> Ahhh, anti-capitalism. A sign of a true liberal.
Ahh, ignorance and name calling.. Not sure what it's a sign of, but it's not a good one. First off, I'm not a liberal, although I do not consider it a "bad word" like you obviously do. Most American liberals (when used as a proper insult) are stuck behind rose-tinted glasses -- obiously he is not; he is quite the opposite, being so disillusioned. Secondly, I'm not anti-capitalism. In fact, I owe everything I own to capitalism, and I'm sure happy that I have it (except the bit of debt). Anarchy is a stupid idea for anyone but the strongest. In fact, since my paycheck comes solely from working with technology, I am extremely thankful for Capitalism. Without it, I would probably be a farm hand and no one would know what a computer is (barring some unforseen Utopia arising from another financial system).
You obviously believe "if you're not with us, you're against us" makes sense. Here's a hint: that's not a good debate tactic. Pointing out one person's stupid money-making idea doesn't mean I don't believe in making money at all.
What I was doing was pointing out that almost anyone's sig can be considered silly, nutty, or of questionable intent one way or another. You attacked him for putting his opinion, in no uncertain terms, in his signature. Ignore him, think him a bleeding-heart moron (he may be, I dunno), but you didn't attempt to counter anything he said you just ridiculed him for voicing an opinion (making you off-topic at best, and more likely flamebait). You, on the other hand, are using your sig as a form of free advertising, not to promote an opinion. Neither one is necessarily wrong, and I would not have even given your sig a second thought had you not acted like an ass in response to his.
Go drink a beer or something, you need to lower your stress level a bit, even if only temporarily.
> > There are always some of those, but thankfully fewer [Christian fanatics] nowadays. > Dude, no offense, but are you completely batshit fucking insane?!?
Maybe, but do you seriously think there aren't fewer, as you say, "batshit insane" fundies today than during, say, the Salem witch trials? Notice he didn't say anything about their positions of power, where they can wield more influence over the crazies, but I believe his statement, taken exactly as said, is true.
> I always thought I was a geek playing d'n'd, now I realise it was 'Intense occult training'.
Man, and I thought my DM sucked before. Now I realize he's been hiding the TRUE power from our group for over a decade now! We must all get together in our suddenly-satanic circle to cure him -- with knives.
> Then it seems to me that the rest of the moderate Muslims should be able to see that it is in their best interest to get together and do something about the troublemakers
I keep seeing this sentiment stated, yet no one making it replies to the obvious response "Why don't Christians see that it's in their best interests to do something about their troublemakers" -- the KKK being the obvious choice.
> I am not a redneck, a republican, a neo-con, or a Zionist. I own weapons, but I do not hunt. I don't live in a trailer park. I own a truck but it's not american. [...] Pin a label on me if you dare
You aren't with "us," so you must be against "us." You're a terrorist!
That doesn't resolve the issue, it just increases the hatred from the people who no longer have that money, giving the citizens another reason to hate the U.S.: "we were trying to build, but then they took away our money."
No, people who thrive on hate will continue to hate, they'll just have to change their reasons slightly (if at all).
Of course it isn't, it's an excuse to riot. They have plenty of things to be pissed off about, but that they latch onto any lame excuse they can find shows that they are not interested in rational debate, they are interested in causing violence. This doesn't change the fact that the peaceful majority are not speaking out against it.
> Any specific reason I should be required to pay approximately fifty-six times more money to replace
Because if someone isn't making ridiculous amounts of money from something, the use of that thing must be unethical -- or at the very least, unpatriotic!
> That is one mighty fine thesis on what's wrong with all the anti-war hippies
You've got that backwards. The hippies are avoiding death while the toxoplasmosis causes tons of aggressive rednecks to go shoot at things in the desert without considering that someone might shoot back... or their parents considering it: note the nutbag Sheehan who didn't mind her son going to war until he was killed; imagine that happening in a war.
> What the fuck their keycard access system was doing on the same network as some of the infected computers is a complete mystery to me though.
I work at a (very small) hospital and our time & attendance system has a web frontend. The time clock is network-based. This system could be used for door access as well, although we do not. Basically, the answer to your question is "because the companies that desing the products are stupid and the hospital management wanted that exact product.!
> What is the territory of religion? Just out of curiousity...
The supernatural. Of course, the next question may be "what happens if something supernatural is identified and explained?" Then it's no longer supernatural.
Slashdot Mirror
> If he had to explain it to her many times then I guess it's not "no nosense" now is it?
No, it means she's stupid and has no business writing articles about things she has no knowledge of.
> Ahhh, anti-capitalism. A sign of a true liberal.
Ahh, ignorance and name calling.. Not sure what it's a sign of, but it's not a good one. First off, I'm not a liberal, although I do not consider it a "bad word" like you obviously do. Most American liberals (when used as a proper insult) are stuck behind rose-tinted glasses -- obiously he is not; he is quite the opposite, being so disillusioned. Secondly, I'm not anti-capitalism. In fact, I owe everything I own to capitalism, and I'm sure happy that I have it (except the bit of debt). Anarchy is a stupid idea for anyone but the strongest. In fact, since my paycheck comes solely from working with technology, I am extremely thankful for Capitalism. Without it, I would probably be a farm hand and no one would know what a computer is (barring some unforseen Utopia arising from another financial system).
You obviously believe "if you're not with us, you're against us" makes sense. Here's a hint: that's not a good debate tactic. Pointing out one person's stupid money-making idea doesn't mean I don't believe in making money at all.
What I was doing was pointing out that almost anyone's sig can be considered silly, nutty, or of questionable intent one way or another. You attacked him for putting his opinion, in no uncertain terms, in his signature. Ignore him, think him a bleeding-heart moron (he may be, I dunno), but you didn't attempt to counter anything he said you just ridiculed him for voicing an opinion (making you off-topic at best, and more likely flamebait). You, on the other hand, are using your sig as a form of free advertising, not to promote an opinion. Neither one is necessarily wrong, and I would not have even given your sig a second thought had you not acted like an ass in response to his.
Go drink a beer or something, you need to lower your stress level a bit, even if only temporarily.
> I'd never vote for an imbasil
Apparently you wouldn't vote for yourself either... Imbecile.
> Indeed, the newspaper who published the Muhammad caricatures, had previously rejected to publish Jesus caricatures not to enrage Christians.
Is there documentation of this online somewhere?
> > There are always some of those, but thankfully fewer [Christian fanatics] nowadays.
> Dude, no offense, but are you completely batshit fucking insane?!?
Maybe, but do you seriously think there aren't fewer, as you say, "batshit insane" fundies today than during, say, the Salem witch trials? Notice he didn't say anything about their positions of power, where they can wield more influence over the crazies, but I believe his statement, taken exactly as said, is true.
> I always thought I was a geek playing d'n'd, now I realise it was 'Intense occult training'.
Man, and I thought my DM sucked before. Now I realize he's been hiding the TRUE power from our group for over a decade now! We must all get together in our suddenly-satanic circle to cure him -- with knives.
> unfortaunatly they are acting exactly the way the rest of the world views them
Does that not imply that "they" are the way they are viewed?
> Then it seems to me that the rest of the moderate Muslims should be able to see that it is in their best interest to get together and do something about the troublemakers
I keep seeing this sentiment stated, yet no one making it replies to the obvious response "Why don't Christians see that it's in their best interests to do something about their troublemakers" -- the KKK being the obvious choice.
> I am not a redneck, a republican, a neo-con, or a Zionist. I own weapons, but I do not hunt. I don't live in a trailer park. I own a truck but it's not american. [...] Pin a label on me if you dare
You aren't with "us," so you must be against "us." You're a terrorist!
(do I need sarcasm tags?)
> Feel free to get off your asses and stop these freaks.
Why don't you ask the Pope to stop the KKK?
> more moral ambiguity from Darby, the guy with the nutty sig
At least he's not trying to profit from his sig.
> This whole Muslim issue can be easily resolved
That doesn't resolve the issue, it just increases the hatred from the people who no longer have that money, giving the citizens another reason to hate the U.S.: "we were trying to build, but then they took away our money."
No, people who thrive on hate will continue to hate, they'll just have to change their reasons slightly (if at all).
> The commandments, on the other hand, are immutable, they were given to Moses as tablets which were written by God.
The only problem with that is how many different versions there are.
> Do you really think it is about the cartoons?
Of course it isn't, it's an excuse to riot. They have plenty of things to be pissed off about, but that they latch onto any lame excuse they can find shows that they are not interested in rational debate, they are interested in causing violence. This doesn't change the fact that the peaceful majority are not speaking out against it.
> Any specific reason I should be required to pay approximately fifty-six times more money to replace
Because if someone isn't making ridiculous amounts of money from something, the use of that thing must be unethical -- or at the very least, unpatriotic!
> Yeesh, I hope they don't find out about the mix tapes I made in high school...
I hope they eventually remember that what you did was (IIRC) ruled to be legal.
> I've got dual LCDs at work, and one of them is slightly red-shifted
Holy $h!t, man, you'd better slow that thing down!!!
> That is one mighty fine thesis on what's wrong with all the anti-war hippies
You've got that backwards. The hippies are avoiding death while the toxoplasmosis causes tons of aggressive rednecks to go shoot at things in the desert without considering that someone might shoot back... or their parents considering it: note the nutbag Sheehan who didn't mind her son going to war until he was killed; imagine that happening in a war.
> But what about the groups like GNAA?
Their problem isn't toxoplasmosis, but idiocy.
> What the fuck their keycard access system was doing on the same network as some of the infected computers is a complete mystery to me though.
I work at a (very small) hospital and our time & attendance system has a web frontend. The time clock is network-based. This system could be used for door access as well, although we do not. Basically, the answer to your question is "because the companies that desing the products are stupid and the hospital management wanted that exact product.!
Oh, so if you are a good customer and shop there often, you get penalized...?
mebsite domiain.. wow. Preview, man...
The mebsite domiain I manage forwards email to gmail accounts so, in a sense, we already have this.
> You throw it forward, and instead of accelerating in the opposite direction, you accelerate in the same direction.
Then when you catch up to it, collect what you've thrown and throw it again?
> What is the territory of religion? Just out of curiousity...
The supernatural. Of course, the next question may be "what happens if something supernatural is identified and explained?" Then it's no longer supernatural.