Some might call it sad to think that screwing "lots" of girls is important. Sure, screwing is fun. It is pointless, but satisfying to an extent (because natural selection). Having lots of partners has always seemed to me kind of narcissistic and unnecessary. Saying that others have led a sad life just because they're not slutty is a bit much. What's wrong with him preferring to have a girlfriend rather than lots of random encounters?
You misunderstand me - what's sad is having the single-g/friend-only-plus-being-a-geek life and then trying to explain that guys who screw lots of girls are jealous of that.
I'd be equally sad if I said I was a virgin at age 19 and that other guys were jealous of that - it's just stupid.
What a stupid story - I spent my youth programming computers, building electronics, "hacking" (whatever the fuck it means now... it used to mean something very different in my youth) and screwing lots of girls. You've had a sad life, man.
How are you going to get better teachers in a country where 85% of the population grew up as second class citizens on reservations with little education just 20 years ago? It's going to take a few generations at least.
It's already been a few generations you idiot. I live here. Close to 100% of the students entering teacher-training colleges next year were born after apartheid and grew up under ANC rule. Close to 90% of the current crop of teachers were appointed during ANC rule (they purged the education system of non-struggle teachers the minute they gained control).
Lets see if I understand it correctly. I can wait until there are no more unmined btc. At that point the miner's only reason to continue mining is to get his fixed fee for verification. I can then spend a few thousand on mining rigs and provide the lowest fee (or for free) for verification, thus making it financially unfeasible for the existing miners to continue. In a few months of running at a loss I *should* be controlling more than 51% of the network because all the other miners have quit.
At that point the entire btc concept breaks down. I can seize coins (by never verifying them), transfer coins to myself, reverse verified transactions and possibly even "magically" create new bitcoins that I then proceed to verify.
If people stop mining, each miner gets more per time interval. Which makes it very attractive to mine again. Its a self-regulating system.
Unless there are no more coins left, at which point the miners will only do verification. It's probable that the mining network will shrink to a fraction of its current size as miners realise that it's not profitable to run that rig just for a percentage of transactions.
It's only an epidemic because the media portrays it that way. People being mean to other people is just a fact of life. It's nothing new, and I'd argue it was a lot worse in the past than it is today. The only difference is that today stories like this go national rather than remain confined to a local news station. Then the various news outlets beat the dead horse until a new salacious scandal can take its place.
The biggest problem with bullying today is this attitude that children need to be insulated from it rather than stand up against it.
No, the biggest problem with bullying these days is that we are not allowed to hit the bully, which is why the bully gets away with it. Another big problem is
that people like yourself feel it's no big deal. Luckily, if your kid bullies mine and I break your nose over it I only have to pay a small fine. More and more parents are starting to realise that it is better to simply go over to the house of the bully and break their parents nose.
What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'? If we're going to blame anyone I blame this girl's parents for raising her to be so emotionally weak that she would rather die than stand up for herself.
Who know who doesn't get bullied? Kids with backbones. Because it's no fun to bully kids who stand up for themselves.
Nope; the kids who get bullied are the ones who cannot stand up for themselves because the bully is some lumbering twat who's older and/or part of a group. You just look stupid (you probably are) when you say that a single small child is supposed to successfully defend against 25 giants. Did you even make it to high school?
(Yes, I'm calling you names, but you aren't allowed to call me names back; follow your own advice and simply stop being so emotionally weak that mere names get to you, you idiot).
Kill yourself. Drink some bleach and die. Now. Do it now. Now. Now. Now. Uh. Did I just commit a felony?
It's interesting that in this age of near-universal anonymity that people take pride in being arseholes. Do you take similar pride in being stupid? Do you proudly walk around saying "Hey, if I'm unable to perform simple arithmetic that's your fault"? Hmm? But here you (and others) are, proudly going around saying "I'm unable to fit into society and live by its rules, and anyone who faces the fallout... well, it's their fault for being thin-skinned and not my fault for being stupid..
Which would be..what, in this case? Equal creation by men and women? Or the previous, evidenceless and sexist assumption that "men must have done this"?
There's something deeply evolutionary to that:
If by "evolutionary" you mean "bullshitish justifications of our society's gender roles as biologically determined truths", yes.
Err, many of our "gender roles" are biologically determined. Sorry.
You should look up the actual numbers, it bolsters your argument. In any case, the bell curve for men is far flatter than the bell curve for women in almost every characteristic that you can think of (weight, height, intelligence, success, performance, etc) - men tend to extremes, always. Women cluster around the median. So, yeah, you won't see as many truly great and exceptional female artists/scientists/polymaths as you would male artists/scientists/polymaths. All the women that were not risk-averse never managed to procreate and/or propagate their genes, so I'd guess that this might not change for a few thousand generations, if at all.
Go back carefully over the past 30 years of US elections, or the "frre and fair" elections in Namibia, Zimbabwe or South Africa.
I hate to interject but here in South Africa our elections truly are fair and free. There is no rigging whatsoever to put the ANC into power repeatedly... why would the ruling party rig the elections when the citizens support them so much?
The answer is languages that aren't retarding. Seriously. The only reason make is required is because you let implementation details leak into the damn language.
Personally I need this. When doing builds off a single source tree for multiple targets then the "implementation details" such as the target name, target bit-width or whatever else is needed can be passed into the code using Make. Other "implementation details" are useful - embedding the git hash into the code makes it easier to determine which version of software sent the crash report. Signing a binary using a hash of the source is another "implementation detail".
Just because you're too stupid to do things like the git hash in your software doesn't mean that everyone wants to be stupid too; there's a reason why other build systems come and go while Make is still around year after year.
And yes, it is libel even if it is true - the defense against libel is that the allegations have to both be true as well as in the public interest.
The truth is always in the public interest.
No. If this statement, taken on its own, were even remotely true then there would be at least a single jurisdiction that would agree with it - not even the US with its myriad of state and federal laws believes that the truth is always in the public interest.
As a simple counterpoint - the US government believes that some things, even if true, is not in the public interest. A more detailed counterpoint is this: is it really in the public interest to know the preference of all the sexual activities of an individual? Should we we say "the truth is always in the public interest" and then force homosexuals to come out of the closet? Your argument says "Yes. You should not be sued for dragging someone out the closet even though they do not want to be dragged," while other jurisdictions (basically everywhere in the world other than the US) says that the individual who has been dragged out the closet can actually sue, unless of course they are in the public interest.
you're OK with the sites posting up details and slandering individuals?
Is it slander, if it is perfectly true? Unpleasant, yes, but "slander"?
In this country we have no slander laws; libel covers everything (speech, writing, publication, etc). And yes, it is libel even if it is true - the defense against libel is that the allegations have to both be true as well as in the public interest. Both those have to hold in order to defend a libel suit. Celebrities are considered to be items of public interest, btw.
1. Non-cooperation is neither illegal nor prejudicial to your case. You have a right, as a legal entity, to refuse to cooperate.
2. Bad-faith cooperation is neither illegal nor prejudicial to your case. You have a right, as a legal entity, to place limits on the extent of your cooperation, if any
The state can issue warrants for data, but until and unless they successfully do, they are entitled to sweet fuck-all from whoever they are requesting the data from. A court can go ahead and give a warrant for whatever it wants to, up to and including retrieving data that cannot possibly ever be retrieved: The respondent in such a case has to convince the court (not too hard with expert testimonies/affidavits) that such a request is not possible due to the laws of physics.
Seconded. Even though many long-time users are switching to Mint or similar, I believe that Ubuntu still commands the lions share of the linux-on-desktop-or-laptop market.
Slashdot Mirror
Some might call it sad to think that screwing "lots" of girls is important. Sure, screwing is fun. It is pointless, but satisfying to an extent (because natural selection). Having lots of partners has always seemed to me kind of narcissistic and unnecessary. Saying that others have led a sad life just because they're not slutty is a bit much. What's wrong with him preferring to have a girlfriend rather than lots of random encounters?
You misunderstand me - what's sad is having the single-g/friend-only-plus-being-a-geek life and then trying to explain that guys who screw lots of girls are jealous of that.
I'd be equally sad if I said I was a virgin at age 19 and that other guys were jealous of that - it's just stupid.
The bible was right after all... it was the snakes fault after all
(Yes, I was aiming for '+5 funny'... how did you know?)
EDLIN is for noobs who never learned to use the computer ... COPY CON FILENAME is where it's at, baby!!!
What a stupid story - I spent my youth programming computers, building electronics, "hacking" (whatever the fuck it means now ... it used to mean something very different in my youth) and screwing lots of girls. You've had a sad life, man.
How are you going to get better teachers in a country where 85% of the population grew up as second class citizens on reservations with little education just 20 years ago? It's going to take a few generations at least.
It's already been a few generations you idiot. I live here. Close to 100% of the students entering teacher-training colleges next year were born after apartheid and grew up under ANC rule. Close to 90% of the current crop of teachers were appointed during ANC rule (they purged the education system of non-struggle teachers the minute they gained control).
Lets see if I understand it correctly. I can wait until there are no more unmined btc. At that point the miner's only reason to continue mining is to get his fixed fee for verification. I can then spend a few thousand on mining rigs and provide the lowest fee (or for free) for verification, thus making it financially unfeasible for the existing miners to continue. In a few months of running at a loss I *should* be controlling more than 51% of the network because all the other miners have quit.
At that point the entire btc concept breaks down. I can seize coins (by never verifying them), transfer coins to myself, reverse verified transactions and possibly even "magically" create new bitcoins that I then proceed to verify.
What, that it's been nothing but a sham and a glorified tax shelter for the elitists of society since inception?
And this differs from other "legitimate" religions ... how?
If people stop mining, each miner gets more per time interval. Which makes it very attractive to mine again. Its a self-regulating system.
Unless there are no more coins left, at which point the miners will only do verification. It's probable that the mining network will shrink to a fraction of its current size as miners realise that it's not profitable to run that rig just for a percentage of transactions.
this "bullying" epidemic
It's only an epidemic because the media portrays it that way. People being mean to other people is just a fact of life. It's nothing new, and I'd argue it was a lot worse in the past than it is today. The only difference is that today stories like this go national rather than remain confined to a local news station. Then the various news outlets beat the dead horse until a new salacious scandal can take its place.
The biggest problem with bullying today is this attitude that children need to be insulated from it rather than stand up against it.
No, the biggest problem with bullying these days is that we are not allowed to hit the bully, which is why the bully gets away with it. Another big problem is that people like yourself feel it's no big deal. Luckily, if your kid bullies mine and I break your nose over it I only have to pay a small fine. More and more parents are starting to realise that it is better to simply go over to the house of the bully and break their parents nose.
What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'? If we're going to blame anyone I blame this girl's parents for raising her to be so emotionally weak that she would rather die than stand up for herself.
Who know who doesn't get bullied? Kids with backbones. Because it's no fun to bully kids who stand up for themselves.
Nope; the kids who get bullied are the ones who cannot stand up for themselves because the bully is some lumbering twat who's older and/or part of a group. You just look stupid (you probably are) when you say that a single small child is supposed to successfully defend against 25 giants. Did you even make it to high school?
(Yes, I'm calling you names, but you aren't allowed to call me names back; follow your own advice and simply stop being so emotionally weak that mere names get to you, you idiot).
Kill yourself. Drink some bleach and die. Now. Do it now. Now. Now. Now. Uh. Did I just commit a felony?
It's interesting that in this age of near-universal anonymity that people take pride in being arseholes. Do you take similar pride in being stupid? Do you proudly walk around saying "Hey, if I'm unable to perform simple arithmetic that's your fault"? Hmm? But here you (and others) are, proudly going around saying "I'm unable to fit into society and live by its rules, and anyone who faces the fallout... well, it's their fault for being thin-skinned and not my fault for being stupid..
What are you talking about? Both genders were fully and always busy as far as we can tell for most of human existence.
Which would be..what, in this case? Equal creation by men and women? Or the previous, evidenceless and sexist assumption that "men must have done this"?
If by "evolutionary" you mean "bullshitish justifications of our society's gender roles as biologically determined truths", yes.
Err, many of our "gender roles" are biologically determined. Sorry.
I take it you don't know much history then.
and then go on to say this:
Pretty much anywhere that had a matriarchal society the women were the historians (the two tend to go hand in hand throughout history).
Go on, show me those successful matriarchal societies, with detailed written records and preserved art, history and culture ....
You should look up the actual numbers, it bolsters your argument. In any case, the bell curve for men is far flatter than the bell curve for women in almost every characteristic that you can think of (weight, height, intelligence, success, performance, etc) - men tend to extremes, always. Women cluster around the median. So, yeah, you won't see as many truly great and exceptional female artists/scientists/polymaths as you would male artists/scientists/polymaths. All the women that were not risk-averse never managed to procreate and/or propagate their genes, so I'd guess that this might not change for a few thousand generations, if at all.
Did I miss anything else?
That whole fire thing.
Should have secured the IP on that before we let it get away from us.
I hear that some real legal-eagle is on that one.
Go back carefully over the past 30 years of US elections, or the "frre and fair" elections in Namibia, Zimbabwe or South Africa.
I hate to interject but here in South Africa our elections truly are fair and free. There is no rigging whatsoever to put the ANC into power repeatedly... why would the ruling party rig the elections when the citizens support them so much?
Here, the voters have spoken... the bastards!
The answer is languages that aren't retarding. Seriously. The only reason make is required is because you let implementation details leak into the damn language.
Personally I need this. When doing builds off a single source tree for multiple targets then the "implementation details" such as the target name, target bit-width or whatever else is needed can be passed into the code using Make. Other "implementation details" are useful - embedding the git hash into the code makes it easier to determine which version of software sent the crash report. Signing a binary using a hash of the source is another "implementation detail".
Just because you're too stupid to do things like the git hash in your software doesn't mean that everyone wants to be stupid too; there's a reason why other build systems come and go while Make is still around year after year.
Came here for airplane jokes, not disappointed :)
Roger, roger...
And yes, it is libel even if it is true - the defense against libel is that the allegations have to both be true as well as in the public interest.
The truth is always in the public interest.
No. If this statement, taken on its own, were even remotely true then there would be at least a single jurisdiction that would agree with it - not even the US with its myriad of state and federal laws believes that the truth is always in the public interest.
As a simple counterpoint - the US government believes that some things, even if true, is not in the public interest. A more detailed counterpoint is this: is it really in the public interest to know the preference of all the sexual activities of an individual? Should we we say "the truth is always in the public interest" and then force homosexuals to come out of the closet? Your argument says "Yes. You should not be sued for dragging someone out the closet even though they do not want to be dragged," while other jurisdictions (basically everywhere in the world other than the US) says that the individual who has been dragged out the closet can actually sue, unless of course they are in the public interest.
My gut reaction is that I would like it to be a crime, but it may be difficult to establish in law.
Not difficult at all - threatening to do something completely legal unless someone pays you is still blackmail!.
Is it slander, if it is perfectly true? Unpleasant, yes, but "slander"?
In this country we have no slander laws; libel covers everything (speech, writing, publication, etc). And yes, it is libel even if it is true - the defense against libel is that the allegations have to both be true as well as in the public interest. Both those have to hold in order to defend a libel suit. Celebrities are considered to be items of public interest, btw.
Undoing incorrect mod
Two can play the FUD game.
...
Dishonest comparison;
You know, I'm pretty certain that was his point :)
1. Non-cooperation is neither illegal nor prejudicial to your case. You have a right, as a legal entity, to refuse to cooperate.
2. Bad-faith cooperation is neither illegal nor prejudicial to your case. You have a right, as a legal entity, to place limits on the extent of your cooperation, if any
The state can issue warrants for data, but until and unless they successfully do, they are entitled to sweet fuck-all from whoever they are requesting the data from. A court can go ahead and give a warrant for whatever it wants to, up to and including retrieving data that cannot possibly ever be retrieved: The respondent in such a case has to convince the court (not too hard with expert testimonies/affidavits) that such a request is not possible due to the laws of physics.
Seconded. Even though many long-time users are switching to Mint or similar, I believe that Ubuntu still commands the lions share of the linux-on-desktop-or-laptop market.