I suppose I worded it poorly
Obviously the original comic was trying to be profound, but I was worried that that was going to be the actual purpose of the post, which the second part obviously changed
That's ok mate, we sell them around the world now, so people can beat wildlife to death. The kind of animals that try to tear out your throat will think twice when they see you whip out the ol three-hose.
whats up with all the ******* rare peeps on fj from the ******* chan
wtf would we call those 4chan coder fags, to bash on them? yeah they can make cool peep pics and run linuxfag and talk about it all over the chan with all their secret onion links to CP, i just wish we could bash on them the way they can call us normies
I've been on FJ since like 2008.
4chan isn't very different from FJ, and a lot of users actually go to both sites.
4chan doesn't have any more coders or Tor users than Reddit or FJ, it doesn't have more pedos either. 4chan might have been a site for edgy hackers and pedos back in 2007 but it got popular and now it's no different than any other site.
Pretty much everything you wrote is wrong, are you sure you're being serious?
wait wait, it sounds like you know a thing or two about whats here and there and i would like to speak w/you ...............haxx, cod3, tor.. i kneeed to become more knowledgeable about how to defend my com through my own programs and what not, more saf on tor etc. im dead serious my html is getting consistent im 20yr old college student
The chance of someone trying to hack you is really small, what you should be careful of is just malware.
So get plugins like httpseverywhere, adblockplus, disconnect, etc.
And programs like malwarebytes.
For Tor, it's mostly safe, not much you can do to improve it.
It would be easier for you to google "tor guide" or something than for me to help you.
ok, but what about the performance of my laptop, i want to delete a lot of files that came on the computer that i have no need of, mostly lenovo apps, i dont want to delete the wrong files, and on top of that i feel like i do have malware that is not being detected, i have norton for a firewall and i dont even know if it can pick u the malware, and i havent deleted anything becuase i wanted to find somone who knows what there doing when hey want to get there comp running at optimum performance. i feel like i have maleware constantly running in the background, please help
there a guy on youtube who braggs about how well protected he is against stuff on tor and he downloads files like crazy... what makes him so protected
? his name is SomeOrdinaryGamers heres a link www.youtube.com/channel/UCtMVHI3AJD4Qk4hcbZnI9ZQ
why have you mentioned malware byte so much? where im at, i have never herd of it ? would it be good protection downloading files off tor ?
there a guy on youtube who braggs about how well protected he is against stuff on tor and he downloads files like crazy... what makes him so protected
? his name is SomeOrdinaryGamers heres a link www.youtube.com/channel/UCtMVHI3AJD4Qk4hcbZnI9ZQ
Malwarebytes is a bit new..
I didn't find the video you talked about, but there isn't much you can do to secure Tor, other than blocking javascript (which will make some websites not work correctly)
Just avoid posting images online taken with a camera, avoid giving out personal information, don't use the same username everywhere, don't use easy passwords, don't use the same password for everything, etc.
How the hell is this getting red thumbs? God damn I hate funnyjunk community sometimes. Take a joke, take a joke all the way in, you know you like it faggot, why else are you here?
** wtf would we call those 4chan coder fags, to bash on them? yeah they can make cool peep pics and run linuxfag and talk about it all over the chan with all their secret onion links to CP, i just wish we could bash on them the way they can call us normies **
This brings up a point though.
All these charities for donating in Africa have been going on for decades,and the situation in Africa is ******* shameful.
Akon spent his own money to get somewhere near 600 million people electricity and is working on clean water.
I mean Africa has been getting a lot better.
There was a reporter who back in like the early 2000's couldnt go anywhere in Africa without being shot at. There was almost no cellphone reception and barely any roads were paved. That same reporter recently went back on the same path 10 years later. This time they were not shot at, had cellphone reception. and almost all roads were paved.
Overall health has been increasing too. Infant mortality rates have been falling steeply.
I'm pretty sure this was the article: www.economist.com/news/special-report/21572377-african-lives-have-already-greatly-improved-over-past-decade-says-oliver-august
There is still a lot more to be done but Africa is very slowly getting there.
Granted you would think with all the money being poured into it it via charities it would be a much better place by now.
Arms dealers in the middle east
Corrupt weapons manufacturers in The US,Israel,and Russia
The charities (if they're legit) would probably hire ex veterans as armed guards, they have a valuable skill set, the pay would be a tiny bit better than the armed forces,and they do something productive.
Foreign aid usually goes straight to warlords and politicians who use the money to buy military equipment like helicopters and fighter jets. I think somewhere around 20% of the money actually goes towards actual aid, but those supplies are usually snatched up by criminals and/or militias.
You can see where the money is going to from private charities and they usually track their success/failure because they have to be open about it. A few of them have horrible track records, but there are a good number of charities that are actually making progress. You don't get that with Government policy, which I would argue is the real issue there.
Absolutely right. To be fair the scammer guy should have taken out like $20 from the jar and set it aside and then get in line with the rest of the money.
Do you not know how a charity works? Some are corrupt but any charity that is actually making a difference only actually spends a minority of it's funds on aid for people. The vast majority of a charities funds go toward advertisements in order to bring in more donations that before.
Would you rather get 90% of 1000 donations or 5% of 1000000? It's all about getting as many people to donate as possible.
That is literally within the definition of a Ponzi scheme. cironline.org/americasworstcharities
Charity has been reduced to nothing but money grubbing by greedy assholes who care more about helping themselves than other people.
Not to mention all of the charity scandals uncovered in recent years.
It's not right.
That why all the bigs ones ceos bring in ******* millions a year with retarded benefits
The ceo of red cross in sweden brings in i think 10000000 kr a year, and has all her expenses paid for her, free car, free house, free food and shopping, free all expenses paid vacation for her and her family 2 week long
>All the big ones
>Proceeds to give one example out of a sample size of thousands
Such an informative statement my friend! We certainly should never donate to any charity ever because they're so corrupt! If only there was a way to research the charities that do the most good with the money they receive. Not that it matters anyways because they're all corrupt, right?
*Proceeds to give AN example
Youre basically saying that if i dont state all the ones with assholes in them and why theyre assholes theres no point
Check it out yourself anon
You would rather millions starve than some highly educated professional take a 2 week vacation? You realize how small a portion of the Red Cross's donations go to her right?
You hate a CEO more than you want to help people is your issue.
Honestly yeah, **** those corrupt pieces of **** , if im gonna donate i check up which ones i donate to first
And even if it is a small amount, its the fact that the leader of a ******* charity is profiteering of their suffering
well if i give a $20 to a homeless guy, I've given money to help the homeless, instead of going thru the middle man who would take a significant cut out of that $20
He's still right though, even if you're giving to a charity organization, the amount that gets spent on actual help depends greatly on who you're giving it to. Water.org is a good one I've heard.
Just do your own research.
Personally, it's a shame when people give away huge chunks of their income to braindead parasites that promise you you're doing the right thing, but really they just squander it on their own salaries and more ways to collect money. But that's taxes for you.
Well last time when a woman came door to door asking for money it was for actual cause and I gave her 5€. It was for getting help dogs for elder ppl. ( my money was really tight at the moment it wasn't even end of the month and only had like 20€ to use for food)
Charity's a bit different than giving money to homeless. Charity would be a fund organized by a third party.
Although even if you give 20$ to a homeless man, you have no guarantee that will actually help that person. More often than not they're homeless due to alcoholism and/or drug abuse, and the funds will find their way into that, rather than actually getting back on their feet.
I dunno about more often than not. But I dunno, I try to avoid cynicism. Besides, I'll take the chance; I'd rather end up giving the money to a person that didn't need it than not give to one that did by assuming they're fake and/or will waste it.
I suppose it differs from country to country. In Norway, where I come from, there are literally no beggars who will spend the money to better themselves. Alcoholics and drug abusers will go on about that life, gypsies are part of a mafia and the money gets kicked up on the organized crime ladder, and the rest of beggars disappeared after we eased up on the welfare system. In the US it could be different, but even there they have some sort of system to keep the legitimate down-on-their-luck people safe from begging.
Do what you want with money, just be wary of gypsies or other typical groups of people. They typically tend to be organized criminals, so the money may not fund personal alcohol abuse, but could fund illegal industry, which endangers society as a whole.
I've lived in Norway my entire life. And first off, there are plenty of homeless people who use most of the money they get from begging to buy food, or better clothes so they are more likely to be able to get a job. Im not saying the majority does this, but they exist. It's generally very little organized crime in Norway.
I assume you live in a hick village. The real Norway is urban, and here we get the **** homeless people. The homeless who use the money for real stuff tend to crash at their parents's or friends's places, or get support from NAV. Illegals, drug abusers and criminals tend to squander it.
Of course there are exceptions, but they don't become the rule. And you don't really know much about homeless people unless you've been one, or studied their behavior. Just because you live within the borders doesn't give you conclusive results.
I live in a medium size city. I was born in oslo, and lived there til i was 10. You shouldnt base your arguments on assumptions. And the majority of Norway consists of "hick villages" The population in Oslo is roughly 650 000, and Norways population is 5 million. I dont know much about homeless people? You're making assumptions again. Even i haven't been homeless or have a degree in homeless people 101, you have no clue if i dont have any information, or if i have a lot of information. I never said the majority of homeless people use money to better themselves, i even specified that the majority doesn't. Im not sure what you're trying to say with your arguments.
4.1 million live in urban areas, 1 million in rural. So no, no majority living in hick villages. Oslo isn't the only city in Norway. Homeless people 101 is a made up class, unless you're talking about Comparative studies of poverty and work force politics, which is a minimal part of Sociology.
I made these assumptions because I seemed to have weighed the part of your: "(...)there are plenty of homeless people who use most of the money(...)" more than the next segment. Which could be a mistake, but I fail to see your argument if you're just going to disagree and then agree. My point in arguing is that they won't spend the money to get back on their feet, as getting better clothing and buying food is a long shot to get a job. NAV would be able to hook you up with something, but that is irrelevant as it's a free service that cares little for your background other than analysis of which jobs you could apply for.
As for organized crime, there is very much of it. It just doesn't make the news because it's non-violent. The drug industry and prostitution smuggling was largely done by gypsies, funded with the illegal industry itself along with the begging. Crackdown on the illegal activity and the lack of begging funds turned the gypsies away, and thus the industry suffered. You could walk up Karl Johan and see dealers and prostitutes lined up, now they're all gone.
My point being, beggars are rarely what they pretend to be, especially here in Norway. I suppose it's a matter of not trusting strangers, and especially those who made the mistakes to make it to the streets.
Urban areas are defined as areas with high population density. So that depends what you consider urban. In my head, it's cities like Oslo, Trondheim and Bergen. Homeless people 101, is infact a made up class, yes. Glad you were able to pick that up. My argument was just that you falsely represented how Norway is.
" literally no beggars who will spend the money to better themselves."
You also write in a manner that makes it seem like Norway is filled with mafia and organized crime. Which obviusly is not the case at all. If there was a lot of organized crime, it would have a noticable impact for normal people. Can you name any mafias?
Google "Norway urban population". It's not a difficult thing to do.
Maybe it comes off like that, but then again, that's not what I mean. We have few beggars overall, to the point where you could actually count them. An article from 2011 states that we have roughly 100 gypsies (now gone) and 15 drug abusers. That gives us a grand total of 15 people in the entire Oslo area, when discounting the gypsies and the 15 drug abusers remain constant.
Thus, even if 100% of all homeless people were mafia, it still wouldn't mean much. As far as mafias are named, we have a few ones with clear hierarchical buildups like the Young Guns and the A- and B-gang, but most of them are people from different countries. Like the African League and the Balkan Group (I took the liberty to name these, seeing as they aren't officially named albeit very organized) organizing the drug and prostitution industry. Which is mostly why the Karl Johan dealers and prostitutes came from these areas. Little is known about them, but they handle production, and distribution. The gypsies handled logistics, so now I don't know how they smuggle the stuff in, or if they even do at all. Haven't seen anything in Oslo in a while.
So yeah, we have organized crime. Not any official stuff like the Sinaloa-cartel or the Gambino-family, but it still very much exists.
That's my point. Im not saying there's no organized crime. But there is generally little of it in Norway compared to other countries. And most of it are foreigners who last here for a couple of years. The B and A gangs are mostly a joke. They do lowtime crime, and end up getting caught.
Like I said, little crime. Used to be the vast majority of beggars in Norway funded organized crime, but then again these were very few and therefore the crime didn't get rampant. Crime in Norway is mostly peaceful, and very small. The matter at hand here is whether or not the beggars are benefactors of organized crime, and they used to be to a very large degree. The crime size doesn't reflect much of that action simply because we had few beggars in the first place. If 10% of a 1000 people are connected to an organized crime web, they make up a much larger part than 100% of 50.
It's not like i have to be that careful with my money. As a delivery driver, change piles up in my care fast, so every so often, I toss a couple dollars their way in coins I wasn't using anyway
Like I said, it's your money. If they want to mess up their own lives, that's their choice. I'm just saying certain people do bad stuff with the cash. If the practice is deemed pointless, they will stop.
We lost a ******** of gypsies that way after we found out about the mafia operation. People stopped giving to them, so they left the country. And a large piece of the drug and prostitution market disappeared with them.
Yo assholes lets just agree that it's different for different people
The Red Cross does a good job of getting people who would OTHERWISE NOT DONATE ANY MONEY to donate, but since you're more aware you can make more informed decisions for where to put your money. Instead of whining with the rest of us autistic faggots how about you spend your energy telling other people which charities need more attention rather than just making blanket statements about how all large corporations are evil you ******* hippie.
Yes it does, Salvation Army gives around 90 cents per dollar donated and excepts food/clothing/toys as well. Not every place is gonna screw over the people they claim to help.
A 5 figure salary can be as small as $10,000. That's well below Middle Class living conditions. People deserve to be paid, but just because their non profit organizations doesn't mean they have to be homeless. 5 figure isn't that bad in the slightest.
i guess he meant monthly
The bitch who is the ceo of the red cross in sweden gets around 1,2 million dollar a year, including free house, free car, free expenses and 2 weeks vacation for her and her family where the red cross foots their bills
This is actually pretty accurate, most charities are set up to benefit those who own the charity. For example the cancer council ******** , where only 2% donated actually ends up being used
That statement does nothing, a smarter compiler would just delete it. Another example is ";", yeah just a semicolon with nothing in front of it. It's syntextually valid, but useless.
You know, misusing charity funds is actually a thing, and it is more common than we would like to believe...
Not to mention, people like that actually exist, taking advantage of someone else´s goodwill to forward their own agenda while smiling gleefully, without feeling a shred of guilt.
>Donate to charity
>90% of my money goes to organization, mostly to the supervising staff and CEO
>The remaining money is used to buy expired food
>Owner of food company friend of charity CEO, so pay premium for spoiled food
>Food shipped to backwaters of Oogabooga
>Upon arrival is immediatly ceized by local warlord who uses it or sells it to local people to fun his war effort
>All my money does is feed CEO fatcats and keep warlords in bussiness, while i'm poor student trying to scrape by
>mfw people critize me for not being more charitable
There's actually a website dedicated to rating the efficiency of charities and the percentage of the dollar that actually goes toward the cause. www.charitynavigator.org/