus

Tony Hindle (
Wed, 23 Jul 1997 01:44:49 +0100

>Its not the vibes Tony ... its the oppression. Once the guards are in
>place you must have a fire ring, it must be at least 10.16 cm high, the
>flames can't be higher then 60.96 cm, the fuel must be a hardwood with an
>avg diameter of 15.24 cm etc. etc.. Once govt. authority is in place it
>goes out of its way to propagate/perpetuate itself.

Yeah, I cant make my mind up which is best, authorised camping
where you know you are safe from criminals or illegal camping where you
know you are safe from the law.
>> You've missed the point again.
>> I only care when I have to share the costs of the risks that you take.
>> Climb all the mountains you want as long as my tax dollars don't get
>>on your inevitable rescue.

I use this argument against tabacco. What a global waste of
human rescources it is and we all pay our share of that cost.
I say hit the people who are screaming
" climb this mountian, its completely safe."

> If you engage in an activity that has a 1 in 100 chance of killing you
><Mercenary in Somalia?>

The entire of the tabacco industry is a waste of time. You have
been duped by subtle arguments about freedom of choice and legal
genicide into defending something you have been programed to defend.
I only hope you are millionaires because of tabacco and not just
mindless automata.

>How do I benefit from you taking these pathetic risks?

Becuase without risks nothing new is learned.
>>Nate's reply:
>>Frankly I would rather be ruled by an unelected conglomeration bent on
>>manipulating demand then the elected shills who currently subjugate me.
>> Economic boycotts seem more effective then voting.
> This is a new angle on me. Please more info, I am listening.

and you did.

I am not sur your poarticalar slant on what is going on here is
the easiest that adequately explains things.
I suggest that a "memetic atmosphetre" affects how the votes
will go and that any particular candidate is merely a local fluctuation
on this.
Nonetheless we are now trying to focus on how the system changes
itself and this is of intense interest to me (mainly bacause I
understand it very dimly).
The main thrust of my position in this thread so far has been to
call for the (moral) assasination (by ciggy victims) of the key personel
in the memetic machinery that works for spread of smoking. This is one
way I suggest as a self changing system, I cant think of any more
effective ones.

>>On the other hand, corporations have immediate democratic feedback.
> Examples include:
>1. McDonalds ...

Only until they own 51 percent of the world, then they have won
and can have us behave at their whim.

>>The reason that security was escalated at
>>Lollapalooza was not because the promoters were worried about the welfare
>>of the audience ... they were worried about torts.
>This doesnt translate yet.
>Promoters of a concert assume the responsibility for ensuring the safety of
>the guests at the concert. For some reason in America when an idiot
>cripples itself by being thrown up in a blanket that breaks at a concert
>the promoter of the concert may be found liable. Society has come up with
>this mechanism to ensure that concert promoters build the cost for safety
>into the price of admission.

Again I see this a s a method of change. If the entrance price
gets too high the safety measures must fall. If the danger gets too high
the safety measures must raise, etc.
>> Similarly, society
>>controls behavior because society must pick up the cost of the

> Explain this more please.
>Its the basis for the current Tobacco settlement in America. ~40 states
>are suing the tobacco companies to recover state funds spent on the health
>costs incurred as a consequence of smoking. Never mind that one could
>argue that these costs were already paid since the difference in risk
>between smoker's and non-smokers was made up by sales taxes on cigarettes.

I would argue that every man hour dedicated to perpetuating the
tabacco meme is a cost on society.

> Following the settlement the tobacco companies will pass the cost of the
>settlement onto consumers by raising the price of cigarettes.

And so the virus goes on. Death is the price that needs to be
passed back.

Society emerges out of behaviour control.
> What is a copraphage, you snobby cunt?
>A copraphage is an animal that survives on the feces of its betters. My
>dictionary lists two examples: Tony Hindle and Dung Beetles.

that is a necrophage, your dictionary is out of date.

>Oh now I see, you think that I am a man?
>No, I think you're a boy ... who may manufacture viable sperm. Fortunately
>your description of yourself makes me think your chances of propagating are

I love you, but you are an idiot automation. I hate your
Tony Hindle.