some colleges assign class B ip addresses to their students. therefore, those computers are directly accessible by the internet if said colleges do not have firewalls blocking the traffic from the outside (i know of at least one pretty good sized state university setup like that). it would probably be in their best interest to set up the residential network differently, but right now, that's the way it is. therefore, even shares over the windows network neighborhood are open to the internet. and we all know how many people put passwords on their shared folders...
well, the problem that the telco's have is that the government promotes competition, regardless of who owns the infrastructure. SBC has been taking a lot of flack because they charge high prices and have come in and taken over a lot of local telephone companies (happened here in CT with them taking over SNET). then they go and charge higher prices than the local company did. well, they've been running TV ads saying how people go and complain about them, but they're the real telco because they take care of the whole infrastructure. they say that most telco's are a bunch of marketing and sales people, but when it comes to fixing the telephone lines and stuff, SBC is the one that goes and and does that. i, personally, don't see a problem with using someone else's lines for a cheaper service. i'm a consumer, i shouldn't be bullied into a monopoly over the local telephone service or cable tv service or broadband internet, or whatever it is. that's why the government has these regulations. and because the regulations hold true for the local/long distance thing, i'm sure once VoIP becomes mainstream, the same thing will happen. i'm pissed that we now only have one cable tv provider in my area. we used to have TCI cablevision, then SNET (the local telephone company) offered it at a much lower price. it was great until just before SBC bought out SNET. then they got rid of the cable tv and we were forced to use AT&T for it. i consider that a monopoly, but the government doesn't. it's a problem. i think we pay like $50 a month for extended basic cable tv service (not even digital cable). there's no choice for just basic service that just gets the major networks either. of course now comcast bought the cable tv service from AT&T, so we'll see what happens now.
"I, the incumbent last mile carrier, do all this hard work to provide all the infrastructure necessary for VoIP to happen, and incur all the costs then these upstart VoIP companies come in an just take advantage of it! It's not fair! We can't compete when they get to have the infrastructure for free!"
the problem with this is i don't think the other services get to use the infrastructure for free. they pay like a "rental" fee for using it. but the reason they can charge less for the service is because they don't have to pay technicians to repair the infrastructure when it goes down.
it's all just stupid, but either way i don't think this bill will cover things like routers or cable tv splitters or anything like that, unless your terms of service actually say that you are only paying for the use of one computer/tv/whatever and any additional ones cost more.
although it woudl be quite amusing to see that happen, i think that the ruling would be that the makers of the nat boxes are not accomplices because you just need to make the judgement as to whether or not you can use one legally according to your isp's tos. it's like that marker trick to get around those copy protected cd's (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002may/gee2002 0521011807.htm). you can't sue the marker-makers just because you can use a marker to do something illegal. and since there are isp's that do allow you to have home networks at no extra charge, selling nat boxes would be completely legal. just buy at your own discresion.
i honestly don't think it matters if gsm is better than cdma or cdma is better than gsm. what matters is that gsm is widely used in the surrounding countries. who cares if cdma will give more money to american companies, america will also have to help support their cdma network, but if they get gsm, the surrounding countries can help once the united states is out of there. i don't think it really matters if the american companies get the money, that's kind of an unfair thing to do. screw them into using american companies for things like that. and honestly, right now, and even after the war is over, deciding which wireless network standard to use is not all that important.
To better position American companies they are also going to change the system of measurement from metric to US Standard (whatever the hell its called).
it's called the english system. it's also used in england, not just the united states. and to the person who made the comment about driving on the left, the only countries that do that are england and most of its former colonies (the ones that were liberated after the car became popular, unlike the united states).
the problem with your argument is that your ISP does not have any revenue from you if you use VoIP from someone else. if you steal VoIP from your ISP, then you are both harming and defrauding them.
using too much bandwidth is not defrauding anyone, in fact, unless you are specifically altering hardware to "get more bandwidth" or stealing a connection from the ISP, you aren't doing anything wrong. they provide you with the internet connection, it's their decision as to how they limit your use (some ISP's block P2P connections). if they want to shutdown your service after you transfer "too much" information to or from the internet, they can, but it should be written in the terms of service.
running a NAT box or router so more than one computer can connect is not a violation unless it is specifically stated that your connection is only for one computer and you must pay for each additional computer connected. if, and only if, your ToS says that, then yes, you are defrauding or "harming" your ISP.
as for changing the ToS, i have never seen it change drastically without them notifying you. usually a change is something small like the way they word something.
and a final comment. when getting broadband, i had the option of going with SBC DSL or with AT&T cable (which is now comcast). we got DSL because AT&T said you could not run servers using your connection (servers being ftp, http, telnet, ssh, whatever, probably includes P2P applications as well). i didn't like that, so i went with SBC even though the upstream sucks. so read the ToS before you sign up for anything anyways. but if i had AT&T, and tried to run my ftp server or "share my bandwidth" with others (since that's what they called running a server, i would be "harming" them. the bill gives more legal rights to teh telecommunications companies, but i don't see any questions as to what harm means. i think in this sense it's meant almost the same way as defraud.
i get absolutely no spam. why? because i don't post my email account. i'm sure taco has a private email account that all his friends and family use and only has his slashdot account for the stupid slashdotters who sign him up for stupid spam lists. the difference between spam email and junk mail is that all street addresses are public knowledge (hence the reason why they're addressed to "resident" and not a person). i think it'd be terrible to charge per email. i can't believe i'd ever hear taco say that it should cost money to do that.
microsoft also gets a lot of money from support. that's where a lot of the money lies, not just teh sale of their products, because if that were true, they'd lose a lot of money to pirates. so just because they have 100% market share doesn't mean they'll never continue to gain money. look at their products. each new one costs a lot more than the old one. winxp is really pricey, even teh upgrades for it are pricey. i don't see microsoft losing money or stopping the gain of money anytime soon unless someone comes out with this kickass product that'll change our lives completely (but that sounds like the segway and that hasn't changed life, nor will it).
ok, i don't think there's a backdoor, but i know windows xp comes installed with a special microsoft tech support user. how do they get to use that user to fix problems? that's what i don't understand. it's really odd i think. i wouldn't be surprised if microsoft started putting backdoors into their software that only closed when you entered a unique serial number that bounced back from an online serial number database. similar to the way Q3A uses the cd key. although i know there are some hacks to the Q3A cd key to allow you to use a pirated copy, so this may not work. i just wouldn't put it past microsoft to do something like that.
when linux is better than windows on the desktop, i will use that... until then i will continue to use teh best browser for windows (IE)... either that or until i get enough money to buy that mac that i've always wanted...
i forgot to mention a couple things. by your definition of sinners, we are all sinners, by your definition of who gets to heaven, no one does. how then can you call jesus fair?
also, how can you condemn someone who knew nothing other than the religion they were brought up with (hindus, muslims, etc)? that also shows that you believe jesus to be an uncaring person. the jesus that i know and love, the jesus of the bible is very fair, very forgiving. he helped the sinners of teh world. you can't reject something that you don't know about. and don't go give me some bullshit about how because gandhi and mohammed were born that they should know about their "Creator". you didn't know about god until your parents told you (or until some elitist born-again group told you). so without people telling you, there's no way to learn. people who have no way of learning, can't be automatically condemned.
and the quotes you use are also take way too literally. the bible is about interpretation, just like jesus' stories. if we took jesus' stories literally, we'd have some pretty messed up ideas of what he was talking about.
also, the divergence of catholicism and the other sects of christianity happened based on small, slight differences, mostly political differences, not differences in belief. i believe in the same things you do. i was brought up to be the same way you were. oh wait, no i wasn't, i was brought up to be an actively moral person, to make the right decisions, to be an example of how people should live their lives, not to just walk around comdemning people to hell like born-agains, like yourself, tend to do. in fact, how about i end this with a few words from your beloved jesus... "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". who are you to judge others? and that is what you have done by rejecting me, all catholics, and all people that are not of the christian faith.
so if you live life in a completely passive manner, you will still go to heaven? you see sinful deeds going down and you continue to just pass them by without any interaction. (by interaction i don't mean telling people off, i mean showing people the right way, such as an old lady fell down in the middle of a cross-walk and people around her just walk on by, sinful deed, and you don't show them the right way by helping her out). that's a sin. there's sins by doing and sins by ignoring. the christian lifestyle teaches us to be active in our lives, not passive. it is he who is apathic towards most situations that has committed a bigger sin than he who created the situation in the first place.
also... jesus condemns the leaders for being hypocrits, not for being jews. you said that he hated jews. you were wrong. there is no place in the bible where you will find that jesus says that jews will not be saved.
rage is a sin. if jesus was perfect, he would not have been filled with rage on that day. he would not have threw the tables all over. he would have told them to leave in a polite manner.
have you ever heard of reading between the lines? you're telling me that someone who has never been introduced to jesus or christianity cannot go to heaven. that's a whole load of crap. yes, i have probably just basically said to you that i am catholic. "not a true christian" according to most "true christians" because catholics don't know anything. i know how you are. the bible is not meant to be taken literally. the bible is meant to serve as a guide to how we should live our lives, not as an exact word for word instruction manual. i have pity on those who try to follow every little word the bible tells them. people like ghandi and the prophet mohammed... where are they now? hell? i don't think so. they're in heaven where every person who lives a good life ends up. keep tellign people that their religion is wrong and you will find that you have very few friends left. live a good life, follow interpretations of the bible (for it was written by man, who is not without sin, and therefore fallible) and you will see that life is wonderful. rebuke my "teachings" all you want, but i will continue to believe what i believe and you can continue to believe what you believe. just remember that no human is perfect, and from what i remember... jesus was human and the bible showed an imperfection. if you really know the bible as well as you seem (the parts other than those where jesus condemns), you will see what i mean. otherwise, keep living you're "born again" lifestyle and find that most people can't stand that shit. i find more joy in proving "born agains" wrong than anything else in life. bring it on.
"Your righteousness is like filthy rags" You are like "whitewashed sepulchres" beautiful on the outside and dead on the inside!
please tell me exactly where in the bible this can be found so i can see it, because as i, and most other christians, happen to know, jesus was a jew himself and would not call jews by those names, UNLESS they happened to be selling stuff in "my father's house", aka the temple. because i know that that was the only time jesus ever lashed out on people.
Christianity is the only religion in the world that's not about what I can do but rather is about what God already did for me and everyone else who will take advantage of it. I for one am very thankful for that.
so you think that because you're "christian" that god already did everything for you and you don't have to do anything? HA! you've got it all wrong. maybe you should go back and read the bible again... oh and you might want to read the first 4 books of the new testament to get your stories correct on jesus' life.
first note: i am a christian, i believe in god, i believe that jesus is the son of god and put on earth and died on the cross for us and rose from the dead and ascended into heaven (i might as well recite the rest of the creed while i'm at it...)...
anywyas, while i agree with some of your thoughts, you are definitely a major extreme in the spectrum of religious people. you don't have to live every bit of your life saying how wonderful god is, you don't have to go preaching the word of the lord, all you have to do to get to heaven is live a good life. set an example for others. by doing the right thing, people take notice, whether they act like they do or not, they do take notice. eventually they will realize that they have it all wrong and will follow your ways. that is the best way of preaching the word of the lord. jesus doesn't care who we are, if we believe in one god or 1000 gods. he doesn't care if we don't even believe in him or in heaven or hell. all he cares about is how we live our lives. by making the right choice in any given situation, by living a good moral life, we show others how they should be acting. yes, the definition of "a good moral life" is different for everyone, but deep down we all have the same basic definition. and by living a good moral life and showing others how to live, we do get to heaven. but we can still have a great time here on earth while we can. just don't do anything stupid.:)
the only thing i don't get is the lemonade... what else looks like lemonade other than urine? and if that's it... why did you have a half gallon of urine in your fridge?
now how could you actually follow his advice if you're not supposed to take anyone else's advice in teh first place? his whole statement is very contradictory... weird...
OR... what if you have no direction and by not taking someone else's advice, you're bound to wind up saying "would you like fries with that?" for the rest of your life?
i have to agree with this one... money really isn't all that important in a material sense... it's the other things that i woudl rather do. like if i had money, i'd go spend a weekend in vermont or maine skiing, i'd go back to school so i can get a job doing what i want to do, i'd travel some more. of coruse the first thing i'd do would be to pay off my loans from my undergrad years. everyone tells me "go back to grad school, jsut take out some loans". it's bad enough having 20k worth of loans on your back, you dont' want more. if only i could win the lottery.
oh, it's also been my experience that people who win the lottery don't raelly need to. they're alraedy comfortable enough. it's those that coudl really use the money that never win.
you thought the vampire fangs was the sickest shit?
you haven't even seen the best parts of rotten.com... elephantitis, shooting victims, other dead people that will give any 12 year old nightmares (hell, i couldn't sleep after i saw some of the decomposing bodies)... but i think it's cool shit...:-)
i saw this porn one time when the chick was giving the guy a handjob... she kept twisting it and somehow, he enjoyed every minute of it... i just didn't understand... it's not made to twist.
actually, when i type "about:XXX" i get whatever "XXX" is printed to the thing, unless it's Mozilla, then it's a blank blue screen... like if i type "about:Microsoft sucks ass" i get "Microsoft sucks ass" printed to the browser.
in response to your sig... it's because they like bsd... true bsd, not some apple crap...
well, either that or because they like to piss people off... they're teh same peopel that join mailing lists for certain bands and go around saying that the band sucks and this other band is much better...
Slashdot Mirror
some colleges assign class B ip addresses to their students. therefore, those computers are directly accessible by the internet if said colleges do not have firewalls blocking the traffic from the outside (i know of at least one pretty good sized state university setup like that). it would probably be in their best interest to set up the residential network differently, but right now, that's the way it is. therefore, even shares over the windows network neighborhood are open to the internet. and we all know how many people put passwords on their shared folders...
well, the problem that the telco's have is that the government promotes competition, regardless of who owns the infrastructure. SBC has been taking a lot of flack because they charge high prices and have come in and taken over a lot of local telephone companies (happened here in CT with them taking over SNET). then they go and charge higher prices than the local company did. well, they've been running TV ads saying how people go and complain about them, but they're the real telco because they take care of the whole infrastructure. they say that most telco's are a bunch of marketing and sales people, but when it comes to fixing the telephone lines and stuff, SBC is the one that goes and and does that. i, personally, don't see a problem with using someone else's lines for a cheaper service. i'm a consumer, i shouldn't be bullied into a monopoly over the local telephone service or cable tv service or broadband internet, or whatever it is. that's why the government has these regulations. and because the regulations hold true for the local/long distance thing, i'm sure once VoIP becomes mainstream, the same thing will happen. i'm pissed that we now only have one cable tv provider in my area. we used to have TCI cablevision, then SNET (the local telephone company) offered it at a much lower price. it was great until just before SBC bought out SNET. then they got rid of the cable tv and we were forced to use AT&T for it. i consider that a monopoly, but the government doesn't. it's a problem. i think we pay like $50 a month for extended basic cable tv service (not even digital cable). there's no choice for just basic service that just gets the major networks either. of course now comcast bought the cable tv service from AT&T, so we'll see what happens now.
"I, the incumbent last mile carrier, do all this hard work to provide all the infrastructure necessary for VoIP to happen, and incur all the costs then these upstart VoIP companies come in an just take advantage of it! It's not fair! We can't compete when they get to have the infrastructure for free!"
the problem with this is i don't think the other services get to use the infrastructure for free. they pay like a "rental" fee for using it. but the reason they can charge less for the service is because they don't have to pay technicians to repair the infrastructure when it goes down.
it's all just stupid, but either way i don't think this bill will cover things like routers or cable tv splitters or anything like that, unless your terms of service actually say that you are only paying for the use of one computer/tv/whatever and any additional ones cost more.
although it woudl be quite amusing to see that happen, i think that the ruling would be that the makers of the nat boxes are not accomplices because you just need to make the judgement as to whether or not you can use one legally according to your isp's tos. it's like that marker trick to get around those copy protected cd's (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002may/gee2002 0521011807.htm). you can't sue the marker-makers just because you can use a marker to do something illegal. and since there are isp's that do allow you to have home networks at no extra charge, selling nat boxes would be completely legal. just buy at your own discresion.
i honestly don't think it matters if gsm is better than cdma or cdma is better than gsm. what matters is that gsm is widely used in the surrounding countries. who cares if cdma will give more money to american companies, america will also have to help support their cdma network, but if they get gsm, the surrounding countries can help once the united states is out of there. i don't think it really matters if the american companies get the money, that's kind of an unfair thing to do. screw them into using american companies for things like that. and honestly, right now, and even after the war is over, deciding which wireless network standard to use is not all that important.
To better position American companies they are also going to change the system of measurement from metric to US Standard (whatever the hell its called).
it's called the english system. it's also used in england, not just the united states. and to the person who made the comment about driving on the left, the only countries that do that are england and most of its former colonies (the ones that were liberated after the car became popular, unlike the united states).
the problem with your argument is that your ISP does not have any revenue from you if you use VoIP from someone else. if you steal VoIP from your ISP, then you are both harming and defrauding them.
using too much bandwidth is not defrauding anyone, in fact, unless you are specifically altering hardware to "get more bandwidth" or stealing a connection from the ISP, you aren't doing anything wrong. they provide you with the internet connection, it's their decision as to how they limit your use (some ISP's block P2P connections). if they want to shutdown your service after you transfer "too much" information to or from the internet, they can, but it should be written in the terms of service.
running a NAT box or router so more than one computer can connect is not a violation unless it is specifically stated that your connection is only for one computer and you must pay for each additional computer connected. if, and only if, your ToS says that, then yes, you are defrauding or "harming" your ISP.
as for changing the ToS, i have never seen it change drastically without them notifying you. usually a change is something small like the way they word something.
and a final comment. when getting broadband, i had the option of going with SBC DSL or with AT&T cable (which is now comcast). we got DSL because AT&T said you could not run servers using your connection (servers being ftp, http, telnet, ssh, whatever, probably includes P2P applications as well). i didn't like that, so i went with SBC even though the upstream sucks. so read the ToS before you sign up for anything anyways. but if i had AT&T, and tried to run my ftp server or "share my bandwidth" with others (since that's what they called running a server, i would be "harming" them. the bill gives more legal rights to teh telecommunications companies, but i don't see any questions as to what harm means. i think in this sense it's meant almost the same way as defraud.
i get absolutely no spam. why? because i don't post my email account. i'm sure taco has a private email account that all his friends and family use and only has his slashdot account for the stupid slashdotters who sign him up for stupid spam lists. the difference between spam email and junk mail is that all street addresses are public knowledge (hence the reason why they're addressed to "resident" and not a person). i think it'd be terrible to charge per email. i can't believe i'd ever hear taco say that it should cost money to do that.
microsoft also gets a lot of money from support. that's where a lot of the money lies, not just teh sale of their products, because if that were true, they'd lose a lot of money to pirates. so just because they have 100% market share doesn't mean they'll never continue to gain money. look at their products. each new one costs a lot more than the old one. winxp is really pricey, even teh upgrades for it are pricey. i don't see microsoft losing money or stopping the gain of money anytime soon unless someone comes out with this kickass product that'll change our lives completely (but that sounds like the segway and that hasn't changed life, nor will it).
ok, i don't think there's a backdoor, but i know windows xp comes installed with a special microsoft tech support user. how do they get to use that user to fix problems? that's what i don't understand. it's really odd i think. i wouldn't be surprised if microsoft started putting backdoors into their software that only closed when you entered a unique serial number that bounced back from an online serial number database. similar to the way Q3A uses the cd key. although i know there are some hacks to the Q3A cd key to allow you to use a pirated copy, so this may not work. i just wouldn't put it past microsoft to do something like that.
so what were you before you were "born again"? drug dealer? pimp? prostitute? junkie?
you can go and recite passages from teh bible... but my formal education on these subjects will prove far superior to being "born again".
when linux is better than windows on the desktop, i will use that... until then i will continue to use teh best browser for windows (IE)... either that or until i get enough money to buy that mac that i've always wanted...
i forgot to mention a couple things. by your definition of sinners, we are all sinners, by your definition of who gets to heaven, no one does. how then can you call jesus fair?
also, how can you condemn someone who knew nothing other than the religion they were brought up with (hindus, muslims, etc)? that also shows that you believe jesus to be an uncaring person. the jesus that i know and love, the jesus of the bible is very fair, very forgiving. he helped the sinners of teh world. you can't reject something that you don't know about. and don't go give me some bullshit about how because gandhi and mohammed were born that they should know about their "Creator". you didn't know about god until your parents told you (or until some elitist born-again group told you). so without people telling you, there's no way to learn. people who have no way of learning, can't be automatically condemned.
and the quotes you use are also take way too literally. the bible is about interpretation, just like jesus' stories. if we took jesus' stories literally, we'd have some pretty messed up ideas of what he was talking about.
also, the divergence of catholicism and the other sects of christianity happened based on small, slight differences, mostly political differences, not differences in belief. i believe in the same things you do. i was brought up to be the same way you were. oh wait, no i wasn't, i was brought up to be an actively moral person, to make the right decisions, to be an example of how people should live their lives, not to just walk around comdemning people to hell like born-agains, like yourself, tend to do. in fact, how about i end this with a few words from your beloved jesus... "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". who are you to judge others? and that is what you have done by rejecting me, all catholics, and all people that are not of the christian faith.
so if you live life in a completely passive manner, you will still go to heaven? you see sinful deeds going down and you continue to just pass them by without any interaction. (by interaction i don't mean telling people off, i mean showing people the right way, such as an old lady fell down in the middle of a cross-walk and people around her just walk on by, sinful deed, and you don't show them the right way by helping her out). that's a sin. there's sins by doing and sins by ignoring. the christian lifestyle teaches us to be active in our lives, not passive. it is he who is apathic towards most situations that has committed a bigger sin than he who created the situation in the first place.
also... jesus condemns the leaders for being hypocrits, not for being jews. you said that he hated jews. you were wrong. there is no place in the bible where you will find that jesus says that jews will not be saved.
rage is a sin. if jesus was perfect, he would not have been filled with rage on that day. he would not have threw the tables all over. he would have told them to leave in a polite manner.
have you ever heard of reading between the lines? you're telling me that someone who has never been introduced to jesus or christianity cannot go to heaven. that's a whole load of crap. yes, i have probably just basically said to you that i am catholic. "not a true christian" according to most "true christians" because catholics don't know anything. i know how you are. the bible is not meant to be taken literally. the bible is meant to serve as a guide to how we should live our lives, not as an exact word for word instruction manual. i have pity on those who try to follow every little word the bible tells them. people like ghandi and the prophet mohammed... where are they now? hell? i don't think so. they're in heaven where every person who lives a good life ends up. keep tellign people that their religion is wrong and you will find that you have very few friends left. live a good life, follow interpretations of the bible (for it was written by man, who is not without sin, and therefore fallible) and you will see that life is wonderful. rebuke my "teachings" all you want, but i will continue to believe what i believe and you can continue to believe what you believe. just remember that no human is perfect, and from what i remember... jesus was human and the bible showed an imperfection. if you really know the bible as well as you seem (the parts other than those where jesus condemns), you will see what i mean. otherwise, keep living you're "born again" lifestyle and find that most people can't stand that shit. i find more joy in proving "born agains" wrong than anything else in life. bring it on.
uhhh... but this was when he was a kid living at home...
"Your righteousness is like filthy rags"
You are like "whitewashed sepulchres" beautiful on the outside and dead on the inside!
please tell me exactly where in the bible this can be found so i can see it, because as i, and most other christians, happen to know, jesus was a jew himself and would not call jews by those names, UNLESS they happened to be selling stuff in "my father's house", aka the temple. because i know that that was the only time jesus ever lashed out on people.
Christianity is the only religion in the world that's not about what I can do but rather is about what God already did for me and everyone else who will take advantage of it. I for one am very thankful for that.
so you think that because you're "christian" that god already did everything for you and you don't have to do anything? HA! you've got it all wrong. maybe you should go back and read the bible again... oh and you might want to read the first 4 books of the new testament to get your stories correct on jesus' life.
first note: i am a christian, i believe in god, i believe that jesus is the son of god and put on earth and died on the cross for us and rose from the dead and ascended into heaven (i might as well recite the rest of the creed while i'm at it...)...
:)
anywyas, while i agree with some of your thoughts, you are definitely a major extreme in the spectrum of religious people. you don't have to live every bit of your life saying how wonderful god is, you don't have to go preaching the word of the lord, all you have to do to get to heaven is live a good life. set an example for others. by doing the right thing, people take notice, whether they act like they do or not, they do take notice. eventually they will realize that they have it all wrong and will follow your ways. that is the best way of preaching the word of the lord. jesus doesn't care who we are, if we believe in one god or 1000 gods. he doesn't care if we don't even believe in him or in heaven or hell. all he cares about is how we live our lives. by making the right choice in any given situation, by living a good moral life, we show others how they should be acting. yes, the definition of "a good moral life" is different for everyone, but deep down we all have the same basic definition. and by living a good moral life and showing others how to live, we do get to heaven. but we can still have a great time here on earth while we can. just don't do anything stupid.
uhhhh...wow...
the only thing i don't get is the lemonade... what else looks like lemonade other than urine? and if that's it... why did you have a half gallon of urine in your fridge?
now how could you actually follow his advice if you're not supposed to take anyone else's advice in teh first place? his whole statement is very contradictory... weird...
OR... what if you have no direction and by not taking someone else's advice, you're bound to wind up saying "would you like fries with that?" for the rest of your life?
i have to agree with this one... money really isn't all that important in a material sense... it's the other things that i woudl rather do. like if i had money, i'd go spend a weekend in vermont or maine skiing, i'd go back to school so i can get a job doing what i want to do, i'd travel some more. of coruse the first thing i'd do would be to pay off my loans from my undergrad years. everyone tells me "go back to grad school, jsut take out some loans". it's bad enough having 20k worth of loans on your back, you dont' want more. if only i could win the lottery.
oh, it's also been my experience that people who win the lottery don't raelly need to. they're alraedy comfortable enough. it's those that coudl really use the money that never win.
you thought the vampire fangs was the sickest shit?
:-)
you haven't even seen the best parts of rotten.com... elephantitis, shooting victims, other dead people that will give any 12 year old nightmares (hell, i couldn't sleep after i saw some of the decomposing bodies)... but i think it's cool shit...
i saw this porn one time when the chick was giving the guy a handjob... she kept twisting it and somehow, he enjoyed every minute of it... i just didn't understand... it's not made to twist.
actually, when i type "about:XXX" i get whatever "XXX" is printed to the thing, unless it's Mozilla, then it's a blank blue screen... like if i type "about:Microsoft sucks ass" i get "Microsoft sucks ass" printed to the browser.
in response to your sig... it's because they like bsd... true bsd, not some apple crap...
well, either that or because they like to piss people off... they're teh same peopel that join mailing lists for certain bands and go around saying that the band sucks and this other band is much better...