As for hating blacks, I have honestly no idea how anyone who does that can still call himself a Christian.
That’s pretty easily explained.
Christians tend to believe that the church is supposed to be doing community stuff like helping the poor (refer: early churches, communist, what you said before).
Therefore, Christians also tend to believe that the government should be, generally, more or less staying out if the way, and letting them give their money to charities they personally want to support.
Therefore, Christians hate poor people because they don’t favour expensive government programs to assist poor people (along with the huge overhead costs associated with any government program).
Therefore, Christians hate black people because a lot of black people are poor.
(I said it was easily explained, not that it made sense.)
If i send you an email, i use the network to copy digitally stored data so that you may read it.
Trivial difference. Snail-mail could make a copy at every step of the journey, but that would be less efficient so it doesn’t. E-mail pretty much has to make a copy, but that doesn’t fundamentally make it any different.
In that logic i could say: "kevlar vests exist that can filter out small caliber bullets" so it was the murder victims fault if he/she doesn't have one.
The other guy used the same exact argument. Go back and read my reply to him.
Re:You're "done" alright ("well done"/"extra crisp
on
New IE Zero Day
·
· Score: 1
You’re obviously too scared to e-mail the admins, who will just verify what I already told you.
Why have so many major sites (such as the credit card companies) been DDOSed successfully recently? Are their admins just incompetent?
Here, have a cookie.
You argument is analogous to saying, "It's your fault you got shot in the chest--you should have worn a bulletproof vest" or "Who cares if I poison someone--there's an antidote."
No, it’s analogous to saying “Aww, you pissed off a few million people and now your switchboards are jammed with angry phone calls. Cry me a river. That’s just an occupational hazard, in your line of business.”
Moreover, defenses are expensive and the attack forces the target to bear an unreasonable cost (including extra server capacity).
By that same logic they should fire their entire PR department and instead they should lobby the government to try to have laws passed so that if any significant number of people spoke out against them, they could all be prosecuted. PR departments are expensive. Boo hoo.
Marriage is, and always has been, a civil/religious union between a man and a woman (polygamists aside, that’s not necessarily saying a man couldn’t be married multiple times but each “marriage” is still between a man and a woman). I am not in favour of changing the definition of a word that has existed for centuries.
I am, however, in favour of discarding the concept of “marriage” altogether from the legal standpoint. It doesn’t belong there to begin with. Knock off the “civil” part of the union entirely: The civil union should be exactly that, a civil union. It should mean “two people living together for economic and civil reasons”. Not “two people living together for religious reasons and having sex”... how the fuck is that relevant, in a civil sense? And then we could start issuing civil unions for sensible situations like an adult child living with an aging parent, etc. which would presumably not involve sexual relations at all but would have obvious benefits in an economic sense.
If a church wants to give two people a piece of paper that says they’re “married”, that should have no legal weight, and if the church says that they can’t have the paper that should equally have no legal weight. And then nobody really has to even care what the church says anyway.
It’s the only remotely sane approach. The only people unhappy are the ones who still want to control everyone else, and at least we can all agree that they’re idiots.
Re:Funny how you ran from disproving my HOSTS post
on
New IE Zero Day
·
· Score: 1
NOBODY comes in this late into a post this deep, & replies, unless they were here already!
I’ve been here all along. I just haven’t been posting until recently. But don’t let that stop you from blathering your drivel.
Despite your stating initially "your code" (script that uses others' work really) works right
For the last time, that wasn’t me. I don’t even use Linux and wouldn’t have the slightest idea how to write a shell script like that. I’d have to completely teach myself shell scripting to even begin, and that much effort would be stupid just to win an argument with you.
Would someone like to try to figure up how many charges you’d have to get from these pants for them to pay for themselves?
For that matter, you could also try to figure up what percentage of the energy used to build the solar panels and assemble the pants you’d recoup from the solar panels over their useful lifespan.
And what, pray tell, is the theoretical reason for the existence of the PR department in a corporation?
Re:clone52431 stalking me? Again?? LMAO... apk
on
New IE Zero Day
·
· Score: 1
Again: You obviously "slipped" when you hit the submit button this time - instead of replying "AC" as you can!
I’m replying to you under my username on purpose, you dimwit. That’s the only way I can make it obvious that I’m not the same Anonymous Coward that you’re currently foaming at the mouth over.
And I never got banned at any PCReview forum, and the link you’re posting doesn’t even work. I don’t know what you’re off on this time, but it appears to be a load of garbage as usual.
Re:Yet MORE "Adhominem attacks"? Please... lol! ap
on
New IE Zero Day
·
· Score: 1
Nobody shows up that late into a discussion like this
Apart that the legal distinction is not a minor detail
Legal distinctions that don’t exist in real life are examples of bad laws. Bad laws should be protested, repealed, and potentially broken if all else fails.
there are real world differences as well: an email is no postcard or letter. I can easily send 1 million emails, but i could not send 1 million letters.
Doing the same old thing on a computer makes it easier and more efficient. It does not, however, make “doing the same old thing on a computer” copyrightable, patentable, or illegal.
I didn't assume that the "you" in the question was a public figure whom civilians might sincerely need to contact in an attempt to participate in the political process.
Corporations are also accountable to the public. They have large PR departments, mailing addresses, and people whose job is to read the mail that people send them (and even reply to some of it), determine and make recommendations of what actions would be most beneficial to their public image, and ideally let the company know quickly if something it did pissed a bunch of people off so that it can decide whether or not it wants to adjust its actions.
And it certainly does not prevent them from SENDING mail, while a DDOS affects the target from sending information out.
Only because they’re dumb enough to actually try to reply to all of it.
Good DDoS protection services exist that can filter out the spam so your server isn’t trying to reply to all of it. Your argument is invalid.
Re:LOL, now "adhominem attacks"? LMAO!
on
New IE Zero Day
·
· Score: 1
I corrected you by showing you HOW/WHERE/WHEN/WHY your already blown code won't work on HOSTS file data import & conversion
That wasn’t me, you dense fucking ass. I’ve told you it wasn’t me, and the guy who wrote it has told you that I’m not him. How much more clear could we make it?
It's harassment if their intent is to cause nuisance.
Like sending a few million form letters, faxes, postcards, e-mails, and phone calls to a congressperson in the month before a vote?
Sure, you think you’re making a political statement, but he thinks it’s a nuisance. He’d greatly prefer you send a single giant petition with a few million signatures so that it could be much more easily ignored.
If the prosecutor can proove that it was coordinated (e.g. someone called for or coordinated it) and it results in a postal service breakdown, the chances are in favor for a criminal offense.
The frequently-used tactic of deliberately flooding congresscritters with explicitly intentioned postcards, letters, faxes and phone calls disagrees with you. Usually form letters, so theoretically sending a single petition signed by as many people would be just as effective, right?
If a comparison was intended by your question, it is deeply flawed.
How so? Apart from the minor detail that a legal distinction has been made where no real distinction exists, I mean.
Its users probably all (well, the dumb ones) got themselves infected with a virus that DDoSed their home turf again. It happens every few months. The main question in my mind is how it spread, this time – reCaptcha cut the head off it last time.
Or maybe it’s just something entirely different this time.
Anyway, returning to the question in my subject, when did it go down? how long has it been down? is it down hard, or is it coming and going?
Slashdot Mirror
As for hating blacks, I have honestly no idea how anyone who does that can still call himself a Christian.
That’s pretty easily explained.
Christians tend to believe that the church is supposed to be doing community stuff like helping the poor (refer: early churches, communist, what you said before).
Therefore, Christians also tend to believe that the government should be, generally, more or less staying out if the way, and letting them give their money to charities they personally want to support.
Therefore, Christians hate poor people because they don’t favour expensive government programs to assist poor people (along with the huge overhead costs associated with any government program).
Therefore, Christians hate black people because a lot of black people are poor.
(I said it was easily explained, not that it made sense.)
You can’t prove what their intentions were. You can only make assumptions.
If i send you an email, i use the network to copy digitally stored data so that you may read it.
Trivial difference. Snail-mail could make a copy at every step of the journey, but that would be less efficient so it doesn’t. E-mail pretty much has to make a copy, but that doesn’t fundamentally make it any different.
In that logic i could say: "kevlar vests exist that can filter out small caliber bullets" so it was the murder victims fault if he/she doesn't have one.
The other guy used the same exact argument. Go back and read my reply to him.
You’re obviously too scared to e-mail the admins, who will just verify what I already told you.
Correction: OLEV is an anagram for LOVE. My guess is it’s a rather obscure reference/tribute/copycat to the “to write LOVE on her arms” campaign.
You can e-mail the admins if you like, and they can verify that the script was not posted by me.
I’m done arguing with you, anyway.
Why have so many major sites (such as the credit card companies) been DDOSed successfully recently? Are their admins just incompetent?
Here, have a cookie.
You argument is analogous to saying, "It's your fault you got shot in the chest--you should have worn a bulletproof vest" or "Who cares if I poison someone--there's an antidote."
No, it’s analogous to saying “Aww, you pissed off a few million people and now your switchboards are jammed with angry phone calls. Cry me a river. That’s just an occupational hazard, in your line of business.”
Moreover, defenses are expensive and the attack forces the target to bear an unreasonable cost (including extra server capacity).
By that same logic they should fire their entire PR department and instead they should lobby the government to try to have laws passed so that if any significant number of people spoke out against them, they could all be prosecuted. PR departments are expensive. Boo hoo.
Marriage is, and always has been, a civil/religious union between a man and a woman (polygamists aside, that’s not necessarily saying a man couldn’t be married multiple times but each “marriage” is still between a man and a woman). I am not in favour of changing the definition of a word that has existed for centuries.
I am, however, in favour of discarding the concept of “marriage” altogether from the legal standpoint. It doesn’t belong there to begin with. Knock off the “civil” part of the union entirely: The civil union should be exactly that, a civil union. It should mean “two people living together for economic and civil reasons”. Not “two people living together for religious reasons and having sex”... how the fuck is that relevant, in a civil sense? And then we could start issuing civil unions for sensible situations like an adult child living with an aging parent, etc. which would presumably not involve sexual relations at all but would have obvious benefits in an economic sense.
If a church wants to give two people a piece of paper that says they’re “married”, that should have no legal weight, and if the church says that they can’t have the paper that should equally have no legal weight. And then nobody really has to even care what the church says anyway.
It’s the only remotely sane approach. The only people unhappy are the ones who still want to control everyone else, and at least we can all agree that they’re idiots.
NOBODY comes in this late into a post this deep, & replies, unless they were here already!
I’ve been here all along. I just haven’t been posting until recently. But don’t let that stop you from blathering your drivel.
Despite your stating initially "your code" (script that uses others' work really) works right
For the last time, that wasn’t me. I don’t even use Linux and wouldn’t have the slightest idea how to write a shell script like that. I’d have to completely teach myself shell scripting to even begin, and that much effort would be stupid just to win an argument with you.
To send out press releases that make the corporation look good?
And how do they decide what would make the corporation look good? Flip coins?
Would someone like to try to figure up how many charges you’d have to get from these pants for them to pay for themselves?
For that matter, you could also try to figure up what percentage of the energy used to build the solar panels and assemble the pants you’d recoup from the solar panels over their useful lifespan.
And what, pray tell, is the theoretical reason for the existence of the PR department in a corporation?
Again: You obviously "slipped" when you hit the submit button this time - instead of replying "AC" as you can!
I’m replying to you under my username on purpose, you dimwit. That’s the only way I can make it obvious that I’m not the same Anonymous Coward that you’re currently foaming at the mouth over.
And I never got banned at any PCReview forum, and the link you’re posting doesn’t even work. I don’t know what you’re off on this time, but it appears to be a load of garbage as usual.
Nobody shows up that late into a discussion like this
I did. Your argument is invalid.
Furthermore by sending someone a million letters, i would at max flood his mailbox. He could still send emails, write letters or place phone calls.
See my reply above.
Apart that the legal distinction is not a minor detail
Legal distinctions that don’t exist in real life are examples of bad laws. Bad laws should be protested, repealed, and potentially broken if all else fails.
there are real world differences as well: an email is no postcard or letter. I can easily send 1 million emails, but i could not send 1 million letters.
Doing the same old thing on a computer makes it easier and more efficient. It does not, however, make “doing the same old thing on a computer” copyrightable, patentable, or illegal.
I didn't assume that the "you" in the question was a public figure whom civilians might sincerely need to contact in an attempt to participate in the political process.
Corporations are also accountable to the public. They have large PR departments, mailing addresses, and people whose job is to read the mail that people send them (and even reply to some of it), determine and make recommendations of what actions would be most beneficial to their public image, and ideally let the company know quickly if something it did pissed a bunch of people off so that it can decide whether or not it wants to adjust its actions.
And it certainly does not prevent them from SENDING mail, while a DDOS affects the target from sending information out.
Only because they’re dumb enough to actually try to reply to all of it.
Good DDoS protection services exist that can filter out the spam so your server isn’t trying to reply to all of it. Your argument is invalid.
I corrected you by showing you HOW/WHERE/WHEN/WHY your already blown code won't work on HOSTS file data import & conversion
That wasn’t me, you dense fucking ass. I’ve told you it wasn’t me, and the guy who wrote it has told you that I’m not him. How much more clear could we make it?
It's harassment if their intent is to cause nuisance.
Like sending a few million form letters, faxes, postcards, e-mails, and phone calls to a congressperson in the month before a vote?
Sure, you think you’re making a political statement, but he thinks it’s a nuisance. He’d greatly prefer you send a single giant petition with a few million signatures so that it could be much more easily ignored.
If the prosecutor can proove that it was coordinated (e.g. someone called for or coordinated it) and it results in a postal service breakdown, the chances are in favor for a criminal offense.
The frequently-used tactic of deliberately flooding congresscritters with explicitly intentioned postcards, letters, faxes and phone calls disagrees with you. Usually form letters, so theoretically sending a single petition signed by as many people would be just as effective, right?
If a comparison was intended by your question, it is deeply flawed.
How so? Apart from the minor detail that a legal distinction has been made where no real distinction exists, I mean.
It’s not harassing unless you’ve asked them to stop. And then it’s not harassing if they stop but other people start.
If they don’t know how to use AdBlock Plus, I don’t have much sympathy for them.
The people in it were unrelated until they all decided to send you mail.
Better to have someplace for them to be. Now they’ll just flood fark, slashdot, wired, ...
Its users probably all (well, the dumb ones) got themselves infected with a virus that DDoSed their home turf again. It happens every few months. The main question in my mind is how it spread, this time – reCaptcha cut the head off it last time.
Or maybe it’s just something entirely different this time.
Anyway, returning to the question in my subject, when did it go down? how long has it been down? is it down hard, or is it coming and going?