SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Alex Cooke write at Fstoppers that Australian researchers believe they have found the world's "ugliest" color as judged by the reactions 1,000 study participants had to it, which included such labels as "sewage-tinted" and "death." The world's ugliest color is opaque couché, also known as Pantone 448C. The research was done for an important reason. The Australian government will now use it on packaging to help deter consumers from buying tobacco products. People find the color so repellent it will be used to discourage people from lighting up. "''We didn't want to create attractive, aspirational packaging designed to win customers," says Victoria Parr. "Instead our role was to help our client reduce demand, with the ultimate aim to minimise use of the product.''"
The new color was found to have the most ability to "minimize appeal" and "maximize perceived harm" and was implemented on plain cigarette packs with health warnings across Australia. Pantone is keen to state, however, that no color is more beautiful or ugly than the next. Naturally, the company was not thrilled at the choice of its tone for the packaging: "At the Pantone Color Institute, we consider all colours equally," explained Leatrice Eiseman, executive director. There was, she said, "no such thing as the ugliest colour". Rather, 448C was associated with "deep, rich earth tones", popular on sofas and shoes and other things that might be found in a house.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @07:01AM
Oh, FFS. I'll see your Jesus motocrossing, and up you a Jesus motoguzzi.
Every mother bucking pack of cigarettes in the world today carries a warning that cigarettes might cause you to get cancer. Every child who has attended school in the past 30 years of more has been indoctrinated by the fearful that cigarettes cause cancer. There isn't a living, breathing soul alive today in the first world, and probably not in the third world, who doesn't know that sucking carcinogenic smoke into your lungs can cause cancer. We've all been warned. And, it's their RIGHT to ignore the warnings, if they so choose.
Labeling foods? That's fucking WONDERFUL! People should be able to read labels, to see what is in their foods, and to decide for themselves whether they wish to consume the shit that the food industry has packaged into nice pretty cartons and wrappers. Labels are righteous, proper, moral, ethical, and even good! Label stuff all you like, I go along with that.
Drinking while pregnant? Again, the warnings are out there. I doubt that there is a woman in the first world who isn't aware that alcohol might damage her baby. Funny thing though - lots of women DO DRINK while pregnant, and they don't all deliver retards. Hmmmm - maybe this is a case of "maybe we don't know as much as we thought we knew"?? Granted, women who get falling down drunk, and pass out in alleyways throughout their pregnancies have an increased chance of delivering retards. Women who sip a glass of wine two or three times throughout their pregnancy MIGHT have SOME chance of having a retarded baby. I mean - it's not like any other substances might be involved, right? It could ONLY be the alcohol.
And, finally, the government does indeed over reach, in all cases. And, yes, this IS one case in which they over reach.
Basically, we're down to one thing here: YOU get to judge what risks are acceptable for EVERYONE.
Let's make a deal. You just accept that not everyone is worth the effort of saving from themselves. Yes, there are millions of us in the world who have no value. Our stupidity puts us so far beyond having any value, that you should just give up on all of us. Smokers are retards, and not worth saving. Just accept that - and we can all kill ourselves peacefully.
Hey - we're gonna die anyway, why should you waste your effort trying to convince us that we're killing ourselvs?
If that's to reasonable a tone for you, then I can be more blunt.
All of you fascists need to just fuck off and die. In a free world, people have the RIGHT to decide which highway to hell they want to travel.
But - you don't really want to live in a free world, do you? You only want to live in a world that you consider to be "safe".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 13 2016, @07:26AM
And who the fucking hell gave YOU the right to decide that some people have no value?! Explain to me the way one calculates this value, if you can. Value to whom, exactly?
You can gussy it up in high-sounding pseudo-philosophic jargon all you like, but at the end of the day you're just another sociopath. And you're doing the work of the very control freaks you claim to hate, who are just as psychopathic as you but coming from the other direction. How does it feel to be a useful idiot in the elites' divide and conquer plan?
I'm not even going to address the "fascist" comment; my political leanings are somewhere between left libertarian and social democrat, but of course anyone who isn't a complete anarchist must be statist, fascist scum, am I right?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @08:34AM
" but of course anyone who isn't a complete anarchist must be statist, fascist scum, am I right? "
Are you not trying to justify the state's dictates here? Or - have I misunderstood what you have said?
I'm stating quite clearly that the state has no fucking right to tell people what they may or may not do with their own lives. None. The state has some obligation to keep people somewhat honest - thus, I approve of labeling foods with their actual ingredients and nutritional value. But, if I really, really, REALLY want to eat a chemical soup with garbage filler, then the state has no right to prevent me from doing so.
Would you pass me that package of Fake Ramen noodles, please? Yeah, I know it has 37 different ingredients known to the state of California to be carcinogenic, but it really tastes good. Thank you, California, for educating me.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by aristarchus on Monday June 13 2016, @09:18AM
I am Runaway1956-2626, and I must protest the continued hijacking of my user name, This interloper is making me sound like an uneducated buffoon, a non-plussed tallywacker, and a hillbilly extra-ordinaire. If only some authority, like a state, could force other people to stop impersonating me! Vote Hillary, y'all! Former first Lady of Arkansas! WhoooHoo!!
(Score: 1) by tractatus_techno_philosophicus on Monday June 13 2016, @07:45PM
I am Runaway1956-2626, and I must protest the continued hijacking of my user name, This interloper is making me sound like an uneducated buffoon, a non-plussed tallywacker, and a hillbilly extra-ordinaire. If only some authority, like a state, could force other people to stop impersonating me! Vote Hillary, y'all! Former first Lady of Arkansas! WhoooHoo!!
Huh?
No moral system can rest solely on authority. ~A.J. Ayer
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @07:56PM
Huh?
Runaway has been cloned in a prior discussion thread. He is now legion. The original username may, or may not, actually be the real Runaway1956-2626. And it looks like Runaway is trying to break through Aristarchus' account. Soon, there will be Runaways running rampant all over SoylentNews, kinda like Agent Smith in the Matrix. I, for one, welcome of new chain-smoking overloads.