Comments by "George Albany" (@Spartan322) on "Technology Connections" channel.

Its called a second for the second minutia of an hour, (or secunda pars minuta, aka second diminished part) because the first one, the minute, was already named. (from pars minuta prima) Also me using minutia here is deceptively irrelevant.
16
@stevesether Its not so much the problems of the helmet not working if you fall or hit something (it is effective at doing so) but its more the fact some jackwad felt it important to near on force you, a totally capable adult making individual decisions, to make the same exact decisions he did. Its unlikely he was even doing so for your sake, even more he likely wouldn't even understand why he'd do so. Its a similar reason for why its annoying that seat belts are law instead just another form of guidance, imagine a world where you'd be arrested and fined for not wearing a helmet? You're the only one liable to get hurt, and you have the right to judge that risk and decide for yourself.
4
@brentfisher902 I don't get why you're asking since I just made it clear by what I said that I'm an individualist, but clearly the capability for individuals to make individual decisions independent of authority and control, unregulated by power or authority, that will always be superior to anything an authority can or should do. Individuals are responsible for themselves, even if they got themselves into debt though, they are still individuals responsible for themselves, should they suffer, it is only under the prerogative of individuals that help such a person, not to force help upon them and neither should a collective decide such. No force should be necessary. And government should not ever have capability to tell you how to run your lives when no right has been infringed, that includes the right to life and business, interference in the lives of right abiding individuals is an infringement of rights.
1
@brentfisher902 communism is inherently force-based, and is only anarchic in reference to black markets, only individuals exist and only individuals can operate, a government (of force, which is the only thing which government does, it is the monopoly of force after all) needs to exist for the good of its people, but only in the ensuring of the rights of the individual for liberty's sake, as the individual is required to ensure the government does not infringe said rights. No collectivism can achieve that.
1
@brentfisher902 If this is meant to be a satire, I wouldn't be able to tell since there are a lot of people that legit believe that. If its not a joke, let me just say mankind inherently evil and sinful, and as a result has caused the scarcity that requires striving and struggling to best, leaving only those most suited at the top and those least suited at the bottom, under a righteous morality (the being Christ) those at the top would assist those at the bottom and the bottom wouldn't resent them for not doing so. But most fail this, a rich man that seeks the pleasures of life and greed can never attain this, a poor man that resents those above him as well can not attain this. Those who look to the material realm will never be satisfied.
1
Or perhaps abolish the concept of intellectual (how can you own a concept, it has no ownership and no right as property because its not property) property altogether, patents being one of them.
1