I hate to have to tell you this, but girls aren't passing you up because you're not aggressive or violent enough, it's because you're ugly, boring, or both. Sorry. If it makes you feel better, I'm right there with you.
My phone is smaller than most, and it's still too damn big. I don't use it for anything other than calling people and checking the time, and I don't need it to be big enough to have other functions (not that I don't understand people that do need features and bigness that I don't). I have a lot of crap I need to carry in my pockets, and I don't like having huge, bulging, jagged thighs all the time. I'd pay quite a bit for a truly miniscule phone. Not the one from the article, though, because it's still too big.
I think I agree with what you said, but I can't be sure since I can't quite make out the tiny, light-colored letters you've used to say it. Please say it again in all caps, and maybe with some arrows pointing at the really important parts. Thank you.
Also, many of His miracles were of a nature that only the God and Creator of the universe could do.
I'm curious how you know that. Taking for granted that he did it, do you know how he managed it? You know the functioning of the miracle mechanism and know that there's no way a non-Creator could use it? I wasn't aware that there were Biblical passages explaining it, and if there are, I'd like to read them. 1 Jimmy 12's, "God, and only God, can do cool stuff," doesn't count. If the miracle mechanism has no bugs that someone else could use to duplicate fish, I'm sure the Bible wouldn't hesitate to publish the specs rather than BC-Jimmy's benchmark results.
That paragraph meandered a little bit, so I'll re-state the question: How do you know only the Creator can do those things?
if someone is questioned about a large number of things, and he gets nervous when answering certain questions, that might be a good place to start investigating.
Or they know that that question is the one you think they did. I had to be polygraphed for a job ("Of course it's voluntary. We're just not hiring you because we liked the other guy's hair better."). In the pre-interview, they ask if you've ever been questioned by police, so I said yes. Which is true. When I was a kid, I was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Didn't do a damn thing, and the cops knew it, but this guy didn't ask them. He asked me about it 45 times in the machine, and obviously that question was important, and it made me nervous every time.
They don't actually tell you the results of those things, but for some reason, I went from being a lock with, "It's just a formality. Call when they're done, we'll get you set up," to not answering my calls for a week until they called to tell me they offered the job to someone else.
Obviously I can't be sure that's why. Maybe my fly was open. But the polygraph's the only reason I can think of.
What I particularly loved was at the end, the guy looks upset and says, "Were you controlling your breathing?" Yes! You strapped a frigging cable around my torso and told me to keep still! Stupid frigging *grumble* *grumble*...
I would imagine that most "firearm enthusiasts" know a thing or two about firearm safety, and don't need any biometric identification or encrypted bullets.
Really? 'Cause I imagine them always one beer away from alcohol poisoning. We must have very incompatible imaginations.
it's not the weapon that kills - it's the weapon bearer.
In the words of Eddie Izzard:
The National Rifle Association says that, "Guns don't kill people, people do." But I think the gun helps.... I just think just standing there going, "Bang!" That's not going to kill too many people, is it? You'd have to be really dodgy on the heart to have that.
A better example is fire extinguishers -- most of them will literally never be used
If that's the case for you, then I feel sorry for you. You've apparently never known the snowy, probably-toxic joy of Fire Extinguisher Expiration Day. It's the happiest day of the decade.
if this party can actually accomplish something I'd think their choice of words for their name will cease to be a bother.
And if this party had a name that was less of a giant bullseye, they might actually accomplish something.
Not that I can think of a better one. All the ones that come to mind have the word "freedom" in them, and everyone knows you only use that in your political group name if you're being sarcastic.
If we wanted, we could alter our standard libraries so that, for instance, strcpy does bounds checking. Is there a reason not to?
We did that. It's called strncpy. If you want better than that, you're going to have to make an entirely new language to get it. But if you decide to make this hypothetical language (which I call "Java", but it's kind of a silly name so I don't think it will catch on, but you could abbreviate it to something really catchy like "J2SE"), please try very hard not to make it so simple applications take up 40 megs of memory. That would suck.
But why should an individual care about whether or not the drama of humanity continues?
Two reasons. One, because when humanity ends, assuming no aliens ever find our stuff, we might as well have never existed. It's bad enough to not be around anymore as an individual, but to have the only thing that can testify to the fact that you ever existed be a big ball of dirt kind of sucks. To me, at least.
Two, some people have kids. They'd rather some of those kids' kids' kids' kids' kids made it to retirement.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to have to tell you this, but girls aren't passing you up because you're not aggressive or violent enough, it's because you're ugly, boring, or both. Sorry. If it makes you feel better, I'm right there with you.
the fact that god has said NO to a couple should be taken as an extremely stong hint that it just shouldn't be done.
He didn't say "no", he said "try harder." You'd know God's "no" if you saw it, it doesn't look like what you're seeing. There's more flaming corpses.
Yeah, that's probably it. Has nothing to do with not wanting to need things from countries who use "Death to America" like Hawaiians use "Aloha."
My phone is smaller than most, and it's still too damn big. I don't use it for anything other than calling people and checking the time, and I don't need it to be big enough to have other functions (not that I don't understand people that do need features and bigness that I don't). I have a lot of crap I need to carry in my pockets, and I don't like having huge, bulging, jagged thighs all the time. I'd pay quite a bit for a truly miniscule phone. Not the one from the article, though, because it's still too big.
Hahahahahahahaha! It's funny because it's 1998! Oh, wait.
Well, it's still funny because it's the same joke from the summary! Things are always funny if you say them twice.
The early Atlas had no insulation and needed to be fueled in the final minutes of the countdown. Clearly a problem.
I ain't quite a rocket scientist, so maybe the answer is obvious to others, but why is that a problem?
I think I agree with what you said, but I can't be sure since I can't quite make out the tiny, light-colored letters you've used to say it. Please say it again in all caps, and maybe with some arrows pointing at the really important parts. Thank you.
Of course, at some point, it still boils down to Faith.
Fair 'nough.
Also, many of His miracles were of a nature that only the God and Creator of the universe could do.
I'm curious how you know that. Taking for granted that he did it, do you know how he managed it? You know the functioning of the miracle mechanism and know that there's no way a non-Creator could use it? I wasn't aware that there were Biblical passages explaining it, and if there are, I'd like to read them. 1 Jimmy 12's, "God, and only God, can do cool stuff," doesn't count. If the miracle mechanism has no bugs that someone else could use to duplicate fish, I'm sure the Bible wouldn't hesitate to publish the specs rather than BC-Jimmy's benchmark results.
That paragraph meandered a little bit, so I'll re-state the question: How do you know only the Creator can do those things?
Choke on that, causality!
I wasn't bitching about them using it. I was saying that a "nervous" reaction to a question doesn't necessarily mean anything.
if someone is questioned about a large number of things, and he gets nervous when answering certain questions, that might be a good place to start investigating.
Or they know that that question is the one you think they did. I had to be polygraphed for a job ("Of course it's voluntary. We're just not hiring you because we liked the other guy's hair better."). In the pre-interview, they ask if you've ever been questioned by police, so I said yes. Which is true. When I was a kid, I was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Didn't do a damn thing, and the cops knew it, but this guy didn't ask them. He asked me about it 45 times in the machine, and obviously that question was important, and it made me nervous every time.
They don't actually tell you the results of those things, but for some reason, I went from being a lock with, "It's just a formality. Call when they're done, we'll get you set up," to not answering my calls for a week until they called to tell me they offered the job to someone else.
Obviously I can't be sure that's why. Maybe my fly was open. But the polygraph's the only reason I can think of.
What I particularly loved was at the end, the guy looks upset and says, "Were you controlling your breathing?" Yes! You strapped a frigging cable around my torso and told me to keep still! Stupid frigging *grumble* *grumble*...
At the very least, they just removed any trace of a moral question about it.
I would imagine that most "firearm enthusiasts" know a thing or two about firearm safety, and don't need any biometric identification or encrypted bullets.
Really? 'Cause I imagine them always one beer away from alcohol poisoning. We must have very incompatible imaginations.
it's not the weapon that kills - it's the weapon bearer.
... I just think just standing there going, "Bang!" That's not going to kill too many people, is it? You'd have to be really dodgy on the heart to have that.
In the words of Eddie Izzard:
The National Rifle Association says that, "Guns don't kill people, people do." But I think the gun helps.
With a larger screen and maybe a soundcard, it could popup a paperclip asking "I think you're trying to kill someone, would you like some help?"
MS should get on that. People would really start to love Clippy if he could lay down suppressing fire.
A better example is fire extinguishers -- most of them will literally never be used
If that's the case for you, then I feel sorry for you. You've apparently never known the snowy, probably-toxic joy of Fire Extinguisher Expiration Day. It's the happiest day of the decade.
if this party can actually accomplish something I'd think their choice of words for their name will cease to be a bother.
And if this party had a name that was less of a giant bullseye, they might actually accomplish something.
Not that I can think of a better one. All the ones that come to mind have the word "freedom" in them, and everyone knows you only use that in your political group name if you're being sarcastic.
Yay, I'm not the only one who can't spell that word!
Louisiana law that makes consuming 40 different (non-marajuana) plants (e.g. Amanita Muscaria) illegal too.
They need a law against that? Louisiana must have the best parties ever!
If we wanted, we could alter our standard libraries so that, for instance, strcpy does bounds checking. Is there a reason not to?
We did that. It's called strncpy. If you want better than that, you're going to have to make an entirely new language to get it. But if you decide to make this hypothetical language (which I call "Java", but it's kind of a silly name so I don't think it will catch on, but you could abbreviate it to something really catchy like "J2SE"), please try very hard not to make it so simple applications take up 40 megs of memory. That would suck.
You're right about the first part, but
Second, if you lack the money to bring your product to market, what do you want the patent for?
To license to someone else to build, which can promote progress provided the invention isn't one of the trivial ones, which is, of course, unlikely.
but also let them publish their claims in a peer reviewed journal so that people smarter than most of us can judge them.
But they can't. The Conspiracy of People Who Make Up Problems For No Reason keeps rejecting their articles.
But why should an individual care about whether or not the drama of humanity continues?
Two reasons. One, because when humanity ends, assuming no aliens ever find our stuff, we might as well have never existed. It's bad enough to not be around anymore as an individual, but to have the only thing that can testify to the fact that you ever existed be a big ball of dirt kind of sucks. To me, at least.
Two, some people have kids. They'd rather some of those kids' kids' kids' kids' kids made it to retirement.
Plus we're irrational sometimes.
So what you're saying is I should watch more TV?