Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Internet freedoms restrained - SOPA/PIPA/OPEN/ACTA/CETA/PrECISE-related updates

<< < (48/79) > >>

IainB:
(Left blank intentionally.)

Renegade:
@Renegade: Yes, you may well be right, but the criteria are different:
-IainB (February 06, 2013, 04:02 AM)
--- End quote ---

Meh, close enough. Horse shoes & hand grenades & all. :)

Here's a good run-down (reformatted for clarity):

http://veracity83.hubpages.com/hub/The-Difference-Between-Psychopathy--Psychotic-Disorders

Psychopathy is defined as a personality disorder in which the following traits or exhibited:


* 1) Glib and superficial charm,
* 2) Grandiose exaggeration of self,
* 3) Need for stimulation,
* 4) Pathological lying,
* 5) Cunning and manipulativeness,
* 6) Lack of remorse or guilt,
* 7) Shallow affect,
* 8) Callousness and lack of empathy,
* 9) Parasitic lifestyle,
* 10) Poor behavioral controls
* 11) Sexual promiscuity,
* 12) Early behavior problems,
* 13) Lack of realistic long-term goals,
* 14) Impulsivity,
* 15) Irresponsibility,
* 16) Failure to accept responsibility for own actions,
* 17) Many short-term marital relationships,
* 18) Juvenile delinquency,
* 19) Revocation of conditional release,
* 20) Criminal versatility.
Furthermore, Psychopaths typically do not show signs of having a conscience and are highly intelligent individuals.

--- End quote ---

tomos:
^ lol, that's a very callous smilie there Ren :P

IainB:
...Here's a good run-down (reformatted for clarity): ...
-Renegade (February 06, 2013, 04:52 AM)
--- End quote ---
Ah, that's the other list that I was looking for, thanks.
One of my clients (a female and a departmental manager at a bank) was in a relationship with a psychopath, but she didn't discover the issue right away - they mask their behaviours very well. He fitted that list of criteria perfectly.
I met her a couple of years later and she described how the experience had been a terror and a horror, and how she found it difficult to leave him because she was so afraid of him and also worried about abandoning his two children (from a previous marriage) - who were terrified of their father. I feel sure that he knew how these things held her paralysed, and he was able to use them to manipulate and control her. He was apparently surprised and furious that she had dared to leave him. I don't know what became of the children.

The experience had evidently been one of destructive dissonance for her, and it had left its scars. I could see that she was quite changed from being a confident, capable person, to someone lacking in confidence and doubting her own capability. It took her some time to rebuild her life, but I gather she's fine now. He was a manager at another bank where I gather that his boss, after belatedly realising from his behaviours what sort of a problem the guy was then had a great deal of difficulty in getting him to leave. I think he was fired in the end.

IainB:
Here's a turn up for the books:
Court Of Human Rights: Convictions For File-Sharing Violate Human Rights
(Part quote below. Read the rest at the link.)
The European Court of Human Rights has declared that the copyright monopoly stands in direct conflict with fundamental Human Rights, as defined in the European Union and elsewhere. This means that as of today, nobody sharing culture in the EU may be convicted just for breaking the copyright monopoly law; the bar for convicting was raised considerably. This can be expected to have far-reaching implications, not just judicially, but in confirming that the copyright monopoly stands at odds with human rights.

--- End quote ---

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page