> Content on Facebook (and any other social networking site with privacy controls) isn't for public consumption - it's for consumption by those whom you've marked as friends.
You mean, those you've marked as friends and those that facebook decides to sell the information to.
This "strong cannabis" argument is fucking retarded. Do you think drunk drivers who stick to beer are less dangerous ?
I'm sure it's true that cannabis today is stronger than in the 60s/70s but so what ? People will carry on taking a drug until they obtain the effect they are looking for, so back then they probably sat around smoking joint after joint until they were properly fucked up. Now they only need a few tokes to get properly fucked up - the main difference is they are causing less damage to their lungs.
Once you get married, I bet you find yourself watching TV less. Part of that may be you have a richer life and other activities to occupy you but mostly its because chick tv sucks big green donkey dick
> 'Rich' people have lots of money, but they usually get that money through hard work, thrift, cleverness and taking risk (coupled with a bit of luck).
No, they usually get rich by having rich parents. This gives them the education, connections, attitude and investment capital to get even richer. They can afford to take more risk because they can afford to take chances, lose, and still have money left over to try again or they know their families will pick them up again if they fail, or.. for *really* successful groups like bankers, if they risk and lose everything, they can get the taxpayer or some other losers to pay for their losses. This model will not be allowed to continue. Live with it.
Yeah, often the industry shills dominate the first few pages of reviews.. good example was Forgetting Sarah Marshall, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800039/usercomments It's insulting that those dicks are not smart enough to come close to sounding like real people: Kristen Bell plays Sarah Marshall, the iconic ex of the film, but her role sits on the back burner along with the truly hilarious Aldous Snow (Russell Brand) to make way for a leading role in Mila Kunis. From the beginning it is clear that her not-too-smart and shallow role of "That 70s Show" didn't follow her to "Forgetting"'s script. Kunis plays Racheal, a hospitality girl for the hotel that "Forgetting" takes place, and subsequently deals with Peter as he tries to get over Sarah Marshall. Her character is intelligent, charismatic, and appreciative of the good in people, a strong juxtaposition to the seemingly.. if that was written by a real person I'm an AI
Understandable, habitual liars often use a 'tell the truth sometimes' strategy so asking someone the same question 10 times is surprisingly effective. It takes more determination than many people possess to lie about something 10 times in a row. If you can't avoid hiring the dishonest, at least hire people who aren't dishonest *and* stupid.
> (oh and there is obviously a difference between Christians and hippies, for starters the fact that Christians actually have a purpose and generally act very sensibly)
Really ?? You must know better quality Christians and lower quality hippies than I do. Or, maybe you don't actually know any hippies, you just assume that the stereotypes from South Park etc are reasonably accurate.
Risk models are largely irrelevant because the only risk anyone in the financial sector is really interested in minimizing is the risk that they will get fired. The way to do that is to do almost exactly the same thing as everybody else, no matter how mind blowing stupid it is. Plenty of people realized that banks etc were not nearly as sound as commonly believed years ago. Those that tried to act on this were fired long ago since they weren't making as high a ROI as those willing to invest in dodgy hedgefunds etc. Rational market my ass.
No, that's the problem with facebook, what they end up knowing about you is much more than you them. As soon as you add a page, people can find you and add information about you without your consent, not just the bare fact that you're friends with these psycho's but they will tag photos they have taken of you at various events you might not want potential employers or mates to know about etc.
> The Internet is not a free ride on the libel train.
Yes it is. You are a twat. Sue me.
Do you really believe that all communications should be monitored and logged so that people can go after anybody saying any little thing that bugs them ?
Insightful, my ass. Points 2&3 are the same for a start.
> 2) There're are no fact that could lead us to think after-life exists (from a scientifical point of view)
Er, no. This whole topic is exactly that. The fact that vast numbers of people think they are feeling/seeing/conversing with their loved ones after their death certainly could lead one to think that there *might* be an after-life. Frankly any other position is unscientific. If one is just going to assume that all these people *have* to be hallucinating, because the only alternative you can think of leads one to an "unscientific" possibility, you're not being more scientific - you just have blind faith in what you think of as "science".
A scientific approach is to question the theory, make predictions and test them. For instance, if the theory is that people's grief is leading them to hallucinate, then the more upset people are, the more likely they would be to hallucinate, this could be measured and tested, a strong correlation between level of grief and likeliness of hallucination would strengthen the theory, etc.
Disclaimer: I don't believe in life after death, but this argument stinks of smugness.
An American one. They specialize *much* later than the English [who are down to 3 subjects, eg Maths, More Maths, and Physics] for A levels [at 16]. Once at university Americans still have to take a relatively broad range of classes for the first 2 years. So, even in good US universities the first year or two only gets them up to A level standard. Top performers make up for it later on because after being held back from focusing only on what interests them for so long its such a relief to be able to concentrate that they really get stuck into it.
Ok, ok, I'll feed the troll... front end work especially in php is often done by people who barely qualify as programmers, but it can also be pretty respectable work and has its own challenges that are as tough to solve well as anything else.
I'm also not convinced they are the lowest of the low either, the guys who made facebook did ok for themselves, as did the people who put together ebay, amazon, etc. None of those involved anything justifiably patentable but making a front end that works well can pay off.
So, your argument is that it's hypocritical of Obama to use the donations people have sent to his election campaign to try and get himself elected as opposed to giving it to other candidates ?
Is this really an argument that you think will impress anyone ? If you really want to prevent Obama being elected, I recommend you argue on his behalf.. you're about as helpful as an Al Qaeda endorsement. Things are stacked sufficiently against McCain without your help.
> all the bad impressions we have about people from other countries
Yeah, people from other countries suck. I'm not so keen on people from other states either. Or towns come to think of it, and those people on the east side of town are pretty sucky too come to think of it. I'm not really that keen on the next street over, its a bit scuzzy, neighbours suck... actually, people other than me are basically suspect. So, when I see a dumb comment like yours, it just reaffirms my conviction that people who aren't me are flawed. You really ought to watch that.
Notice that word 'Fractional' in FRB, what do you think it's there for ? Have a look at the wiki entry, or *any* explanation of FRB. From wiki:
If banks did not lend out their available funds after meeting their reserve requirements, depositors might have to pay banks to provide safekeeping services for their money. For the economy and the banking system as a whole, the practice of keeping only a fraction of deposits on hand has an important cumulative effect. Referred to as the fractional reserve system, it permits the banking system to "create" money.
I'm more impressed that they made their park a union jack, I guess that was put up a 100+ years ago, so maybe they just have a history of sucking up to the powers that be..
> Nobody would have seriously considered the myspace page to be anything but the ramblings of an angry young person
Really ?? There's really nothing more plausible and therefore more damaging she could have said. She has a right to say what she likes, but maybe teachers have a right to refuse to teach little bitches who spout crap about them.
Slashdot Mirror
> Content on Facebook (and any other social networking site with privacy controls) isn't for public consumption - it's for consumption by those whom you've marked as friends.
You mean, those you've marked as friends and those that facebook decides to sell the information to.
This "strong cannabis" argument is fucking retarded. Do you think drunk drivers who stick to beer are less dangerous ?
I'm sure it's true that cannabis today is stronger than in the 60s/70s but so what ? People will carry on taking a drug until they obtain the effect they are looking for, so back then they probably sat around smoking joint after joint until they were properly fucked up. Now they only need a few tokes to get properly fucked up - the main difference is they are causing less damage to their lungs.
> Note to self, never read the last 50 pages of Snow Crash.
Fixed that for you. Loved the [:-50]
> If yes, then why are you posting on Slashdot? ;)
Because I fucking *hate* Sex and the city
Once you get married, I bet you find yourself watching TV less. Part of that may be you have a richer life and other activities to occupy you but mostly its because chick tv sucks big green donkey dick
> 'Rich' people have lots of money, but they usually get that money through hard work, thrift, cleverness and taking risk (coupled with a bit of luck).
No, they usually get rich by having rich parents. This gives them the education, connections, attitude and investment capital to get even richer. They can afford to take more risk because they can afford to take chances, lose, and still have money left over to try again or they know their families will pick them up again if they fail, or.. for *really* successful groups like bankers, if they risk and lose everything, they can get the taxpayer or some other losers to pay for their losses. This model will not be allowed to continue. Live with it.
Yeah, often the industry shills dominate the first few pages of reviews.. good example was Forgetting Sarah Marshall, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800039/usercomments It's insulting that those dicks are not smart enough to come close to sounding like real people: Kristen Bell plays Sarah Marshall, the iconic ex of the film, but her role sits on the back burner along with the truly hilarious Aldous Snow (Russell Brand) to make way for a leading role in Mila Kunis. From the beginning it is clear that her not-too-smart and shallow role of "That 70s Show" didn't follow her to "Forgetting"'s script. Kunis plays Racheal, a hospitality girl for the hotel that "Forgetting" takes place, and subsequently deals with Peter as he tries to get over Sarah Marshall. Her character is intelligent, charismatic, and appreciative of the good in people, a strong juxtaposition to the seemingly.. if that was written by a real person I'm an AI
Understandable, habitual liars often use a 'tell the truth sometimes' strategy so asking someone the same question 10 times is surprisingly effective. It takes more determination than many people possess to lie about something 10 times in a row. If you can't avoid hiring the dishonest, at least hire people who aren't dishonest *and* stupid.
Your post is full of all kinds of nonsense, but the bit that most confuses me is:
> Then the British decided they don't want the Jews in their land,
What are you talking about ?
> (oh and there is obviously a difference between Christians and hippies, for starters the fact that Christians actually have a purpose and generally act very sensibly)
Really ?? You must know better quality Christians and lower quality hippies than I do. Or, maybe you don't actually know any hippies, you just assume that the stereotypes from South Park etc are reasonably accurate.
Risk models are largely irrelevant because the only risk anyone in the financial sector is really interested in minimizing is the risk that they will get fired. The way to do that is to do almost exactly the same thing as everybody else, no matter how mind blowing stupid it is. Plenty of people realized that banks etc were not nearly as sound as commonly believed years ago. Those that tried to act on this were fired long ago since they weren't making as high a ROI as those willing to invest in dodgy hedgefunds etc. Rational market my ass.
No, that's the problem with facebook, what they end up knowing about you is much more than you them. As soon as you add a page, people can find you and add information about you without your consent, not just the bare fact that you're friends with these psycho's but they will tag photos they have taken of you at various events you might not want potential employers or mates to know about etc.
> The Internet is not a free ride on the libel train.
Yes it is. You are a twat. Sue me.
Do you really believe that all communications should be monitored and logged so that people can go after anybody saying any little thing that bugs them ?
Insightful, my ass. Points 2&3 are the same for a start.
> 2) There're are no fact that could lead us to think after-life exists (from a scientifical point of view)
Er, no. This whole topic is exactly that. The fact that vast numbers of people think they are feeling/seeing/conversing with their loved ones after their death certainly could lead one to think that there *might* be an after-life. Frankly any other position is unscientific. If one is just going to assume that all these people *have* to be hallucinating, because the only alternative you can think of leads one to an "unscientific" possibility, you're not being more scientific - you just have blind faith in what you think of as "science".
A scientific approach is to question the theory, make predictions and test them. For instance, if the theory is that people's grief is leading them to hallucinate, then the more upset people are, the more likely they would be to hallucinate, this could be measured and tested, a strong correlation between level of grief and likeliness of hallucination would strengthen the theory, etc.
Disclaimer: I don't believe in life after death, but this argument stinks of smugness.
They are of course perfect for making toast, slice and cook together. Steaks are doable but they turn out a bit rare.
> So what kind of university are you at?
An American one. They specialize *much* later than the English [who are down to 3 subjects, eg Maths, More Maths, and Physics] for A levels [at 16]. Once at university Americans still have to take a relatively broad range of classes for the first 2 years. So, even in good US universities the first year or two only gets them up to A level standard. Top performers make up for it later on because after being held back from focusing only on what interests them for so long its such a relief to be able to concentrate that they really get stuck into it.
Ok, ok, I'll feed the troll... front end work especially in php is often done by people who barely qualify as programmers, but it can also be pretty respectable work and has its own challenges that are as tough to solve well as anything else.
I'm also not convinced they are the lowest of the low either, the guys who made facebook did ok for themselves, as did the people who put together ebay, amazon, etc. None of those involved anything justifiably patentable but making a front end that works well can pay off.
So, your argument is that it's hypocritical of Obama to use the donations people have sent to his election campaign to try and get himself elected as opposed to giving it to other candidates ?
Is this really an argument that you think will impress anyone ? If you really want to prevent Obama being elected, I recommend you argue on his behalf.. you're about as helpful as an Al Qaeda endorsement. Things are stacked sufficiently against McCain without your help.
> all the bad impressions we have about people from other countries
Yeah, people from other countries suck. I'm not so keen on people from other states either. Or towns come to think of it, and those people on the east side of town are pretty sucky too come to think of it. I'm not really that keen on the next street over, its a bit scuzzy, neighbours suck... actually, people other than me are basically suspect. So, when I see a dumb comment like yours, it just reaffirms my conviction that people who aren't me are flawed. You really ought to watch that.
Shouting something does not make it true.
Notice that word 'Fractional' in FRB, what do you think it's there for ? Have a look at the wiki entry, or *any* explanation of FRB. From wiki:
If banks did not lend out their available funds after meeting their reserve requirements, depositors might have to pay banks to provide safekeeping services for their money. For the economy and the banking system as a whole, the practice of keeping only a fraction of deposits on hand has an important cumulative effect. Referred to as the fractional reserve system, it permits the banking system to "create" money.
We can live without almost the entire banking sector. What we can't live without is money. Print the money, let the sector fall, fuck em.
Actually, 14.4kbps means 14.4 k *bits* / second
> If so we've got more serious problems to worry about than the Dow.
We sure do: peak oil, global warming, asteroids, people who actually like Murder She Wrote. Now that's scary.
I'm more impressed that they made their park a union jack, I guess that was put up a 100+ years ago, so maybe they just have a history of sucking up to the powers that be..
I hate people who repeat themselves when nailed in an argument instead of either acknowledging the point or refuting it.
> Nobody would have seriously considered the myspace page to be anything but the ramblings of an angry young person
Really ?? There's really nothing more plausible and therefore more damaging she could have said. She has a right to say what she likes, but maybe teachers have a right to refuse to teach little bitches who spout crap about them.