When you can't automate something, do it with human power. I don't see why Google doesn't hire a dozen or so college-age kids to do basic data entry on this sort of thing. I'm sure they know how important the power of an accurate search is.
I don't think there's a person charismatic enough on this entire planet to reason away most of the shit the Catholic church does. Even if Jesus Christ himself came back, he wouldn't be defending them or any other church.
How date they enlist the police to seize all this property over a civil matter. Oh wait this is someone we hate unlike the piratebarry guys? Oh, never mind. Woot for justice!
...this is taking place on American soil. The Pirate Bay stuff happened in Sweden, where they were heavily influenced by the American government. Incidentally, being a politician and succumbing to foreign influence is a pretty big crime in Sweden.
In Sweden, Swedish law applies - the "would only be rape in Sweden" argument holds no water, as that was where the events (rape or no) happened.
It does hold water. It holds an entire fucking lake of water. I really don't think a whole lot of people define rape as "fucking someone and then regretting it". Rape is being sexually assaulted under coercion/or threat of force.
Interestingly enough, the Japanese did something similar to this when Christianity was spreading throughout their country. They used Fumi-e, a plate or stone with a picture of Jesus or another major Christian religious figure or symbol on it. One had to step on it to prove that they were not a Christian. Essentially, they were assuming that people who cared so much about their faith to risk death would not dare blaspheme it, and they were right.
However, I doubt it would actually work in preventing, say, a fundamentalist terrorist (of any faith) from getting past a checkpoint. They'd just do it and rationalize that "God will forgive me as I am carrying out his mission and this is what is required to do that". Christianity has a lot of prohibitions against killing and yet that didn't stop a few of them from shooting abortion doctors.
The "substance" changes, but not the "accidents". The "substance" is something that is unobservable. The "accidents" are the observable part of the bread and wine. This way it is perfectly compatible with science, because it doesn't make any claims that could be proven wrong be science. If there is no way to check if the substance changed, it could have changed or it didn't change. There is no way to check this claim.
...what?
So they're literally saying "It's different, but not in any way that you could possibly ever detect"? They're seriously going there?
Here's an example of exactly that, a debate involving Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry. (Or rather, the link is to the results of the debate tracked by the audience responding to a question via ballot before and after the debate to reflect their opinion and whether it has changed.) Watch the whole debate, it's worth it and heavily mirrored on YouTube.
I take a bit of that back - of course no place would be *entirely* free from natural disaster. "Mosty free" would be a better way to put things.
Take Arizona, for instance - the biggest natural disasters that I know of offhand (without Googling) are the occasional wildfire and the *very* rare hurricane/tropical storm that makes it that far inland from the Pacific Coast. The list is pretty damn short.
I feel somewhat bad for all the current artists getting screwed (and less so for the popular ones, because even with the RIAA taking a lot of money they're still fucking rich), but the RIAA is going into the shitter. They're essentially irrelevant now - more and more music is being sold via iTunes and other services. Pretty soon, CDs will be a novelty like vinyl records.
Every musician I know who aspires to become a professional performer is very aware of the raw deal artists have been getting for decades and now know to stay away from the really big labels. It's harder to screw people over when everyone knows the deal is most definitely not in your favor.
The U.S. surely has some areas that are free from natural disasters like tornadoes, flooding, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. You always see the same few places getting socked by something horrible - and yet, a large amount of the Midwest is practically deserted.
Why hasn't the people who live there moved somewhere like that? More importantly, why hasn't the federal government encouraged people to move to such a place? Instead, we keep bailing these people out who repeatedly choose a poor location for a home. Being stubborn and saying "We'll rebuild" when your area is constantly damaged by natural disasters isn't brave - it's moronic. It might make sense in a smaller country, but one of the things we have a lot of in America is land.
Exactly! I think it'd be safe to say that a lot of laws the Republican majority are passing wouldn't be able to get enough votes to override a Presidential veto. He can essentially hold whatever law he wants hostage to get his agenda moving along - he just doesn't have the balls to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
Kabbalah is just Numerology with beaded curtains and shag carpeting.
I think music like this would actually be really, really good for horror movies. It was a bit unsettling.
Important tip: when using iGrind, keep your iPhone away from your nose.
When you can't automate something, do it with human power. I don't see why Google doesn't hire a dozen or so college-age kids to do basic data entry on this sort of thing. I'm sure they know how important the power of an accurate search is.
2011 List of American companies that don't abuse human rights:
1) Bob's Diner, Kennesaw, Georgia, USA
2) Samir's News Stand, New York City, New York, USA
Wow, I thought the only guns /. geeks knew about were of the "hot glue" and "N.E.S." varieties.
They funded every guy into office. They're not going to dick about them.
FTFY.
Don't you mean Windows Bing Livemail Yahoo Hot 2010 Professional Edition?
I don't think there's a person charismatic enough on this entire planet to reason away most of the shit the Catholic church does. Even if Jesus Christ himself came back, he wouldn't be defending them or any other church.
Umm, have you actually met any geek girls? Better grab on to something*.
* blatant over-generalization based on anecdotal experience
Well now, isn't that the whole point?
How date they enlist the police to seize all this property over a civil matter. Oh wait this is someone we hate unlike the piratebarry guys? Oh, never mind. Woot for justice!
...this is taking place on American soil. The Pirate Bay stuff happened in Sweden, where they were heavily influenced by the American government. Incidentally, being a politician and succumbing to foreign influence is a pretty big crime in Sweden.
To be fair, Spain are experts in "Non-working". For instance, a large portion of their populace is "Non-working".
In Sweden, Swedish law applies - the "would only be rape in Sweden" argument holds no water, as that was where the events (rape or no) happened.
It does hold water. It holds an entire fucking lake of water. I really don't think a whole lot of people define rape as "fucking someone and then regretting it". Rape is being sexually assaulted under coercion/or threat of force.
Interestingly enough, the Japanese did something similar to this when Christianity was spreading throughout their country. They used Fumi-e, a plate or stone with a picture of Jesus or another major Christian religious figure or symbol on it. One had to step on it to prove that they were not a Christian. Essentially, they were assuming that people who cared so much about their faith to risk death would not dare blaspheme it, and they were right.
However, I doubt it would actually work in preventing, say, a fundamentalist terrorist (of any faith) from getting past a checkpoint. They'd just do it and rationalize that "God will forgive me as I am carrying out his mission and this is what is required to do that". Christianity has a lot of prohibitions against killing and yet that didn't stop a few of them from shooting abortion doctors.
The "substance" changes, but not the "accidents". The "substance" is something that is unobservable. The "accidents" are the observable part of the bread and wine. This way it is perfectly compatible with science, because it doesn't make any claims that could be proven wrong be science. If there is no way to check if the substance changed, it could have changed or it didn't change. There is no way to check this claim.
...what?
So they're literally saying "It's different, but not in any way that you could possibly ever detect"? They're seriously going there?
Here's an example of exactly that, a debate involving Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry. (Or rather, the link is to the results of the debate tracked by the audience responding to a question via ballot before and after the debate to reflect their opinion and whether it has changed.) Watch the whole debate, it's worth it and heavily mirrored on YouTube.
No, never dig straight up or down! What if there's lava or a creeper there?
I take a bit of that back - of course no place would be *entirely* free from natural disaster. "Mosty free" would be a better way to put things.
Take Arizona, for instance - the biggest natural disasters that I know of offhand (without Googling) are the occasional wildfire and the *very* rare hurricane/tropical storm that makes it that far inland from the Pacific Coast. The list is pretty damn short.
I feel somewhat bad for all the current artists getting screwed (and less so for the popular ones, because even with the RIAA taking a lot of money they're still fucking rich), but the RIAA is going into the shitter. They're essentially irrelevant now - more and more music is being sold via iTunes and other services. Pretty soon, CDs will be a novelty like vinyl records.
Every musician I know who aspires to become a professional performer is very aware of the raw deal artists have been getting for decades and now know to stay away from the really big labels. It's harder to screw people over when everyone knows the deal is most definitely not in your favor.
You know, this has always made me wonder.
The U.S. surely has some areas that are free from natural disasters like tornadoes, flooding, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. You always see the same few places getting socked by something horrible - and yet, a large amount of the Midwest is practically deserted.
Why hasn't the people who live there moved somewhere like that? More importantly, why hasn't the federal government encouraged people to move to such a place? Instead, we keep bailing these people out who repeatedly choose a poor location for a home. Being stubborn and saying "We'll rebuild" when your area is constantly damaged by natural disasters isn't brave - it's moronic. It might make sense in a smaller country, but one of the things we have a lot of in America is land.
Exactly! I think it'd be safe to say that a lot of laws the Republican majority are passing wouldn't be able to get enough votes to override a Presidential veto. He can essentially hold whatever law he wants hostage to get his agenda moving along - he just doesn't have the balls to do it.
Because it's part of our jurisdiction as World Police.
UUUHHHHHHHMERRRRRRRICUH FUCK YEAH!
Which organizations were freedom fighters and became terror organizations?
Easy. Freedom Fighters are on your side, and Terrorist Organizations are on their side.
What's it gonna do, make your wrist joint weaker so it hangs limp all the time? It'd be easier just to buy an iPhone, it does the same thing.
You won't be laughing when a terrorist hijacks a train and crashes it into the White House.
"FBI Agents found a copy of Rollercoaster Tycoon on a laptop, which was described as a 'terrorist train crashing simulator'."