I don't know the poster's POV, but for many people, being a Christian and using parts of the Bible doesn't necessarily mean you believe the whole thing is true, or even that any of it is meant to be taken literally.
Too many times people try to refute Christians by trying to force a false dichotomy "Either you believe the entirety of the Bible is the infallible word of God, or you are a heretic to your own religion." That's just dishonest to try to do that.
No insult intended to you, I just wanted to reiterate the point./I'm an atheist, FYI
Oh man, I totally agree. What's even worse is that it changes! Sometimes I will click on a link to them, and actually SEE the answers, but then I go back to the page a little later and suddenly it's asking me to pay! WTF?!?!?!
If the tail rudder and wing flaps are controlled via electronics, those wires would have to run the length of the plane. The wires can pick up the interference, but I agree the likelihood of that causing any problem is virtually nil.
While I agree with what you are saying, ATi may be a bad example. I have never gotten them to work correctly. Perhaps it's that card model I was using: a 9600XT and an AiW2006 (basically the same thing)...
HAHA, you win! Sadly, that's basically what first crossed my mind when I saw the title. I thought maybe there was some radioactive isotope that gave feelings of euphoria to people with highly active brains. As I read further and saw what was meant, I realized I was apparently not one of those people, despite high standardized test scores.
> has managed to see the forest to spite all the trees.
Take that, you stoopid trees! Did you, perhaps, mean "despite all the trees"? Anyway, no offense intended.
I love to see stuff like this: > If you aren't up to that responsibility, don't have kids.
Woo! I agree completely. Too many people think that the meaning of life is propagation at all costs.
I once said to my brother that many parents don't really care what happens to their children. He said it was one of the stupidest things I had ever said, but I believe it is one of the most insightful. If people are willing to have children despite having no ability to pay for their proper care, then they REALLY don't care about the children, they only care about having children. That's assuming it was an intentional pregnancy, of course. If it was intentional, then the problem is greed and lack of self control. Can't afford kids ? Stop having unprotected sex, you ignorant slut (I aim that at males as well as females, because "stud" isn't really an insult).
Sorry to go off like that, but I was annoyed today after reading an "article" that basically suggested that celebrities (B. Spears in this case) should use their children as personal decoration. That made me SOOOO disgusted.
I think I am missing something here... You traded in a car because the alternator failed? If I am reading you correctly, I believe I have figured out why your cars aren't lasting very long.
That's not a troll, it's exactly right! I hate Java for exactly that reason: developers build their software to work on exactly one version (or set of compatible versions), but will not work on newer versions. We have a financial application, a time & attendance webpage, a scheduling app, and my Cisco cluster manager, and the best I have managed to do is get it down to three different versions of Java that must be installed to get it working (it was four until we got a financial system upgrade that didn't conflict with the scheduler).
It is ridiculous, and if any company tries to sell us something written in Java, I explain in no uncertain terms what I think of such a stupid choice.
If it's a web page, FINE, use Java. But these are applications that are supposed to be secure and (presumably) responsive. Java is not exactly great at either of those.
> it does amaze me that GM food products are not subject to the same level of scrutiny that pharmaceuticals are
Yes, because we all know that pharmaceuticals rarely have dangerous side-effects. OK, with that bit of sarcasm out of the way, I don't see why you think food products and medicines need the same level of testing. Sure, they should be tested thoroughly by the FDA to make sure they are not terribly dangerous -- and they ARE, contrary to what many ignorant knee-jerk GM-haters proclaim. But real(*) medicines are used for very specific purposes in people who are already sick, and should go through much more rigorous safety tests.
However, pharmaceutical companies are partially shielded from their mistakes (which I mostly disagree with). Food manufacturers should not (do not?) have the same protection; and rightfully so. IMO, they both should have no protection from lawsuit by individuals who have been harmed by their products. But then, you'll get people suing drug companies because of all the side-effects their drugs cause. Hmm, I was trying to make a pro-protection argument, but I'm not doing a very good job. If the side effect is worse than the thing it is trying to cure, it shouldn't be on the market. Especially if it doesn't actually do ANYTHING good, as is the case with far too many drugs.
(* I do not include drugs that don't cure diseases or fix real problems: eg, botox. Those "sick", self-loathing morons with too much money can go DIAF for all I care)
What, you were expecting me to have a point or something?
Actually, you lose because there are bricks missing in your building. If you completed a floor successfully, it is demolished, bringing the upper floors down...
> You see in our culture to aquire too much property or goods is a sin.
So that's why they donate all the money they make from their tax-free Casinos back to their tribe to share freely and equally. Aaah, it all makes sense now.... ?
> Did humans get less creative when they created the internet?
Interesting point of view, but I would posit it is the opposite. You see, even though a billion people may participate in a thing, the individual, sitting behind a computer, is working alone (usually). This can be evidenced by the very common, and incorrect, view that the Internet is "anonymous." If everyone on the Internet thought about others on the Internet as if they were in the same room staring at them, flame wars would be much less prevalent... you jerk!;) (kidding, kidding)
Can you not link directly to a particular revision of a wikipedia entry? You can say "I wrote this," and if asked why you didn't link to the most recent version, you simply say "because I didn't write that part."
Ah, that probably explains why a translator I found only picked out the words "true" and "santa." I recognized suoma- myself, though; I learned the word from Hockey trading cards.:)
OK, it makes more sense now. However, if we were truly inseparable, astronauts could not go to the moon. Taken to its extreme, it would mean we could not jump in the air; that would separate us -- very temporarily -- from the Earth, sort of (ignoring that the gaseous fluids surrounding the Earth are actually part of it). Of course, I am pretty sure this is not what you meant.
> how do you really know the earth doesn't spring from us?
Because we require oxygen to breath, which means it must be present (duh). Finding pockets of oxygen in the "vacuum" of space seems to be rather difficult, without it being around/part of a planet... or at least enough of it that will support the continuance of mammalian life, as I understand. Therefore, the gases must have collected around this body of rock before anything came about to use those gases.
This ignores the possibility that the Earth is completely imagined and does not exist outside of our conceptual reality. Being purely imagination, that could have sprung from us. That leads to the question of whether a nonexistant/imaginary object can be considered to "sprung" from us simply because we imagined it.
So someone is acting irresponsibly if they have the means and desire to care for more than 3 children and do so? Does it make a difference if the kids are all their own or were adopted? If someone adopts 20 children, there is no increase in population. Of course, this person would be too big for an SUV and had better invest in a bus, but that's not the point. What I'm pointing out is that some people really do have a genuine use for such things and having a large family doesn't make you a bad person.
> If people realized that the earth was, literally, a physical extension of themselves
No we, literally are not. Figuratively, we are extensions of Earth. Unless, of course, we came from another planet, in which case we would be an extension of that one. We sprung from the Earth, the Earth did not spring from us.
Slashdot Mirror
That was very well said, and is similar to my own experience, although I was never able to phrase it so well.
I don't know the poster's POV, but for many people, being a Christian and using parts of the Bible doesn't necessarily mean you believe the whole thing is true, or even that any of it is meant to be taken literally.
/I'm an atheist, FYI
Too many times people try to refute Christians by trying to force a false dichotomy "Either you believe the entirety of the Bible is the infallible word of God, or you are a heretic to your own religion." That's just dishonest to try to do that.
No insult intended to you, I just wanted to reiterate the point.
Oh man, I totally agree. What's even worse is that it changes! Sometimes I will click on a link to them, and actually SEE the answers, but then I go back to the page a little later and suddenly it's asking me to pay! WTF?!?!?!
If the tail rudder and wing flaps are controlled via electronics, those wires would have to run the length of the plane. The wires can pick up the interference, but I agree the likelihood of that causing any problem is virtually nil.
While I agree with what you are saying, ATi may be a bad example. I have never gotten them to work correctly. Perhaps it's that card model I was using: a 9600XT and an AiW2006 (basically the same thing)...
Touche, my anonymous friend.
HAHA, you win! Sadly, that's basically what first crossed my mind when I saw the title. I thought maybe there was some radioactive isotope that gave feelings of euphoria to people with highly active brains. As I read further and saw what was meant, I realized I was apparently not one of those people, despite high standardized test scores.
> has managed to see the forest to spite all the trees.
Take that, you stoopid trees! Did you, perhaps, mean "despite all the trees"? Anyway, no offense intended.
I love to see stuff like this:
> If you aren't up to that responsibility, don't have kids.
Woo! I agree completely. Too many people think that the meaning of life is propagation at all costs.
I once said to my brother that many parents don't really care what happens to their children. He said it was one of the stupidest things I had ever said, but I believe it is one of the most insightful. If people are willing to have children despite having no ability to pay for their proper care, then they REALLY don't care about the children, they only care about having children. That's assuming it was an intentional pregnancy, of course. If it was intentional, then the problem is greed and lack of self control. Can't afford kids ? Stop having unprotected sex, you ignorant slut (I aim that at males as well as females, because "stud" isn't really an insult).
Sorry to go off like that, but I was annoyed today after reading an "article" that basically suggested that celebrities (B. Spears in this case) should use their children as personal decoration. That made me SOOOO disgusted.
Aaah, sorry didn't understand.
I think I am missing something here... You traded in a car because the alternator failed? If I am reading you correctly, I believe I have figured out why your cars aren't lasting very long.
That's not a troll, it's exactly right! I hate Java for exactly that reason: developers build their software to work on exactly one version (or set of compatible versions), but will not work on newer versions. We have a financial application, a time & attendance webpage, a scheduling app, and my Cisco cluster manager, and the best I have managed to do is get it down to three different versions of Java that must be installed to get it working (it was four until we got a financial system upgrade that didn't conflict with the scheduler).
It is ridiculous, and if any company tries to sell us something written in Java, I explain in no uncertain terms what I think of such a stupid choice.
If it's a web page, FINE, use Java. But these are applications that are supposed to be secure and (presumably) responsive. Java is not exactly great at either of those.
> it does amaze me that GM food products are not subject to the same level of scrutiny that pharmaceuticals are
Yes, because we all know that pharmaceuticals rarely have dangerous side-effects. OK, with that bit of sarcasm out of the way, I don't see why you think food products and medicines need the same level of testing. Sure, they should be tested thoroughly by the FDA to make sure they are not terribly dangerous -- and they ARE, contrary to what many ignorant knee-jerk GM-haters proclaim. But real(*) medicines are used for very specific purposes in people who are already sick, and should go through much more rigorous safety tests.
However, pharmaceutical companies are partially shielded from their mistakes (which I mostly disagree with). Food manufacturers should not (do not?) have the same protection; and rightfully so. IMO, they both should have no protection from lawsuit by individuals who have been harmed by their products. But then, you'll get people suing drug companies because of all the side-effects their drugs cause. Hmm, I was trying to make a pro-protection argument, but I'm not doing a very good job. If the side effect is worse than the thing it is trying to cure, it shouldn't be on the market. Especially if it doesn't actually do ANYTHING good, as is the case with far too many drugs.
(* I do not include drugs that don't cure diseases or fix real problems: eg, botox. Those "sick", self-loathing morons with too much money can go DIAF for all I care)
What, you were expecting me to have a point or something?
Or perhaps the point of the game flying over yours? Or just construction?
Actually, you lose because there are bricks missing in your building. If you completed a floor successfully, it is demolished, bringing the upper floors down...
> You see in our culture to aquire too much property or goods is a sin.
So that's why they donate all the money they make from their tax-free Casinos back to their tribe to share freely and equally. Aaah, it all makes sense now.... ?
> Did humans get less creative when they created the internet?
;) (kidding, kidding)
Interesting point of view, but I would posit it is the opposite. You see, even though a billion people may participate in a thing, the individual, sitting behind a computer, is working alone (usually). This can be evidenced by the very common, and incorrect, view that the Internet is "anonymous." If everyone on the Internet thought about others on the Internet as if they were in the same room staring at them, flame wars would be much less prevalent... you jerk!
I concur. Bruce?
Can you not link directly to a particular revision of a wikipedia entry? You can say "I wrote this," and if asked why you didn't link to the most recent version, you simply say "because I didn't write that part."
> a: and o: are in here a and o
:)
Ah, that probably explains why a translator I found only picked out the words "true" and "santa." I recognized suoma- myself, though; I learned the word from Hockey trading cards.
OK, it makes more sense now. However, if we were truly inseparable, astronauts could not go to the moon. Taken to its extreme, it would mean we could not jump in the air; that would separate us -- very temporarily -- from the Earth, sort of (ignoring that the gaseous fluids surrounding the Earth are actually part of it). Of course, I am pretty sure this is not what you meant.
:)
> how do you really know the earth doesn't spring from us?
Because we require oxygen to breath, which means it must be present (duh). Finding pockets of oxygen in the "vacuum" of space seems to be rather difficult, without it being around/part of a planet... or at least enough of it that will support the continuance of mammalian life, as I understand. Therefore, the gases must have collected around this body of rock before anything came about to use those gases.
This ignores the possibility that the Earth is completely imagined and does not exist outside of our conceptual reality. Being purely imagination, that could have sprung from us. That leads to the question of whether a nonexistant/imaginary object can be considered to "sprung" from us simply because we imagined it.
Is this off-topic enough?
> Onko totta, etta suomalaisessa jouluperinteessa, Joulupukki oli lapsia syova villisika?
Uncle Tattoo, when interpreting Finnish, joyfully pukes on the lap of that villain, Santa.
Am I good, or what!?!?!?
So someone is acting irresponsibly if they have the means and desire to care for more than 3 children and do so? Does it make a difference if the kids are all their own or were adopted? If someone adopts 20 children, there is no increase in population. Of course, this person would be too big for an SUV and had better invest in a bus, but that's not the point. What I'm pointing out is that some people really do have a genuine use for such things and having a large family doesn't make you a bad person.
> > Simple fact is, most people don't need the space!
> I'd say a family of six does!
"MOST": A significant portion of a given population, but not 100%
> But for the left, it's never about "need"
And for the right, it's never about responding to an argument, it's about making a counterexample to what they wish was being argued.
> If people realized that the earth was, literally, a physical extension of themselves
No we, literally are not. Figuratively, we are extensions of Earth. Unless, of course, we came from another planet, in which case we would be an extension of that one. We sprung from the Earth, the Earth did not spring from us.
> God will put a a stop to it.
Yes, thankfully he doesn't like the concept of "free will" and micromanages us daily.