So, when was the last time you saw an ad for methamphetamine?
And methamphetamine, which the magazine [Wired] says can âoeincrease concentration and creative output.â
Wired makes clear that it knows methamphetamine is illegal; in the âoeHow to Get Itâ box, it advises readers to âoetap the black market.â
You fail. HIV/AIDS is not untreatable. It is incurable, but that is not because of on-going and continual mutation.
The same for Hepatitis and TB, except they do not continually mutate.
The flu and the common cold (which is actually several bacteria and viruses) do continually mutate, but that does not stop anyone from treating and curing them.
Because they are a bunch of crack-pot fundamentalists nuts (CPFNs). Look at other CPFNs, such as the Taliban, Al-Qeda, etc. They are very dangerous because their belief justifies horrific actions. The particular CPFN referred to in the article is obsessed with silencing the scientists in question and they are increasingly willing to do anything, whether illegal or immoral, to do so as they can justify their bad actions by saying "I did it for God."
Your argument is a false premise. You suggest that the company would fail if it paid the cost of the software, but there is nothing to support that supposition.
Management is making a choice which pushes the cost of the software from the company (in the form of license fees) to the employee (in the form of unpaid overtime). Then, the poster, who has apparently never worked at a real IT job, suggest that the PP pay for the tool himself, which again pushes the cost to the employee, and also is probably impractical as most business only let one use "approved" software tools.
a) That would involve real kids now wouldn't it, dumbass.
b)You are right not everything is free, but I should not have to pay, or give up my freedom, so you can be lazy piece of shit parent who let's their little brats run free expecting everyone to put up with and protect them. Raising your child is your job, try doing it.
c)No, you never said it. You just behave like it. I am not making shit up.
d)So, your kids are not part of the general population of kids? And, yes, when you are talking it is YOUR kids. Bad things may happen to the children of great parents, but I am will to bet, that it is not all the time nor is it at as great a frequency as it is to the kids of shitty parents like you.
I never said anything about a 100% free society, you lying asshole. I said I should not have to give up my freedoms to give your whiny bitch ass a world where your little brats can be "free range" children, able to stay out all night, watch any movie or TV show, or go to any website without you having to do your job of protecting and guiding them. You know, actually paying attention to what your children are doing.
Now, go back to your children, you negligent, lazy, worthless piece of shit parent.
They state that the dog gave it's life for the test. It does not state that the dog died as a result of the surgery.
A more likely interpretation is that the surgery was completed and that the dog was killed and dissected to determine if the surgery was a success. That is what normally happens during animal trials.
No, we are not talking about child porn. We are talking about computer generated porn. No children involved, just pixels.
I'm so terribly sorry that you are so wrapped up in yourself that you expect everyone else to give up their freedom, just so you can have the OPTION to ignore your children.
Hey, here is a thought. Be a fucking adult and act like the responsible parent by actually paying attention to your kid instead of trying make everyone live in a disneyfied world
Fuck you and your children. I am an adult, I am single, I don't have kids, and I should not have to live my life as if I am 13 because you and your ilk are too lazy and too stupid to actually be parents and protect your children.
Now, go shut the fuck up and go raise your children or give them to someone who will.
But, their porn only became, as you put it, "screwed up" after World War 2 and the rules of occupation that outlawed pubic hair and penile penetration shots to protect the Japanese, especially the women, from exploitation.
Biased source: Victor B. Cline, Pornography's Effects on Adults and Children (New York: Morality in Media, 1990), 11.
From the Morality in Media website:
MORALITY IN MEDIA, INC. was established in New York City in 1962 to combat pornography. Oh, and you are a liar. The referenced articles are x and xi. Those are:
ix Victor B. Cline, Pornography's Effects on Adults and Children (New York: Morality in Media, 1990), 11.
x Edward Donnerstein, "Ordinances to Add Pornography to Discrimination against Women," statement at Public Hearing of Minneapolis City Council Session (12 December 1983). See also Luis T. Garcia, "Exposure to Pornography and Attitudes about Women and Rape: A Correlative Study," AG 22 (1986), 382-83. This study found "subjects with a greater degree of exposure to violent sexual materials tended to believe that: (a) women are responsible for preventing their own rape, (b) rapists should not be severely punished, and (c) women should not resist a rape attack. In addition, researchers found that exposure to violent sexual material correlated significantly with the belief that rapists are normal. See also Zillman, "Effects of Prolonged Consumption," 129; and N. Malamuth and J. Ceniti, 129-37. "Studyâ¦results consistently showed a relationship between one's reported likelihood to rape and responses associated with convicted rapists such as sexual arousal to rape stimuli, callous attitudes toward rape, beliefs in the rape myths, and hostility towards women."
You fail The study does not support the assertion made in the GPP. The study proves that child molesters and rapists watch porn. It does not say nor does it support the claim that using porn leads to rape or child molestation.
In fact, for child molestation, the article seems to indicate the opposite:
child molesters indicated significantly more exposure than rapists in adulthood and were significantly more likely both to use such materials prior to and during their offenses and to employ pornography to relieve an impulse to act out. [emphasis added] This seems to indicate that at least some child molesters try fight their impulses to molest by using porn.
2)The second gives one tools to protect the rest. 3) See #2
every idiot can not be trusted with a tank But, interestingly enough, any idiot who can afford one and can get the license can, in fact, own a tank, complete with working main gun. Just like if I wanted to own, say, a.50 caliber machine gun, I could do it as long as I got the proper permit from the ATF and could afford it. As it is, I have been looking at a Tommy gun, but I just can't justify the expense.
Slashdot Mirror
If they do not have the skill to crack into those laptops, then we should stop sending all this hi-tech software development work over to them
According to that election map, 21 states will override the will of 29 states. Those 21 states are mainly in the Pacific west and the Northeast.
The South, the Plains states, and portions of the Midwest and Southwest states do not believe in Obama. These are mostly rural and farm states.
Could it be that the data is skewed by the availability of net access?
Also, is this an indicator that those who grow most of the food do not believe that Obama will do what is in their best interest?
Wired makes clear that it knows methamphetamine is illegal; in the âoeHow to Get Itâ box, it advises readers to âoetap the black market.â
You mean like the way religionists and creationists bash scientists and science?
Stones and glass houses and all that.
posts on /. as an anonymous coward posts
to prevent karma loss.
I do not recognize your authority because it is based in a delusion.
You fail.
HIV/AIDS is not untreatable. It is incurable, but that is not because of on-going and continual mutation.
The same for Hepatitis and TB, except they do not continually mutate.
The flu and the common cold (which is actually several bacteria and viruses) do continually mutate, but that does not stop anyone from treating and curing them.
To answer your question:
Because they are a bunch of crack-pot fundamentalists nuts (CPFNs). Look at other CPFNs, such as the Taliban, Al-Qeda, etc. They are very dangerous because their belief justifies horrific actions. The particular CPFN referred to in the article is obsessed with silencing the scientists in question and they are increasingly willing to do anything, whether illegal or immoral, to do so as they can justify their bad actions by saying "I did it for God."
Do you understand now?
That was already stipulated. So, do you always change the argument when you can't win?
How about he pay the money and use something that already works?
Why should he pay to get something fixed when he can pay to get something that doesn't need to be fixed?
Oh, wait, that actually makes sense, doesn't it.
Your argument is a false premise. You suggest that the company would fail if it paid the cost of the software, but there is nothing to support that supposition.
You fail.
No, the poster doesn't.
Management is making a choice which pushes the cost of the software from the company (in the form of license fees) to the employee (in the form of unpaid overtime). Then, the poster, who has apparently never worked at a real IT job, suggest that the PP pay for the tool himself, which again pushes the cost to the employee, and also is probably impractical as most business only let one use "approved" software tools.
a) That would involve real kids now wouldn't it, dumbass.
b)You are right not everything is free, but I should not have to pay, or give up my freedom, so you can be lazy piece of shit parent who let's their little brats run free expecting everyone to put up with and protect them. Raising your child is your job, try doing it.
c)No, you never said it. You just behave like it. I am not making shit up.
d)So, your kids are not part of the general population of kids? And, yes, when you are talking it is YOUR kids. Bad things may happen to the children of great parents, but I am will to bet, that it is not all the time nor is it at as great a frequency as it is to the kids of shitty parents like you.
I never said anything about a 100% free society, you lying asshole. I said I should not have to give up my freedoms to give your whiny bitch ass a world where your little brats can be "free range" children, able to stay out all night, watch any movie or TV show, or go to any website without you having to do your job of protecting and guiding them. You know, actually paying attention to what your children are doing.
Now, go back to your children, you negligent, lazy, worthless piece of shit parent.
Yes, quite great. *gurps* Excuse me....
They state that the dog gave it's life for the test. It does not state that the dog died as a result of the surgery.
A more likely interpretation is that the surgery was completed and that the dog was killed and dissected to determine if the surgery was a success. That is what normally happens during animal trials.
No, we are not talking about child porn. We are talking about computer generated porn. No children involved, just pixels.
I'm so terribly sorry that you are so wrapped up in yourself that you expect everyone else to give up their freedom, just so you can have the OPTION to ignore your children.
Hey, here is a thought. Be a fucking adult and act like the responsible parent by actually paying attention to your kid instead of trying make everyone live in a disneyfied world
Fuck you and your children. I am an adult, I am single, I don't have kids, and I should not have to live my life as if I am 13 because you and your ilk are too lazy and too stupid to actually be parents and protect your children.
Now, go shut the fuck up and go raise your children or give them to someone who will.
But, their porn only became, as you put it, "screwed up" after World War 2 and the rules of occupation that outlawed pubic hair and penile penetration shots to protect the Japanese, especially the women, from exploitation.
How about posting something that is not from a nanny -state, "think of the children" website.
From the Morality in Media website: MORALITY IN MEDIA, INC. was established in New York City in 1962 to combat pornography. Oh, and you are a liar. The referenced articles are x and xi. Those are
x Edward Donnerstein, "Ordinances to Add Pornography to Discrimination against Women," statement at Public Hearing of Minneapolis City Council Session (12 December 1983). See also Luis T. Garcia, "Exposure to Pornography and Attitudes about Women and Rape: A Correlative Study," AG 22 (1986), 382-83. This study found "subjects with a greater degree of exposure to violent sexual materials tended to believe that: (a) women are responsible for preventing their own rape, (b) rapists should not be severely punished, and (c) women should not resist a rape attack. In addition, researchers found that exposure to violent sexual material correlated significantly with the belief that rapists are normal. See also Zillman, "Effects of Prolonged Consumption," 129; and N. Malamuth and J. Ceniti, 129-37. "Studyâ¦results consistently showed a relationship between one's reported likelihood to rape and responses associated with convicted rapists such as sexual arousal to rape stimuli, callous attitudes toward rape, beliefs in the rape myths, and hostility towards women."
xi Cline, Pornography's Effects, 8.
In fact, for child molestation, the article seems to indicate the opposite: child molesters indicated significantly more exposure than rapists in adulthood and were significantly more likely both to use such materials prior to and during their offenses and to employ pornography to relieve an impulse to act out. [emphasis added] This seems to indicate that at least some child molesters try fight their impulses to molest by using porn.
There is a guy who sells them for about $1000 each. And, he sells the drum magazines. And, he used to have viola gun cases, too.
I wants, but I just can't justify it.
No, it's not ok.
You should be referencing the actual articles from the original sources, not some propaganda site and not some biased organization site.
Reference the Advertiser, the Morning Herald, the Herald sun because they are the unbiased source.
Hey, nice of you to like to an anti-American, racist website. That just shows what kind of racist asshole you really are.
World Net Daily is not a valid news source. It is a christian propaganda news site.
3) See #2 every idiot can not be trusted with a tank But, interestingly enough, any idiot who can afford one and can get the license can, in fact, own a tank, complete with working main gun. Just like if I wanted to own, say, a