Maybe he forgot a couple zeroes. 2000 years of constant warming may be able to put the surface temp above 212F, but I doubt it. We'd be long gone before it ever got that high and we wouldn't be able to pump greenhouse gases into the air to accelrate the process.
Ah, I see, I guess I didn't get the point of your first post. Maybe I should hit the office coffee pot. I agree with everything that you say above. If the victim lied about their age I guess there is nothing that you can do. But it is probably very hard to prove that the person lied, unless it is like your bar example or something similar.
I've used the free version of ZoneAlarm for years and I've always been happy with it. Does anyone know how the free version compares to Pro? There probably isn't much difference.
PS- I use AntiVir for virus protection and have been happy with it as well.
"But why should someone be branded for life if they sleep with a 17 year old? Are we to believe that she didn't know what she was doing when she lied about her age?"
A person's brain and personality are not fully developed until their twenties. Many people of this age do not understand the full consequences of their actions. Hormones are also still a major factor in their decision making. You see this all the time in the way young adults behave behind the wheel, drink irresponsibly, etc. I'm not saying that adults do not do the same thing. But, to put it simply, teens brains are different. They are also, for the most part, inexperienced. A 20 year old sleeping with a 17 year old isn't that bad I suppose. But a 30 year old is a completely different story. Society is different today as well. Teenagers in this country are coddled. Well, this is just my opinion. And I see that you are somewhat in agreement with me (your comment about the 28 year old). In my opinion, 17 year olds cannot willingly consent, just like they can't sign contracts or vote. I don't mean "cannot" in the legal sense, I mean it in terms of mental and emotional capacity. I'm sure the fact that I have children may skew my opinion in this matter.
It's not sex that is taboo. It is molesting of children, rape, etc. Granted, some of the laws out there apply a very "loose" interpretation of what a sex offender actually is. But even in a sexually liberal society there is a line.
"Why don't we just implant chips into sex offenders brains and shock them every time they have a dirty thought."
That is actually already done. Well, not exactly, but something like it. It's basic conditioning. Such treatment is voluntary though. The subject is subjected to pornographic material and then shocked. Obviously, it's a bit more complicated than that, but you see the point. There are also methods to chemically castrate, which wouldn't, to me, be excessive for repeat offenders of the more violent crimes.
"Hence, even for crimnals who deserved extreme and examplary punishment there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but glut one man's cruelty, that they were being punished." -Tacitus
"However, there are definitely repeat offenders that are not really mentally ill."
One, could argue that simply being a repeat sex offender is a mental illness. Something must be causing that behaviorm, and that something obviously lies within the brain (with the occasional exception of some hormonal disfunction). I do agree with your other opinions on the matter. But if somebody raped my daughter or son I would fucking kill them myself.
"And when I **** my wife, I'm denying myself the revenue of a third-party john who might have rented her for that slot. Thus, in a very real sense, I pay the same rate as everyone else."
He later when on to say that in the future "no one will own cars because the public transportation system will be so good. Also, private property will be consolidated and we will live in communes so as to provide cheaper maintenance. I mean, who wants to mow their own lawn."
He even went so far as to say that the concept of marriage will soon be dead. "In the future, everyone will frequent brothels. Anybody who fucks a whore is in fact consuming a service. They are contributing to a larger-scale brothel rather than them marrying some broad and sticking her in a house. I mean, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for cheap?"
Exactly, why would I want to hire someone incompetent enough to get caught committing a crime? I want the smart ones, the innovators, the ones that don't get caught. But seriously, I work in recruitment for a very large organization and we background check ALL of our new employees. We fingerprint quite a few too, but that's due to specific legislation.
I'm sure that some of "US" are lawyers or work for anti-spyware companies. What exactly is your point? I hate all this US/THEM crap. It just dehumanizes one group to justify the opinion of the other.
I suppose Sega is supposed to be a gaming hardware company then, too. And Sony is a Betamax manufacturer. And what the hell does IBM think they are doing? They are a punch card manufacturing company for God's sake!
A company that is just a ______ company is sure to die eventually, especially if they are not on the top of their market. Every company needs to find its segment of the market. Every company needs to adapt to survive. Apple may have been a "computer" company, but now they are evolving into something else. Would you rather they stagnate and die? I welcome any additions to the gaming world. Even if they don't fair well, the competition they provide will spur innovation in their competitors.
Although, altavista seems to almost agree. Check the second non-advertised result.
I do find this amusing though. Third place, how humble.
I didn't expect such interesting results. The site with the search term in its url was tops for av and yahoo, but not google. Yahoo ranked the wiki entry above google, but av reversed that decision, google of course thought itself was more important than the wiki. Google's own reference site was number one in its own search and near the top in the other two, but pagerank.net wasn't even in the top 10 for google's search. I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn from all that, but it is definitely food for thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Trekker, you insensitive clod. Now make like my pants and split.
We can use the interweb tubes. Duh.
Maybe he forgot a couple zeroes.
2000 years of constant warming may be able to put the surface temp above 212F, but I doubt it. We'd be long gone before it ever got that high and we wouldn't be able to pump greenhouse gases into the air to accelrate the process.
Ah, I see, I guess I didn't get the point of your first post. Maybe I should hit the office coffee pot. I agree with everything that you say above. If the victim lied about their age I guess there is nothing that you can do. But it is probably very hard to prove that the person lied, unless it is like your bar example or something similar.
http://www.linux-sec.net/Firewall/Testing/
I've used the free version of ZoneAlarm for years and I've always been happy with it. Does anyone know how the free version compares to Pro? There probably isn't much difference.
PS- I use AntiVir for virus protection and have been happy with it as well.
"But why should someone be branded for life if they sleep with a 17 year old? Are we to believe that she didn't know what she was doing when she lied about her age?"
A person's brain and personality are not fully developed until their twenties. Many people of this age do not understand the full consequences of their actions. Hormones are also still a major factor in their decision making. You see this all the time in the way young adults behave behind the wheel, drink irresponsibly, etc. I'm not saying that adults do not do the same thing. But, to put it simply, teens brains are different. They are also, for the most part, inexperienced. A 20 year old sleeping with a 17 year old isn't that bad I suppose. But a 30 year old is a completely different story. Society is different today as well. Teenagers in this country are coddled. Well, this is just my opinion. And I see that you are somewhat in agreement with me (your comment about the 28 year old). In my opinion, 17 year olds cannot willingly consent, just like they can't sign contracts or vote. I don't mean "cannot" in the legal sense, I mean it in terms of mental and emotional capacity. I'm sure the fact that I have children may skew my opinion in this matter.
It's not sex that is taboo. It is molesting of children, rape, etc. Granted, some of the laws out there apply a very "loose" interpretation of what a sex offender actually is. But even in a sexually liberal society there is a line.
"Why don't we just implant chips into sex offenders brains and shock them every time they have a dirty thought."
That is actually already done. Well, not exactly, but something like it. It's basic conditioning. Such treatment is voluntary though. The subject is subjected to pornographic material and then shocked. Obviously, it's a bit more complicated than that, but you see the point. There are also methods to chemically castrate, which wouldn't, to me, be excessive for repeat offenders of the more violent crimes.
"Hence, even for crimnals who deserved extreme and examplary punishment there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but glut one man's cruelty, that they were being punished." -Tacitus
Also,
"Things forbidden have a secret charm."
"However, there are definitely repeat offenders that are not really mentally ill."
One, could argue that simply being a repeat sex offender is a mental illness. Something must be causing that behaviorm, and that something obviously lies within the brain (with the occasional exception of some hormonal disfunction). I do agree with your other opinions on the matter. But if somebody raped my daughter or son I would fucking kill them myself.
This technology isn't knew though. I heard of it a long time ago.
Is this relevant enough for you? There are also several related articles.
It's described better here.
"And when I **** my wife, I'm denying myself the revenue of a third-party john who might have rented her for that slot. Thus, in a very real sense, I pay the same rate as everyone else."
Didn't we already have this discussion here?
I didn't say that, Sun's CTO did.
Anyway, while I don't personally own a barn, I have milked cows before. But it's been over a decade...
man, do I miss those teets.
Shut up you anti-Semant!
Dude! It's not vaporware. I heard from an inside source that Duke Nukem Forever is coming out in this format in '08.
He later when on to say that in the future "no one will own cars because the public transportation system will be so good. Also, private property will be consolidated and we will live in communes so as to provide cheaper maintenance. I mean, who wants to mow their own lawn."
He even went so far as to say that the concept of marriage will soon be dead. "In the future, everyone will frequent brothels. Anybody who fucks a whore is in fact consuming a service. They are contributing to a larger-scale brothel rather than them marrying some broad and sticking her in a house. I mean, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for cheap?"
Exactly, why would I want to hire someone incompetent enough to get caught committing a crime? I want the smart ones, the innovators, the ones that don't get caught.
But seriously, I work in recruitment for a very large organization and we background check ALL of our new employees. We fingerprint quite a few too, but that's due to specific legislation.
I'm sure that some of "US" are lawyers or work for anti-spyware companies. What exactly is your point? I hate all this US/THEM crap. It just dehumanizes one group to justify the opinion of the other.
So a dead cat and a live cat are the same thing? That sounds like a business opportunity. I've got it...
PetsMort.
If both companies got together then prices most likely wouldn't be less and the quality wouldn't be near as great. Keep it the way it is.
But if it is dead, is it still really a cat?
Who dictates that law?
I suppose Sega is supposed to be a gaming hardware company then, too. And Sony is a Betamax manufacturer. And what the hell does IBM think they are doing? They are a punch card manufacturing company for God's sake!
A company that is just a ______ company is sure to die eventually, especially if they are not on the top of their market. Every company needs to find its segment of the market. Every company needs to adapt to survive. Apple may have been a "computer" company, but now they are evolving into something else. Would you rather they stagnate and die? I welcome any additions to the gaming world. Even if they don't fair well, the competition they provide will spur innovation in their competitors.
Interestingly enough, google thinks so, too.
Of course, yahoo has its own opinion.
Although, altavista seems to almost agree. Check the second non-advertised result.
I do find this amusing though. Third place, how humble.
I didn't expect such interesting results. The site with the search term in its url was tops for av and yahoo, but not google. Yahoo ranked the wiki entry above google, but av reversed that decision, google of course thought itself was more important than the wiki. Google's own reference site was number one in its own search and near the top in the other two, but pagerank.net wasn't even in the top 10 for google's search. I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn from all that, but it is definitely food for thought.