A critique of someone's methods does not involve comments like:
You're all assholes because you don't believe the crap I believe, I find that insulting, and calling you names is the only avenue left to me to defend my fairy tale god.
That's putting idiotic words in the mouth of your opponent, which is exactly what your opponent was doing to atheists.
Why do so many ACs who are bitching about other people's minor grammatical errors frequently make a complete hatchet job of subject/predicate tense and plurality agreements?
Well, for example, General Motors had some pushrod (no overhead camshaft) V6s in use from the late 1990s and 2000s that routinely met or beat their EPA fuel economy ratings. The engines were less powerful than you'd expect from a V6 and pretty noisy for their class, especially under hard acceleration. But my 2001 Impala was rated 21 city/32 highway, and I averaged between 24 and 28 miles per gallon for the 125,000 miles I owned the vehicle and always got 31-32 miles per gallon on long trips.
I assume you're talking about the 3400 V6, as that's the version that was rated at 32 highway, if I recall correctly, although most of what you're saying could equally apply to the 3800. While they weren't powerful in terms of peak horsepower (which is all non-gearheads understand) the area under the torque curve was quite substantial, as they had gobs of bottom end torque. I drove a 2000 Impala 3400, and now a 2003 Impala 3400. They're both geared high enough to do 42 MPH/70kmph in first gear, but both would give a good shriek out of the front tires from a straight standing start on dry pavement. With that gearing, it's like laying a patch with a Honda Accord starting in second gear. Any engine that can do that has to have a good bottom end.
The really nice thing about them, if you're into modifying cars, is that you can spend between $1000 and $1500 on a set of ported heads and camshaft, including all necessary gaskets, take a couple of weekends stripping down the top end and replacing it, and you've gone from 180 HP stock up to 250-275 HP. The bottom end in the Impala version of the 3400 is all forged, rather than cast, so it can take a LOT more stress than it's ever put under in stock configuration. Incidentally, the 3800 is quite capable of around 750 HP at the crank, although it takes a lot more than $1500 to get to that.
And as far as the noise goes, I've read that it's specifically tuned to sound like that in the Impala. That makes sense, because both my Impalas have sounded the same, but I've got the same engine in a 2003 Montana, (rated 5 more HP) and it's significantly quieter. The Impala was designed to be a bit of a muscle car, so it's a little more in the line of "mechanical symphony" than "luxury silence".
Only if you're Catholic. I'm not. Catholicism has a bunch of twisted stuff that's not Christian, and in some cases specifically goes *against* what Jesus taught. There are a lot of things in "Christianity" that aren't Christian. Don't assume that's stuff that you're supposed to follow to call yourself a Christian.
I've been told I'm a crappy Christian for wearing jeans and a t-shirt to church, instead of a suit and tie. Nowhere does Jesus say to wear your "Sunday best" when worshiping. In fact, he specifically invited people who were in rags, who were hated by society, etc.
I've been told I'm a crappy Christian for playing what basically amounts to rock music in our service (I'm the music director), because I'm supposed to do traditional hymns on a pipe organ. But according to the Bible, I'm supposed to praise with tambourine, dancing, strings, flute, cymbals, drums, trumpet, harp, lyre, etc. Sounds like rock music to me...
Genesis. Old Testament. Thousands of years before Christ, therefore decidedly NOT Christian.
Besides that, I don't know of too many people, Christians or otherwise, who would think that screwing your brother's wife is the right thing to do, whether you pull out or not. It doesn't specifically say that he was killed for using the pull out method. It says "what he did." I think having sex with his brother's wife was the bigger evil than pulling out.....
Where? He claimed to be there to fulfill the law, not enforce it. That's two different things.
You can't even begin to claim that until Christian at LEAST start using books that don't have the old testament included. While they are distributing the pile of nonsense, hate, and crap they can't claim it doesn't count.
1. New Testament, Psalms and Proverbs, distributed by the Gideons. One of many. 2. Does that mean that a history book that details medieval atrocities is supporting that kind of behaviour? Of course not. The Old Testament is as much about explaining the need for Jesus, as anything.
Interesting note: Jesus claimed to return during the lifetime of the apostles as well as the life time of Caiphas.
Again, where? I'd like to see something that isn't taken out of context, please.
Because for a start, I don't think it was an attack on Atheism. I think it was an attack on Dawkins, who is an arrogant, obnoxious prick, regardless of whether you agree with him or not.
And then, instead of debating the issue, you just attack the poster, with a "words-in-your-mouth" strawman that adds nothing to the discussion, other than an attack of the exact type you are decrying.
I'd assume the Netflix employee was in the USA. It's really not relevant where the source of the subs was, as long as the copying action happened within the USA. At least, that's my understanding of it, and IANAL.
And you're an insulting prick, but I don't let that bother me.
Netflix is certainly paying the legit publisher for the original movie, but if the subtitles were from the original publisher, they wouldn't mention the Finnish pirate website in them, would they? I would think (IANAL) that the translations would be a derivative work, and therefore would have a copyright owned by the translator, as well as the possibility of one owned by the studio.
Netflix is an American company. I would imagine that the person who lifted the subtitles was probably in the US, too, although I admit that is merely an assumption on my part. However, there's no indication at all that the Netflix employee who did this was in Finland, at least not in the summary. This would mean US copyright law most likely would apply.
"why is there a diversity of life on the planet, and why does it show similarity?"
As an I.T. person (I'm assuming) you should know better than to ask this question. Let me rephrase it in a context that you'd understand better:
Why are there so many Windows programs out there, and why do they similarly rely on win32k.sys?
Your assumption about life is that it shows similarities because it evolved from one life form to the next. A programmer knows this is bullshit. All programs are intelligently designed, yet they all have similar functions, all rely on similar libraries and show very similar characteristics to life, as far as how they develop.
Could a complex software program come about by chance? I think we'd all say the idea is ludicrous. But suddenly when we're talking about life, which is infinitely more complex than the most complex program, it all must have happened by chance, and there's a mental block when it comes to discussing any other possibility.
I don't know where this disconnect comes from. How do two very similar situations lead an intelligent person to come to two polar opposite conclusions?
If I kill you because you are a godless infidel spreading lies and deceit, undermining the work of the holy one and leading good people astray, I am a saint -- in any religion.
Errr...what? I'm sorry, but you are completely and totally wrong. I know for a fact that Christianity condemns murder under any circumstances, Republicans notwithstanding. Don't try to pull some Old Testament scripture where it says to kill everybody in a city as a claim that Christianity somehow supports this. Christianity didn't even exist when all that Old Testament stuff happened. Find somewhere, anywhere, where Christ told anyone to kill someone. Christian, after all, does mean "Follower of Christ," not "Follower of all the Old Testament bullshit that got us to the point of *needing* the Christ in the first place."
I'm pretty sure Hinduism, which believes in reincarnation, finds murder under any circumstances just as heinous. Their belief is that a murderer would be reincarnated at a lower level. Maybe they'll come back as a worm, or something.
I'm sure there are others, as I'm certainly not an expert on all religions.
Take a look at our exciting national debate about rape this election season and tell me that fringey, quirky religious ideas aren't something to fight against.
Ok, I admit Romney's a crackpot, but let me reframe that point another way:
Do you believe it's right/acceptable to kill person A because person B raped person C?
It's not impossible, unless you run into one of those idiots who think that any sex beyond attempting procreation within a properly married couple is a grievous sin. But that's not Biblical, and those types usually have nothing to back up that opinion, and just keep shouting fire and brimstone.
I *am* a Christian, and even I ignore that type...
Christianity (you know, that whole "New Testament" thing?) is pretty strongly against wars.
1 John 3:15: Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.
It's pretty hard to go to war with someone if you don't hate them. That single verse pretty much shoots down the *ahem* "Christian" Republican warmongers.
1 John 3:17: If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?
That pretty much shoots down the *ahem* "Christian" Republican corporatists.
1 John 3:18: Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.
That pretty much shoots down every other hypocritical Republican.
People here seem to think that because Republicans claim to be Christian, and they're usually all for war, military dominance, corporate supremacy and profits, etc, then Christianity must support all this crap. These types of Republicans aren't Christians. They're posers.
1 John 4:1: Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
That pretty much admonishes everybody who thinks Christianity is all about war and profit just because some Republican warmonger douchebag claims to be a Christian.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, how often is Time's Man of the Year a newborn?
Ahh, and indoctrinated Apple user. .apk file types on Google. You'll find them in plenty of places besides Google App Store.
Search for
Thus proving the point that every time you correct someone, your probably wrong. :)
My probably wrong what? What's this about my probably wrong?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
A critique of someone's methods does not involve comments like:
You're all assholes because you don't believe the crap I believe, I find that insulting, and calling you names is the only avenue left to me to defend my fairy tale god.
That's putting idiotic words in the mouth of your opponent, which is exactly what your opponent was doing to atheists.
That's why it's hypocritical.
Why do so many ACs who are bitching about other people's minor grammatical errors frequently make a complete hatchet job of subject/predicate tense and plurality agreements?
That's' greengrocer's' apo's'trophe, dumba's's'.
FTFY
If you're going to do it, do it big.
Well, for example, General Motors had some pushrod (no overhead camshaft) V6s in use from the late 1990s and 2000s that routinely met or beat their EPA fuel economy ratings. The engines were less powerful than you'd expect from a V6 and pretty noisy for their class, especially under hard acceleration. But my 2001 Impala was rated 21 city/32 highway, and I averaged between 24 and 28 miles per gallon for the 125,000 miles I owned the vehicle and always got 31-32 miles per gallon on long trips.
I assume you're talking about the 3400 V6, as that's the version that was rated at 32 highway, if I recall correctly, although most of what you're saying could equally apply to the 3800.
While they weren't powerful in terms of peak horsepower (which is all non-gearheads understand) the area under the torque curve was quite substantial, as they had gobs of bottom end torque. I drove a 2000 Impala 3400, and now a 2003 Impala 3400. They're both geared high enough to do 42 MPH/70kmph in first gear, but both would give a good shriek out of the front tires from a straight standing start on dry pavement. With that gearing, it's like laying a patch with a Honda Accord starting in second gear. Any engine that can do that has to have a good bottom end.
The really nice thing about them, if you're into modifying cars, is that you can spend between $1000 and $1500 on a set of ported heads and camshaft, including all necessary gaskets, take a couple of weekends stripping down the top end and replacing it, and you've gone from 180 HP stock up to 250-275 HP. The bottom end in the Impala version of the 3400 is all forged, rather than cast, so it can take a LOT more stress than it's ever put under in stock configuration.
Incidentally, the 3800 is quite capable of around 750 HP at the crank, although it takes a lot more than $1500 to get to that.
And as far as the noise goes, I've read that it's specifically tuned to sound like that in the Impala. That makes sense, because both my Impalas have sounded the same, but I've got the same engine in a 2003 Montana, (rated 5 more HP) and it's significantly quieter. The Impala was designed to be a bit of a muscle car, so it's a little more in the line of "mechanical symphony" than "luxury silence".
Among the clergy, even that is a sin.
Only if you're Catholic. I'm not. Catholicism has a bunch of twisted stuff that's not Christian, and in some cases specifically goes *against* what Jesus taught.
There are a lot of things in "Christianity" that aren't Christian. Don't assume that's stuff that you're supposed to follow to call yourself a Christian.
I've been told I'm a crappy Christian for wearing jeans and a t-shirt to church, instead of a suit and tie.
Nowhere does Jesus say to wear your "Sunday best" when worshiping. In fact, he specifically invited people who were in rags, who were hated by society, etc.
I've been told I'm a crappy Christian for playing what basically amounts to rock music in our service (I'm the music director), because I'm supposed to do traditional hymns on a pipe organ.
But according to the Bible, I'm supposed to praise with tambourine, dancing, strings, flute, cymbals, drums, trumpet, harp, lyre, etc.
Sounds like rock music to me...
Genesis. Old Testament.
Thousands of years before Christ, therefore decidedly NOT Christian.
Besides that, I don't know of too many people, Christians or otherwise, who would think that screwing your brother's wife is the right thing to do, whether you pull out or not. It doesn't specifically say that he was killed for using the pull out method. It says "what he did." I think having sex with his brother's wife was the bigger evil than pulling out.....
I hope they're not going to try to patent this.
Fukushima and Pripyat already have glow in the dark roads!
Thanks. I'll be here all week. Or at least until management kicks me out.....
Jesus said he was there to enforce the old ways,
Where? He claimed to be there to fulfill the law, not enforce it. That's two different things.
You can't even begin to claim that until Christian at LEAST start using books that don't have the old testament included. While they are distributing the pile of nonsense, hate, and crap they can't claim it doesn't count.
1. New Testament, Psalms and Proverbs, distributed by the Gideons. One of many.
2. Does that mean that a history book that details medieval atrocities is supporting that kind of behaviour? Of course not. The Old Testament is as much about explaining the need for Jesus, as anything.
Interesting note: Jesus claimed to return during the lifetime of the apostles as well as the life time of Caiphas.
Again, where? I'd like to see something that isn't taken out of context, please.
Because for a start, I don't think it was an attack on Atheism. I think it was an attack on Dawkins, who is an arrogant, obnoxious prick, regardless of whether you agree with him or not.
And then, instead of debating the issue, you just attack the poster, with a "words-in-your-mouth" strawman that adds nothing to the discussion, other than an attack of the exact type you are decrying.
*That's* why it's hypocritical.
According to the USA, it is. :P
I'd assume the Netflix employee was in the USA. It's really not relevant where the source of the subs was, as long as the copying action happened within the USA.
At least, that's my understanding of it, and IANAL.
So none of Weird Al's songs are covered by copyright? Awesome!!
And you're an insulting prick, but I don't let that bother me.
Netflix is certainly paying the legit publisher for the original movie, but if the subtitles were from the original publisher, they wouldn't mention the Finnish pirate website in them, would they?
I would think (IANAL) that the translations would be a derivative work, and therefore would have a copyright owned by the translator, as well as the possibility of one owned by the studio.
Netflix is an American company. I would imagine that the person who lifted the subtitles was probably in the US, too, although I admit that is merely an assumption on my part. However, there's no indication at all that the Netflix employee who did this was in Finland, at least not in the summary.
This would mean US copyright law most likely would apply.
"why is there a diversity of life on the planet, and why does it show similarity?"
As an I.T. person (I'm assuming) you should know better than to ask this question.
Let me rephrase it in a context that you'd understand better:
Why are there so many Windows programs out there, and why do they similarly rely on win32k.sys?
Your assumption about life is that it shows similarities because it evolved from one life form to the next. A programmer knows this is bullshit. All programs are intelligently designed, yet they all have similar functions, all rely on similar libraries and show very similar characteristics to life, as far as how they develop.
Could a complex software program come about by chance? I think we'd all say the idea is ludicrous. But suddenly when we're talking about life, which is infinitely more complex than the most complex program, it all must have happened by chance, and there's a mental block when it comes to discussing any other possibility.
I don't know where this disconnect comes from. How do two very similar situations lead an intelligent person to come to two polar opposite conclusions?
People are the problem with the world.
FTFY
If I kill you because you are a godless infidel spreading lies and deceit, undermining the work of the holy one and leading good people astray, I am a saint -- in any religion.
Errr...what?
I'm sorry, but you are completely and totally wrong.
I know for a fact that Christianity condemns murder under any circumstances, Republicans notwithstanding. Don't try to pull some Old Testament scripture where it says to kill everybody in a city as a claim that Christianity somehow supports this. Christianity didn't even exist when all that Old Testament stuff happened.
Find somewhere, anywhere, where Christ told anyone to kill someone. Christian, after all, does mean "Follower of Christ," not "Follower of all the Old Testament bullshit that got us to the point of *needing* the Christ in the first place."
I'm pretty sure Hinduism, which believes in reincarnation, finds murder under any circumstances just as heinous. Their belief is that a murderer would be reincarnated at a lower level. Maybe they'll come back as a worm, or something.
I'm sure there are others, as I'm certainly not an expert on all religions.
Hmmmm. What's the word?
Oh, yeah...
Whoosh.
Take a look at our exciting national debate about rape this election season and tell me that fringey, quirky religious ideas aren't something to fight against.
Ok, I admit Romney's a crackpot, but let me reframe that point another way:
Do you believe it's right/acceptable to kill person A because person B raped person C?
.... an internet full of facts?
You must have a completely different Internet that I've never seen.....
It's not impossible, unless you run into one of those idiots who think that any sex beyond attempting procreation within a properly married couple is a grievous sin.
But that's not Biblical, and those types usually have nothing to back up that opinion, and just keep shouting fire and brimstone.
I *am* a Christian, and even I ignore that type...
Christianity (you know, that whole "New Testament" thing?) is pretty strongly against wars.
1 John 3:15: Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.
It's pretty hard to go to war with someone if you don't hate them. That single verse pretty much shoots down the *ahem* "Christian" Republican warmongers.
1 John 3:17: If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?
That pretty much shoots down the *ahem* "Christian" Republican corporatists.
1 John 3:18: Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.
That pretty much shoots down every other hypocritical Republican.
People here seem to think that because Republicans claim to be Christian, and they're usually all for war, military dominance, corporate supremacy and profits, etc, then Christianity must support all this crap.
These types of Republicans aren't Christians. They're posers.
1 John 4:1: Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
That pretty much admonishes everybody who thinks Christianity is all about war and profit just because some Republican warmonger douchebag claims to be a Christian.