This is the second time you've made this mistake, which is particularly funny because earlier in the thread you were chastising someone for their reading comprehention in regards to your sig.
READ:
You can make any abusive comments
about my dick size you want, but...
Your reading skills are not as up to par as you think. Do I need to break it down for you? As I so often do for others?
He then later admits he mods down people for disagreeing. Nice. He read my sig and saw within himself that he exhibited the very behavior my sig described: modding down for disagreeing. He processed that internally to mean he has a small dick, which then became translated internally as an accusation from me, thus the tears regarding abusive comments. My comment is in no way abusive, so long as you don't mod people down for disagreeing. It's also a joke. Get over it.
I generally change my sig every couple weeks, but now that this one has been generating so much attention, I may permanently keep it.
--------------
Never did he say that he would mod down for disagreeing. He said he'd mod you down because you're *WRONG*.
Saying someone is wrong is disagreeing. It sounds like you're just as lame as he is. Just because you believe something and you've infused it within your core belief structure, does not make you an authority on judging right and wrong. You tell me I'm wrong. I tell you you're wrong. Your words do not hold higher weight than mine. I provided my reasoning, so if you still disagree, then deal with it. It's not my problem you're raising your ass in the air and making a stink about it.
--------------
I just think you're a tool that has been abusive to many of your responders in the thread
Post as a woman for a while. You'll know real abuse. You may think I'm abusive, but I'm not. I accept zero abuse from you men and this offends you, because I will slam you back 100 times harder. That is why you're shedding tears and crying about it. Stand up. Dust yourself off. Be a man for once. Stop being a pussy.
I make statements; I support said statements with logic and/or data; I make conclusions from such. Many of you guys only bash and insult. You make no relevant statements; provide no logic and/or data; no relevant conclusions.
I have no patience for that, nor do I have patience for having to illustrate and diagram out incredibly obvious points. I seek to respond to the general topic and meaning of the person's post. I can easily look past minor typographical or logical errors that do not detract from the overall commentary. YOU AND MANY OTHERS CANNOT. You'd rather argue irrelevant minutia, such as arguing the definition of "is", which is a second reason I have no patience with you and others like you.
You're really a waste of time. This entire post is a waste of time, and I don't know why I'm even bothering. Oh wait, maybe it's because I wanted you to know you're not "all that".
I meant it more in a subtle way, really. It's a comfort thing so for me it's psychological, such as strength of character, boldness, working hard, having goals, etc. I don't mean literally go fight my fights for me. Not at all. That would irritate the hell out of me and some guys do that and mess things up. Please don't start acting like Mad Max go beating guys up! LOL.
There's often an association with "nice" meaning a guy sits there and waits for a girl to make a move. That works for highly desirable men, because a woman will fight for a guy if he's dynamic, fun, and wanted by other girls. Chances are any guy who says he's nice is NOT that guy. It's more probable he's an average, ummotivated bore.
No matter what, a guy needs to be proactive and let her know he's there. He's projecting that he's a serious contender for a mate. If she's not interested, he will move on. No hard feelings.
Nice guys only wind up demonstrating that they're friend material because they're not perceived as sexual threats. They signal women that they're safe, so they inevitably become perpetual friends.
A man who deeply desires a woman must signal his interest in her if he wants to get anywhere. A nice guy doesn't do that. No, he sits around and waits. He watches her go off on dates with other men and does nothing. He lets other guys step all over him because he's too "nice" to risk changing the relationship.
Nice guys don't take risks. They play it safe. They know that if they make a move, it could ruin the friendship if she rejects him. That is a very real possibility because if she was never interested in him, she may feel uncomfortable with knowing he's always going to be pining after her.
There is yet one more issue. If you're a nice guy and you've been her friend for a long time and nothing has happened, it means she just ain't into ya. She'd have sent you signals by now. But, I will say that sometimes it's possible for a guy to escape friend status, but personally, I feel that it's not very common. Once patterns set in, it's kind of hard to break them.
Oh yes... I enjoyed your response. Heh. Heh. Plus you raised some interesting questions, bonus.
And why is it that women are rarely called "desperate" just because they really want to get laid?
It's due to the asymmetrical nature of the male and female relationship. Men are seen as the aggressive pursuers and women are seen as the their seductive prizes. A man who has difficulty pursuing women is seen as man who isn't aggressive, which in turn causes him to appear weak. Men are all about being strong and virile, so appearing weak is their biggest detractor.
Women are indeed judged, but judged with a different scale. If a woman is seen as desperate, she experiences the same thing as men, but this time it's seen as a positive impact. The perception of being a submissive seductress is often what peaks the interests of men, because men prefer their women to less aggressive and less sexually active. Men also desire a woman who's "pent up", ready to burst sexually. In this case "less" is considered more pure and virile--the opposite for men.
she had a reason for why none of them were interesting
Her concept of what's interesting is different than yours. It's likely none of them wow'ed her with their personality. Even when it's about sex, it's not just about sex. The guy still has to have something interesting about his personality, otherwise it just ain't worth it.
finally there were the rest of them that were dismissed for having the wrong style clothes or shoes.
I can understand that very well. Heh. A man with dirty or crappy shoes is telling people he doesn't pay attention to details. He doesn't notice obvious things. He's only concerned with doing a minimal job. It's also telling her he puts no effort into coordinating his clothing and doesn't value improving his appearances the best way he can.
She wanted a no strings attached one night stand and went home alone talking about how there were no guys who were interested in her, while dismissing a guy who she thought was nice but had the wrong color shoes
You mean, no worthy guy was interested in her. She's aware there were guys, but they weren't even on her radar.
she's hardly the only woman I've met who's dismissed guys for completely irrelevant reasons
Just because a reason is not understandable doesn't mean it's irrelevant.:)
If not immaturity, what is it? Answers not insults please.
You asked nice and seemed to earnestly want to know, so I will elaborate. First off, there are two issues here, so I will treat them separately; however, know that they're inter-related.
The first question was why are HS girls self-conscious? I'll follow that with another question. Do you remember puberty? Yes? Great. Were you self-conscious about the changes? You probably were for a short while, at least until you saw other guys developing in the same way. At some point, you probably competed with other guys trying to grow a bigger, more bushier mustache. You probably enjoyed seeing your muscles grow, your voice deepen, and gaining the respect of older men. Puberty was FUN for you.
OK. Now, imagine you're a girl and rather than developing all that cool guy stuff, you find yourself with BOOBS on your chest. Obvious ones, that you can't hide. Men are starting to notice you. I don't just mean teenagers. I mean 30 and 40 year old guys--creepy ones--are now oggling you, as well as guys in your class, guys under your class, teenage guys, college guys. ALL GUYS.
When you walk past them, what do they say? Sometimes they whisper, sometimes they grin, sometimes they stand there staring at you like they're going to devour you. They are lions and you're a helpless lamb. Sometimes you overhear them saying "Hey.. look at that RACK!!". Sometimes they talk about what they're going to do to you sexually. Sometimes it's horribly mean comments. "That chick is ugly." "She's such a fat pig."
At every second of the day, you are judged for how you look and for your body features--or lack of. Features that are new and foreign to you, which you cannot hide. You already feel self-conscious about it, but now you've got guys picking it apart as if you're on stage--in a beauty contest that you never wanted to enter.
OK. What about other girls? They're looking at you also. They're judging you. They're looking at how nice your clothes are, the brand of shoes you're wearing, the guy you're with, the weight you put on, the size of your breasts, how much skin you're revealing, how little skin you're revealing, how prude you are, how old-fashioned your clothes are. It's endless. If any single thing is out of order, not up to snuff, you are deemed unworthy, or worse a whore, a skank, or a bitch. You are branded and thus locked out of the social cliques.
Now comes the second part, guys and which guys you're going to find interesting. So much of your identity in HS is based on the guy you're with. He has to meet the expected standards of your peers.
Guys have reputations. We all know this, but which reputation is going to be desirable to a girl? The one who runs around at lunch time begging all the girls to give him attention? Or, the guy who is hot, confident, and a leader among his friends. It's going to be the latter, every time. That guy is going to have the choice of any girl he wants and he's not going to settle for a sub-standard girl. He's not going to beg, plead, or do stupid things to get your attention. No. It's the other way around. The girl has to get his attention.
She feels like she has to prove herself worthy to him. She wants him to select her, because if he does she wins. He's Midas with the golden touch. If he touches you, you are GOLD. All the other girls will be jealous of you. Your standing will be at the top, in the stratosphere. They will all envy you because you got the guy they want. The very reason his value is perceived to be higher is because he's hard to get. He's selective, which means when he selects you, he's making a powerful statement regarding his perception of you.
That is the reason why high school girls are self-conscious and go after the aloof type of guy. An aloof type of guy knows he's got the choice of who he dates, and he knows this because he knows his value. He knows he's got stuff to offer to a girl. Of
Your assumption that men only become abusive over time is patently wrong. I've been in group dating scenes before where one woman brought her new boyfriend to the restaurant or whatever, and five minutes later every other female in the group had remarked something on the lines of 'she's an idiot, that guy's a dangerous jerk." etc. (and several of the men had said similar things). Signs are often there early - some women just miss them, and some have a bad habit of getting very head over heals in love so fast that it's easy for the abuser to hide for the very brief time needed.
Which... supports exactly what I said. Men become abusive over time. It's not apparent at first, but slowly they expose their violent nature over time.
You assume she should see the signs just because you do. You are the one making wrong assumptions. Those men modify their behavior around these girls, so it's much harder for her to see what you see because you're not in it. You're outside the dynamic of the relationship. I doubt you know what it feels like to finally be accepted and loved by a man after years or decades of feeling insecure and shitty about yourself, so you overlooked certain flaws in that man.
You said I was categorically wrong about saying no woman goes for these men. Maybe I should have qualified that with "consciously"? Maybe I should have tried to be more precisely detailed to the point of exhaustion? Or maybe, you'd rather argue technical minutia.
I will say this again, in a slightly modified form (so maybe you'll get off my back). No woman consciously or willingly pursues a violent man who she knows will beat her up. There are stupid women who "play" around with these guys, yes, but it's not a conscious decision. It's an emotional interaction with a man who she feels is the only man who would unconditionally accept and love her.
Who are the women who are more likely to do this? Ones who've been abused in the past. Ones who've been told they're worthless, again and again and again. Do women go out of their way to be abused? Your disagreement with me implied you believe that. If so, it's a rather ignorant stance to adopt, because no one chooses to be abused. They choose to be loved.
If I had mod points I'd mod you down, for being arrogantly wrong.
So you admit you abuse the moderation system here? There's a reason why "I Agree" and "I Disagree" aren't options to moderation. You're not supposed to mod down people for merely disagreeing. I never do that, no matter how much I disagree, because I know it's petty and cheap.
You can make any abusive comments about my dick size you want
And, when and where did I do that? LOL. Oh right.. you read my sig and saw yourself as modding me down for disagreeing. So are you always stricken with fear and anxiety over every penis joke? LOL. Sorry if that's true. (snickers)
but you are still just plain wrong, and somebody needs to tell you. I've seen the exceptions to your blanket generalizations, they are tragic, they are often just plain loathsome situations, and they are unfortunately way too frequent.
Don't lecture me about abuse and violence. Every day I step outside, I risk being attacked, beaten, or murdered for who and what I am. I won't go into detail because I owe you nothing, but know this: the threat of violence against me is always on my mind. There are things I cannot do that you can because you do not experience the risks I experience.
Women intensely dislike any hint of desperation, and many women mislabel direct or frank interest as desperation
A desperate man gives the appearance of a man with nothing to offer. Also, it's assumed the reason he's desperate is due to rejection by other women, who probably recognized independently that he had nothing to offer.
My definition of "bad boy" is not some violent abusive man. In that case, I refer to them as pigs who deserve to be in jail.
A "bad boy" is a man who challenges authority, he knows what he wants and pursues it, he doesn't sit around waiting to beg permission from some authority on high, he's not afraid of people who dislike him, he's not afraid to express his desire, and most importantly.... he knows when it's the right time to make a move.:)
By the way, I fully expect very few men to understand anything said in that post. It's okay, because I gave it a shot. You can't say I didn't try to help ya guys out.:) Continue buying into your fantasy realities regarding women and romance; I know it comforts you.:)
Your analysis of men and your sig go hand in hand. If someone disagrees, that someone is a man with a small dick
Your reading comprehension is terrible. I'll explain what it means baby.
Ok.. It starts with: Modding me down because you disagree and then after that it says tells me you're a weak little man with a small dick. Read it slowly, I know you can do it baby. Now, what does it say in the beginning? It says Modding me down. OK. Now, what's the next part? because you disagree. Right! OK, now... does that mean the same thing as If you disagree? I'll give you a moment to think on it.
No? Yay!!! You got it right. *CLAPPING*
Learn to roll with the punches. It's clearly a joke. Did it strike a nerve with you? Poor baby.
And guys who don't approach you are pathetic little virginal boys.
No where in my post did I ever say that, implied or directly. I said women don't want a man who's too chicken shit or cowardly to approach them. There is a huge difference between the those two.
Just because you're a woman doesn't make you right when you're the one slinging around abusive stereotypes.
Being a scared little man who can't approach women is very undesirable to a woman. That's not a stereotype. You believe it is because you completely misunderstood and got all offended. If you're going to take personal injury, then I apologize for hurting your lil sensitive ego. Just stay away from me in the clubs... mmmm'kay?
You don't have the first clue why high school girls are self-conscious or why they responded in the way they did. You think it's immaturity; you're dead wrong.
Women always say they want a man that is nice, helpful, respectful and will treat them right. But, you see it time after time...they go for the guys that are assholes, abusive (sometimes even physically).
No woman has ever used the phrase "a nice, helpful, respectful man who will treat them right" to describe an ideal man as something resembling a nerdy, computer geek who's legs turn to noodles whenever he sees a woman's chest. It is you men who have interpreted that, or variations of it, which is hardly the fault of women.
Women want a man who can demonstrate he can protect her, has the strength and ability to provide for her, and has the balls to stand up to other men who would give her trouble. I'm sorry if this causes you and others to feel sub-standard, but you can hardly blame women for your wishy-washy fearful personalities.
No woman wants a buffoon who lacks the ability or confidence to step up to a girl and introduce himself like a man who knows himself. Why do women go for aloof men? Do you really wanna know why? It's because she knows he's not some desperate, pathetic little virginal BOY who's wandering around searching for the first woman who will say yes. She knows he's fulfilled in life and isn't going to debase himself by begging and pleading for a woman to give him attention. She knows he recognizes his value and doesn't give it away willy nilly. When a woman sees a man protecting his value and dignity, she wants that man. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
And lastly, women don't go for abusive men. Men become abusive over time. Your assumption of such indicates you lack severe understanding of female psychology.
Oh..they may eventually grab the steady, meeker nice guy, and have kids with them because they are stable, but then they will often go out and cheat....with the bad boy they meet and find they are sexually attracted and excited by.
You men filter women on purely how their faces look and the sizes of their breasts and asses. Not exactly virtuous... is it?
Moderation will always be abused. Some people just put more effort on being covert and efficient with abusing it (ex. sock puppets for accumulating mod points, posting anon to threads u moderated on, targeting specific foes, etc).
But any time you're doing something commercial which is not news or education, you're pretty much screwed.
Not true. You're confusing commercial usage with assessing a violation versus assessing damages (after the conviction of guilt). Yes, it's considered upon figuring damages owed, but commercial usage doesn't make it more or less guilty. Commercial usage can be considered when judging if a defense of fair use is valid, but we don't need to fall back on that here because it's my contention that the game was not a derivative work.
A screenshot of a desktop app is composed of controls drawn by the operating system. Those cannot be copyrighted so the remaining portions that are copywritable include illustrations, text, and logos. These guys didn't use those.
Ok, there is the exception of the textures and they are indeed artwork but what if I take a photo of it? Let's change to the example of a sculpture created by you located in the park. When I shoot a photo of it, I own the copyright to my photo, not you. I say it's the same deal here.
Let's simply it to a basic example. If I'm a Pac-Man fan, I can take a screenshot of my Pac-Man game and print a huge poster with it. I can sell the poster because I own the copyright to the image I created. The game put the dots on the screen, but I composed it.
A screenshot is a photo of a live transient scene rendered by a raycasting engine capable of an infinite (or seemingly infinite) number of unique images. The player and the player's hardware is guiding the generation of the final flattened image of the scene, so the player owns the screenshots. That's the defense they ought to take if they're sued.
This is a really vapid argument because we're talking about a credit card number. You already have only one bill to pay (the credit card bill) or zero bills to pay (it comes out of your checking account via debit card.)
It's not a vapid argument if the account isn't automatically charged to the card. You asked general questions. I gave general answers. Also, you didn't address the bit about it generating extra useless transactions on my credit card statement. Even if it's not an issue for you, it's an issue for me and thus it becomes part of my reasoning. We're talking opinions and behavior here, not science.
In other words, you're hanging on to a ridiculous model that harms everyone (as computers become more efficient, the internet becomes more efficient, and trends in electronics are towards smaller size and lower power consumption per operation, but paper is pretty much paper and the USPS or their contractor still delivers it in an extremely inefficient internal combustion engine-powered vehicle) instead of getting with the program. Congratulations!
When industry can get billing statements right every time, I will rely on electronic billing and online bill payments. Until then, I defer to paper printed on their corporate stationary.
If we're going to cast aspersions about character flaws, then I'll tell you you're being naive placing your faith in corporations who have little incentive to maintain accurate records.
The reason is they can always claim I forged the email and there is no ubiquitous channel for them to request a guaranteed-to-be-unmodified copy of an email from gmail, other than a court subpoena, which they have no motive to do. If the provider doesn't sign the email before sending it to you, then that forces you to sign them--that's work. Also, the billing corporation will not trust your signature, therefore forcing you to go to court to resolve billing issues. If you know of a way to automatically have gmail sign incoming messages, then that's great, but you still have to convince the provider to honor it. No guarantee.
Not all providers email statements. Some host them on their servers. They can always alter statements hosted on their website. With those I have no recourse should they decide to double bill me or add an extra 0 on a line item.
There is still a large amount of trust with paper documents. I can't say why this is so, but it's just how it is. I know if I walk into a bank with paper documents proving my case, my word will carry more weight than had I walked in with a CD containing emails. Given that, I still do online payment whenever possible thus eliminating a chunk of the paper correspondence, but for those cases the record of payment is with my credit card--a 3rd party.
If you're going to argue the merits of paper consumption, then LEGALIZE HEMP PAPER. It has a much longer recycle capability and requires fewer chemicals to recycle it. It's also harvested from a fast growing plant which can repopulate quicker than trees.
On the other hand, you've got an antiquarian mentality that fails to embrace the present, let alone the future - at least in this area. It will only cost you time and effort.
You haven't completely considered the risks of all your statements resting in the hands of your service provider, where they're stored in a highly dynamic medium. My mentality hasn't cost me anything, really. Other than purchasing a file cabinet.
Again, it's your prerogative, but acting incensed when someone wants to do business more intelligently than you is less than compelling.
Don't project your moods on me. I'm not incensed at all. I only described my method..
Who owns the copyright to rendered images? The game manufacturer or you? After all, a screenshot of a rendered image created by a raycasting engine is not a digital bit-by-bit copy of the data model and textures built into the game. A screenshot is a recording of that unique perspective in the game that the player experienced, which is highly dependent on the actual graphics hardware of the PC and the settings for the hardware and software configuration. It also varies by time, position, viewing angles, and placement of other players.
Let's say you love FPS games (Quake,Unreal,etc) and you build a website (with revenue generating ads) around awesome screenshots and movie recordings of insane frag sessions (see YouTube). Are you guilty of copyright infringement? No. So, why would these guys be guilty? They used screenshots of rendered scenes and therefore did not use exact digital copies of the textures on disk.
If I use a raycasting engine and I set it up to raycast a scene, then I own the copyright to that rendered image, not the owner of the raycaster. It is the same here, however rather than specifying "sphere at x1,y1 and retangle at x2,y2", I am creating the scene by positioning the viewport.
Let's take another angle on this. I write a movie script and I want to set it to animation, so I use an FPS game to act it out. I merge the audio and video and put it up on my for profit website. Am I guilty of copyright infringement? No. It's an original work using rendered images from a raycasting engine. (This has been done quite a number of times.)
Before you use the "for profit" defense, know that for USA copyright law a violation without profit or without profit motive is still actionable by the copyright holder (see RIAA). Likewise, the inverse of profiting from copyright infringement is no guarantee of conviction. Profit is irrelevant in regard to guilt, but can be relevant with assessing damages awarded.
Also, some will likely respond to this post saying conviction of infringement is not based on making exact duplicates, but rather is in the fact you made a low grade copy or used small snippets of the copyrighted data. That really doesn't apply here because a rendered scene is data generated on the fly driven by user inputs and configuration settings of the machine. It is not a duplication of the textures and models on the disk. It's not valid to draw a parallel between an exact or low grade copy of a song to that of a data model rendered to an image, because a rendered image is not a version of the model, but a low grade copy of a song is a version of the original.
Last point. Is this game a derivative and thus potentially a violation of the copyright holder's exclusive rights to derivatives? No, because this guy's game uses no shared code. No shared model data. No shared textures. He used rendered scenes. If it were a derivative, then we could also apply this argument to compilers and say all compiler owners own the code you compiled, given that we're associating the raycasting engine to compiler and source code to scene setup. That happens to be an ancient debate: a compiler compiles source code to a binary, so who owns the binary? The compiler manufacturer or you? This ties back into the point of the previous paragraph. A work cannot be a derivative if it is not a version of the original--in part or in whole.
Considering all of this, I'm going out on a limb here and saying he did nothing wrong and is completely innocent. And additionally, just about everyone here is off their rocker on this topic.
Although, I still think he's a lame ass but that's irrelevent.
Why does it have to be a single billing statement?
Convenience. 1 bill to pay rather than 2. 1 less check to write or 1 less online bill to pay. OK, let's assume auto-bill pay. Fewer transactions junking up my billing history. If I want to search for a specific transaction, I have less history to page through. Also, fewer transactions means I'm more likely to spot something bogus.
Do you save money if you have a single statement?
I get paper statements, so actually it does. It saves the company less in postage and paperwork so their costs are slightly less. And 1 less stamp for me to mail them a paper check (I'm archaic).
An explanation for above: I don't use bill pay for everything because it makes it difficult to plan when you forget when the bill pays will hit your account. I only use it for the biggies: phone bill and college loans. My other online bill pays are done manually so I can plan better.
Also, fewer statements to archive in the filing cabinet. I file *everything*, that's why I like paper statements, and I know I've got access to them long after my account is deactivated.
Does your bank/other financial institution charge you per-transaction?
I worked on a robot project for them for a few years. It was insane. There was no way to do what they wanted - but my university got lots of money!!!
I'm curious what they wanted the robot to do. Maybe with current methods and processing power it'd be feasible. Or, maybe in the near future: 5-10 years. Sometimes the impossible becomes possible when methods from completely unrelated fields are considered and applied. Other times it requires simplification of the requirements or narrowing of the problem domain by adding boundaries.
I can guarantee that the separation of accounts from queues causes quite a bit of complexity
My suggestion did not imply changing whatever core schema Netflix uses. Permitting profiles to remain would be less destructive.
I don't have a netflix account so I have to fly blind here, but I fail to see why you would say that. Netflix is going to have a unique id tied to a customer account and several ids tied to profiles (1->N). The billing would be tied to the customer account and so would tables with a 1 to 1 relation to the customer. Billing usually consists of line items with everything broken down. A charge for an extra profile would simply be another line item. Enumerating profiles and appending them to the billing statement is not complex at all, assuming one didn't design a bass-ackwards schema.
Cutting a bunch of tables out of the system and having to resolve broken dependencies is more complex.
Also, some systems as a rule prohibit entering the same CC on different accounts. Of course, the reasons for doing so are somewhat arbitrary and debatable, but once a system implements that many dependencies wind up cropping up that require the credit info be unique (name/expiry/cc number).
It worked very well. There was far less variation between the bottom and top of the class and the teachers could do a much better job of teaching to the class.
My school was like that also. There were 3 levels. Top students, average students, and the "stupid kids". I had attended all 3 levels at various points for different subjects.
What I found was in the top class, everyone was super serious. Kids were super well behaved and worked hard to be the best student. Doing poorly was seen as something really bad among peers.
In the middle group, the kids in the back goofed off and passed notes. They didn't pay much attention because learning was seen as something bad. You dared not be seen as a nerd or actually enjoying learning. They wanted to be cool by showing disinterest and frequently skipping class. Despite this, some kids still learned, usually the ones who sat in the front. They just wanted to get a passing grade and get through school so they begrudgingly did the work, although they still avoided showing interest due to pressure of the "cool" kids in back.
Finally, the stupid class. I had to go there in 2nd grade after being transferred from a liberal experimental school that taught me nothing between 1st and 2nd grade. So anyway, in this class some tried hard, and some were simply uinterested and stared out the window; however, all ended up learning something because it was very hands on due to the fact the class was maybe 6-10 students.
Merging those 3 groups hurts the smart and stupid kids because it turns everything into a middle group where no one cares and everyone spends their time ignoring the teacher and causing trouble. Plus, the smart kids aren't able to keep pushing beyond the limits of the course and the stupid kids don't get personal hands-on teaching. Both lose. The only ones who win are the "cool" kids who'd rather turn the class into a circus.
Slashdot Mirror
Given:
say(mod down) for(disagree) => imply(small dick)
Then:
cry(abusive comment) for(small dick) => imply(mod down) for(disagree)
He then later admits he mods down people for disagreeing. Nice. He read my sig and saw within himself that he exhibited the very behavior my sig described: modding down for disagreeing. He processed that internally to mean he has a small dick, which then became translated internally as an accusation from me, thus the tears regarding abusive comments. My comment is in no way abusive, so long as you don't mod people down for disagreeing. It's also a joke. Get over it.
I generally change my sig every couple weeks, but now that this one has been generating so much attention, I may permanently keep it.
-------------- Saying someone is wrong is disagreeing. It sounds like you're just as lame as he is. Just because you believe something and you've infused it within your core belief structure, does not make you an authority on judging right and wrong. You tell me I'm wrong. I tell you you're wrong. Your words do not hold higher weight than mine. I provided my reasoning, so if you still disagree, then deal with it. It's not my problem you're raising your ass in the air and making a stink about it.
-------------- Post as a woman for a while. You'll know real abuse. You may think I'm abusive, but I'm not. I accept zero abuse from you men and this offends you, because I will slam you back 100 times harder. That is why you're shedding tears and crying about it. Stand up. Dust yourself off. Be a man for once. Stop being a pussy.
I make statements; I support said statements with logic and/or data; I make conclusions from such. Many of you guys only bash and insult. You make no relevant statements; provide no logic and/or data; no relevant conclusions.
I have no patience for that, nor do I have patience for having to illustrate and diagram out incredibly obvious points. I seek to respond to the general topic and meaning of the person's post. I can easily look past minor typographical or logical errors that do not detract from the overall commentary. YOU AND MANY OTHERS CANNOT. You'd rather argue irrelevant minutia, such as arguing the definition of "is", which is a second reason I have no patience with you and others like you.
You're really a waste of time. This entire post is a waste of time, and I don't know why I'm even bothering. Oh wait, maybe it's because I wanted you to know you're not "all that".
LOL. A Mad Max reference. Not surprised. LOL.
I meant it more in a subtle way, really. It's a comfort thing so for me it's psychological, such as strength of character, boldness, working hard, having goals, etc. I don't mean literally go fight my fights for me. Not at all. That would irritate the hell out of me and some guys do that and mess things up. Please don't start acting like Mad Max go beating guys up! LOL.
There's often an association with "nice" meaning a guy sits there and waits for a girl to make a move. That works for highly desirable men, because a woman will fight for a guy if he's dynamic, fun, and wanted by other girls. Chances are any guy who says he's nice is NOT that guy. It's more probable he's an average, ummotivated bore.
No matter what, a guy needs to be proactive and let her know he's there. He's projecting that he's a serious contender for a mate. If she's not interested, he will move on. No hard feelings.
Nice guys only wind up demonstrating that they're friend material because they're not perceived as sexual threats. They signal women that they're safe, so they inevitably become perpetual friends.
A man who deeply desires a woman must signal his interest in her if he wants to get anywhere. A nice guy doesn't do that. No, he sits around and waits. He watches her go off on dates with other men and does nothing. He lets other guys step all over him because he's too "nice" to risk changing the relationship.
Nice guys don't take risks. They play it safe. They know that if they make a move, it could ruin the friendship if she rejects him. That is a very real possibility because if she was never interested in him, she may feel uncomfortable with knowing he's always going to be pining after her.
There is yet one more issue. If you're a nice guy and you've been her friend for a long time and nothing has happened, it means she just ain't into ya. She'd have sent you signals by now. But, I will say that sometimes it's possible for a guy to escape friend status, but personally, I feel that it's not very common. Once patterns set in, it's kind of hard to break them.
It's due to the asymmetrical nature of the male and female relationship. Men are seen as the aggressive pursuers and women are seen as the their seductive prizes. A man who has difficulty pursuing women is seen as man who isn't aggressive, which in turn causes him to appear weak. Men are all about being strong and virile, so appearing weak is their biggest detractor.
Women are indeed judged, but judged with a different scale. If a woman is seen as desperate, she experiences the same thing as men, but this time it's seen as a positive impact. The perception of being a submissive seductress is often what peaks the interests of men, because men prefer their women to less aggressive and less sexually active. Men also desire a woman who's "pent up", ready to burst sexually. In this case "less" is considered more pure and virile--the opposite for men.
Her concept of what's interesting is different than yours. It's likely none of them wow'ed her with their personality. Even when it's about sex, it's not just about sex. The guy still has to have something interesting about his personality, otherwise it just ain't worth it.
I can understand that very well. Heh. A man with dirty or crappy shoes is telling people he doesn't pay attention to details. He doesn't notice obvious things. He's only concerned with doing a minimal job. It's also telling her he puts no effort into coordinating his clothing and doesn't value improving his appearances the best way he can.
You mean, no worthy guy was interested in her. She's aware there were guys, but they weren't even on her radar.
Just because a reason is not understandable doesn't mean it's irrelevant.
You asked nice and seemed to earnestly want to know, so I will elaborate. First off, there are two issues here, so I will treat them separately; however, know that they're inter-related.
The first question was why are HS girls self-conscious? I'll follow that with another question. Do you remember puberty? Yes? Great. Were you self-conscious about the changes? You probably were for a short while, at least until you saw other guys developing in the same way. At some point, you probably competed with other guys trying to grow a bigger, more bushier mustache. You probably enjoyed seeing your muscles grow, your voice deepen, and gaining the respect of older men. Puberty was FUN for you.
OK. Now, imagine you're a girl and rather than developing all that cool guy stuff, you find yourself with BOOBS on your chest. Obvious ones, that you can't hide. Men are starting to notice you. I don't just mean teenagers. I mean 30 and 40 year old guys--creepy ones--are now oggling you, as well as guys in your class, guys under your class, teenage guys, college guys. ALL GUYS.
When you walk past them, what do they say? Sometimes they whisper, sometimes they grin, sometimes they stand there staring at you like they're going to devour you. They are lions and you're a helpless lamb. Sometimes you overhear them saying "Hey.. look at that RACK!!". Sometimes they talk about what they're going to do to you sexually. Sometimes it's horribly mean comments. "That chick is ugly." "She's such a fat pig."
At every second of the day, you are judged for how you look and for your body features--or lack of. Features that are new and foreign to you, which you cannot hide. You already feel self-conscious about it, but now you've got guys picking it apart as if you're on stage--in a beauty contest that you never wanted to enter.
OK. What about other girls? They're looking at you also. They're judging you. They're looking at how nice your clothes are, the brand of shoes you're wearing, the guy you're with, the weight you put on, the size of your breasts, how much skin you're revealing, how little skin you're revealing, how prude you are, how old-fashioned your clothes are. It's endless. If any single thing is out of order, not up to snuff, you are deemed unworthy, or worse a whore, a skank, or a bitch. You are branded and thus locked out of the social cliques.
Now comes the second part, guys and which guys you're going to find interesting. So much of your identity in HS is based on the guy you're with. He has to meet the expected standards of your peers.
Guys have reputations. We all know this, but which reputation is going to be desirable to a girl? The one who runs around at lunch time begging all the girls to give him attention? Or, the guy who is hot, confident, and a leader among his friends. It's going to be the latter, every time. That guy is going to have the choice of any girl he wants and he's not going to settle for a sub-standard girl. He's not going to beg, plead, or do stupid things to get your attention. No. It's the other way around. The girl has to get his attention.
She feels like she has to prove herself worthy to him. She wants him to select her, because if he does she wins. He's Midas with the golden touch. If he touches you, you are GOLD. All the other girls will be jealous of you. Your standing will be at the top, in the stratosphere. They will all envy you because you got the guy they want. The very reason his value is perceived to be higher is because he's hard to get. He's selective, which means when he selects you, he's making a powerful statement regarding his perception of you.
That is the reason why high school girls are self-conscious and go after the aloof type of guy. An aloof type of guy knows he's got the choice of who he dates, and he knows this because he knows his value. He knows he's got stuff to offer to a girl. Of
You assume she should see the signs just because you do. You are the one making wrong assumptions. Those men modify their behavior around these girls, so it's much harder for her to see what you see because you're not in it. You're outside the dynamic of the relationship. I doubt you know what it feels like to finally be accepted and loved by a man after years or decades of feeling insecure and shitty about yourself, so you overlooked certain flaws in that man.
You said I was categorically wrong about saying no woman goes for these men. Maybe I should have qualified that with "consciously"? Maybe I should have tried to be more precisely detailed to the point of exhaustion? Or maybe, you'd rather argue technical minutia.
I will say this again, in a slightly modified form (so maybe you'll get off my back). No woman consciously or willingly pursues a violent man who she knows will beat her up. There are stupid women who "play" around with these guys, yes, but it's not a conscious decision. It's an emotional interaction with a man who she feels is the only man who would unconditionally accept and love her.
Who are the women who are more likely to do this? Ones who've been abused in the past. Ones who've been told they're worthless, again and again and again. Do women go out of their way to be abused? Your disagreement with me implied you believe that. If so, it's a rather ignorant stance to adopt, because no one chooses to be abused. They choose to be loved.
So you admit you abuse the moderation system here? There's a reason why "I Agree" and "I Disagree" aren't options to moderation. You're not supposed to mod down people for merely disagreeing. I never do that, no matter how much I disagree, because I know it's petty and cheap.
And, when and where did I do that? LOL. Oh right.. you read my sig and saw yourself as modding me down for disagreeing. So are you always stricken with fear and anxiety over every penis joke? LOL. Sorry if that's true. (snickers)
Don't lecture me about abuse and violence. Every day I step outside, I risk being attacked, beaten, or murdered for who and what I am. I won't go into detail because I owe you nothing, but know this: the threat of violence against me is always on my mind. There are things I cannot do that you can because you do not experience the risks I experience.
My definition of "bad boy" is not some violent abusive man. In that case, I refer to them as pigs who deserve to be in jail.
:)
A "bad boy" is a man who challenges authority, he knows what he wants and pursues it, he doesn't sit around waiting to beg permission from some authority on high, he's not afraid of people who dislike him, he's not afraid to express his desire, and most importantly.... he knows when it's the right time to make a move.
It's not always about being rich.
By the way, I fully expect very few men to understand anything said in that post. It's okay, because I gave it a shot. You can't say I didn't try to help ya guys out. :) Continue buying into your fantasy realities regarding women and romance; I know it comforts you. :)
Ok.. It starts with: Modding me down because you disagree and then after that it says tells me you're a weak little man with a small dick. Read it slowly, I know you can do it baby. Now, what does it say in the beginning? It says Modding me down. OK. Now, what's the next part? because you disagree. Right! OK, now... does that mean the same thing as If you disagree? I'll give you a moment to think on it.
No? Yay!!! You got it right. *CLAPPING*
Learn to roll with the punches. It's clearly a joke. Did it strike a nerve with you? Poor baby.
No where in my post did I ever say that, implied or directly. I said women don't want a man who's too chicken shit or cowardly to approach them. There is a huge difference between the those two.
Being a scared little man who can't approach women is very undesirable to a woman. That's not a stereotype. You believe it is because you completely misunderstood and got all offended. If you're going to take personal injury, then I apologize for hurting your lil sensitive ego. Just stay away from me in the clubs... mmmm'kay?
By the way, weak can mean a number of things.
You don't have the first clue why high school girls are self-conscious or why they responded in the way they did. You think it's immaturity; you're dead wrong.
Women want a man who can demonstrate he can protect her, has the strength and ability to provide for her, and has the balls to stand up to other men who would give her trouble. I'm sorry if this causes you and others to feel sub-standard, but you can hardly blame women for your wishy-washy fearful personalities.
No woman wants a buffoon who lacks the ability or confidence to step up to a girl and introduce himself like a man who knows himself. Why do women go for aloof men? Do you really wanna know why? It's because she knows he's not some desperate, pathetic little virginal BOY who's wandering around searching for the first woman who will say yes. She knows he's fulfilled in life and isn't going to debase himself by begging and pleading for a woman to give him attention. She knows he recognizes his value and doesn't give it away willy nilly. When a woman sees a man protecting his value and dignity, she wants that man. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
And lastly, women don't go for abusive men. Men become abusive over time. Your assumption of such indicates you lack severe understanding of female psychology.
You men filter women on purely how their faces look and the sizes of their breasts and asses. Not exactly virtuous... is it?
Jail time is not the solution for everything.
Moderation will always be abused. Some people just put more effort on being covert and efficient with abusing it (ex. sock puppets for accumulating mod points, posting anon to threads u moderated on, targeting specific foes, etc).
A screenshot of a desktop app is composed of controls drawn by the operating system. Those cannot be copyrighted so the remaining portions that are copywritable include illustrations, text, and logos. These guys didn't use those.
Ok, there is the exception of the textures and they are indeed artwork but what if I take a photo of it? Let's change to the example of a sculpture created by you located in the park. When I shoot a photo of it, I own the copyright to my photo, not you. I say it's the same deal here.
Let's simply it to a basic example. If I'm a Pac-Man fan, I can take a screenshot of my Pac-Man game and print a huge poster with it. I can sell the poster because I own the copyright to the image I created. The game put the dots on the screen, but I composed it.
A screenshot is a photo of a live transient scene rendered by a raycasting engine capable of an infinite (or seemingly infinite) number of unique images. The player and the player's hardware is guiding the generation of the final flattened image of the scene, so the player owns the screenshots. That's the defense they ought to take if they're sued.
When industry can get billing statements right every time, I will rely on electronic billing and online bill payments. Until then, I defer to paper printed on their corporate stationary.
If we're going to cast aspersions about character flaws, then I'll tell you you're being naive placing your faith in corporations who have little incentive to maintain accurate records.
The reason is they can always claim I forged the email and there is no ubiquitous channel for them to request a guaranteed-to-be-unmodified copy of an email from gmail, other than a court subpoena, which they have no motive to do. If the provider doesn't sign the email before sending it to you, then that forces you to sign them--that's work. Also, the billing corporation will not trust your signature, therefore forcing you to go to court to resolve billing issues. If you know of a way to automatically have gmail sign incoming messages, then that's great, but you still have to convince the provider to honor it. No guarantee.
Not all providers email statements. Some host them on their servers. They can always alter statements hosted on their website. With those I have no recourse should they decide to double bill me or add an extra 0 on a line item.
There is still a large amount of trust with paper documents. I can't say why this is so, but it's just how it is. I know if I walk into a bank with paper documents proving my case, my word will carry more weight than had I walked in with a CD containing emails. Given that, I still do online payment whenever possible thus eliminating a chunk of the paper correspondence, but for those cases the record of payment is with my credit card--a 3rd party.
If you're going to argue the merits of paper consumption, then LEGALIZE HEMP PAPER. It has a much longer recycle capability and requires fewer chemicals to recycle it. It's also harvested from a fast growing plant which can repopulate quicker than trees.
You haven't completely considered the risks of all your statements resting in the hands of your service provider, where they're stored in a highly dynamic medium. My mentality hasn't cost me anything, really. Other than purchasing a file cabinet.
Don't project your moods on me. I'm not incensed at all. I only described my method..
Who owns the copyright to rendered images? The game manufacturer or you? After all, a screenshot of a rendered image created by a raycasting engine is not a digital bit-by-bit copy of the data model and textures built into the game. A screenshot is a recording of that unique perspective in the game that the player experienced, which is highly dependent on the actual graphics hardware of the PC and the settings for the hardware and software configuration. It also varies by time, position, viewing angles, and placement of other players.
Let's say you love FPS games (Quake,Unreal,etc) and you build a website (with revenue generating ads) around awesome screenshots and movie recordings of insane frag sessions (see YouTube). Are you guilty of copyright infringement? No. So, why would these guys be guilty? They used screenshots of rendered scenes and therefore did not use exact digital copies of the textures on disk.
If I use a raycasting engine and I set it up to raycast a scene, then I own the copyright to that rendered image, not the owner of the raycaster. It is the same here, however rather than specifying "sphere at x1,y1 and retangle at x2,y2", I am creating the scene by positioning the viewport.
Let's take another angle on this. I write a movie script and I want to set it to animation, so I use an FPS game to act it out. I merge the audio and video and put it up on my for profit website. Am I guilty of copyright infringement? No. It's an original work using rendered images from a raycasting engine. (This has been done quite a number of times.)
Before you use the "for profit" defense, know that for USA copyright law a violation without profit or without profit motive is still actionable by the copyright holder (see RIAA). Likewise, the inverse of profiting from copyright infringement is no guarantee of conviction. Profit is irrelevant in regard to guilt, but can be relevant with assessing damages awarded.
Also, some will likely respond to this post saying conviction of infringement is not based on making exact duplicates, but rather is in the fact you made a low grade copy or used small snippets of the copyrighted data. That really doesn't apply here because a rendered scene is data generated on the fly driven by user inputs and configuration settings of the machine. It is not a duplication of the textures and models on the disk. It's not valid to draw a parallel between an exact or low grade copy of a song to that of a data model rendered to an image, because a rendered image is not a version of the model, but a low grade copy of a song is a version of the original.
Last point. Is this game a derivative and thus potentially a violation of the copyright holder's exclusive rights to derivatives? No, because this guy's game uses no shared code. No shared model data. No shared textures. He used rendered scenes. If it were a derivative, then we could also apply this argument to compilers and say all compiler owners own the code you compiled, given that we're associating the raycasting engine to compiler and source code to scene setup. That happens to be an ancient debate: a compiler compiles source code to a binary, so who owns the binary? The compiler manufacturer or you? This ties back into the point of the previous paragraph. A work cannot be a derivative if it is not a version of the original--in part or in whole.
Considering all of this, I'm going out on a limb here and saying he did nothing wrong and is completely innocent. And additionally, just about everyone here is off their rocker on this topic.
Although, I still think he's a lame ass but that's irrelevent.
I get paper statements, so actually it does. It saves the company less in postage and paperwork so their costs are slightly less. And 1 less stamp for me to mail them a paper check (I'm archaic).
An explanation for above: I don't use bill pay for everything because it makes it difficult to plan when you forget when the bill pays will hit your account. I only use it for the biggies: phone bill and college loans. My other online bill pays are done manually so I can plan better.
Also, fewer statements to archive in the filing cabinet. I file *everything*, that's why I like paper statements, and I know I've got access to them long after my account is deactivated.
No.
I don't have a netflix account so I have to fly blind here, but I fail to see why you would say that. Netflix is going to have a unique id tied to a customer account and several ids tied to profiles (1->N). The billing would be tied to the customer account and so would tables with a 1 to 1 relation to the customer. Billing usually consists of line items with everything broken down. A charge for an extra profile would simply be another line item. Enumerating profiles and appending them to the billing statement is not complex at all, assuming one didn't design a bass-ackwards schema.
Cutting a bunch of tables out of the system and having to resolve broken dependencies is more complex.
Also, some systems as a rule prohibit entering the same CC on different accounts. Of course, the reasons for doing so are somewhat arbitrary and debatable, but once a system implements that many dependencies wind up cropping up that require the credit info be unique (name/expiry/cc number).
What I found was in the top class, everyone was super serious. Kids were super well behaved and worked hard to be the best student. Doing poorly was seen as something really bad among peers.
In the middle group, the kids in the back goofed off and passed notes. They didn't pay much attention because learning was seen as something bad. You dared not be seen as a nerd or actually enjoying learning. They wanted to be cool by showing disinterest and frequently skipping class. Despite this, some kids still learned, usually the ones who sat in the front. They just wanted to get a passing grade and get through school so they begrudgingly did the work, although they still avoided showing interest due to pressure of the "cool" kids in back.
Finally, the stupid class. I had to go there in 2nd grade after being transferred from a liberal experimental school that taught me nothing between 1st and 2nd grade. So anyway, in this class some tried hard, and some were simply uinterested and stared out the window; however, all ended up learning something because it was very hands on due to the fact the class was maybe 6-10 students.
Merging those 3 groups hurts the smart and stupid kids because it turns everything into a middle group where no one cares and everyone spends their time ignoring the teacher and causing trouble. Plus, the smart kids aren't able to keep pushing beyond the limits of the course and the stupid kids don't get personal hands-on teaching. Both lose. The only ones who win are the "cool" kids who'd rather turn the class into a circus.
If that's the reason, why not just say "we need to charge for this now". Existing users get grandfathered in, new users must pay an extra small fee.