Oh, I agree with you. I'm not saying Democrats are saints and Republicans are demons. In fact, I know a great number of Republicans, and most of them are level-headed, rational people who support freedom and democracy in many the same ways I do. I was just going off on what's-his-name's claim that Republicans have never encroached on anyone's freedom. As I said in my opening, I was simplifying the issue into the Democrat=liberal, Republican=conservative dichotomy. And, you have to admit that, statistically speaking, all of my points were accurate. The more conservative you go, the more you find resistance to personal freedoms, including drug use, abortion, "indecent" behaviour, etc. As for liberal tax collecting and social spending, that's a completely different issue that, actually, I agree with you on, regarding responsible spending, money != success, and so forth.
I must say, this is the most backwards, misinformed post I've read in quite a while. The evils of education? Rich, powermongering Democrats? Republicans not taking away rights? Huh? WTF? I realize there are conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, but for now let's just assume the typical two-party, two-ideology identities. Oh, sure, you admit the slave-owning thing, I'll grant you that. But Republicans have never taken away any other rights? Bullshit.
Who wanted to deny women the right to vote?
Republicans.
Who wanted to deny blacks the right to use "white" restrooms/water fountains/bus seats?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to say what I want on television or radio?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to view what they define as "indecent"?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to gamble with my own money?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to pay or charge for sex?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to smoke a joint after work (even though their tobacco buddies kill hundreds of thousands a year)?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to have an abortion?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to marry another woman?
Republicans.
Who has taken every opportunity to force their Christian ideals down others' throats and done everything in their power to squash the rights of people who subscribe to a different faith, or no faith at all?
Republicans.
Who now, and, from what I can tell, always, has lobbied for the rights of corporations, or in this day and age, the goverment, in the name of "security", at the expense of people?
Republicans.
Oh, but wonderful Republicans could never deny us any rights, could they? Those evil Democrats take away some of your oh-so-precious money in a not-always-successful-but-atleast-well-intentioned attempt to help those in need and make society better, and you whine about that? You call that "taking your rights away"? Now I've heard everything...
10 INPUT "Was this bacteria found 41 kilometers in the atmosphere? (Y/N)";A$
20 IF A$ = "Y" THEN GOTO 40
30 PRINT "Not extraterrestrial." : END
40 PRINT "Extraterrestrial." : END
I hope Google wins a countersuit and Novak spends the rest of his natural life paying off his debt by cleaning up after their pigeons."
Re:is it so hard to believe?
on
Life on Pluto?
·
· Score: 1
This reminds me of the story of the hundred and sixteen lavender chickens of Romania, who scoured the Rocky Mountains for many a year in search of the giant Spork of Wisdom. Their search was cut short, however, when Richard Nixon's Carriage of Death rolled by, and the glare from a giant wicker cabinet incinerated Vermont.
Re:is it so hard to believe?
on
Life on Pluto?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I have to agree with you regarding the abundance of life. We have no reason to suspect that Earth is unique, or even unusual, considering the vast number or star systems in our galaxy alone, many of which have been confirmed to have planetary bodies (something else I believe we will discover to be more common than not).
I have to point out a flaw in your fire analogy, though. Oxidation, as well as all other nonliving chemical reactions, have no free will. The outcome of a nonliving chemical reaction is based completely upon the location, velocity, and composition of preexisting particles and conditions of the system. Nothing occurs of its own volition in such a reaction, and there is no randomness, which are the defining characteristics of life.
But I do have to concur with your assessment that life will exist where it can exist, or atleast where it can be created or placed. Evidence shows that life appears on Earth relatively shortly (in cosmic terms) after it became possible for life to exist. I think we will eventually find that to be true in most of the universe, even if it is on the level or virii or bacteria.
This is exactly what I was thinking. If I remember correctly, the main requirements for the creation of life were large amounts of methane, carbon dioxide, and other gasses, as well as sustained electrical discharges over a long enough period of time to form complex proteins. While there may be sufficient pressure and heat far beneath the surface of these places to maintain existing life, I can't imagine the initial requirements existing there now or, considering the vast distance from the Sun, in the past either.
I'm just curious... is this really any different than what television stations do? I mean, 90% of the movies you'll see on TV will have a quarter of the film cut for commercial room, a quarter of it cut for material arbitrarily defined as indecent, "bad words" removed or redubbed, etc. All legal and ethical arguments aside, as I don't know who decides what to cut, who cuts it, and all that (they do have that "This movie has been edited for content/time."), but when you watch a movie on television, and when you watch one from Clean Flicks, aren't you gonna see about the same thing (the Clean Flicks version will probably have LESS cut because commercials aren't a consideration)?
Has anyone considered that they exist only as particles, and any wave function assigned to them exists because of inherent vibration? Sometimes the wavelength of the vibration exceeds the width of the particle, but so what?
Maybe it's just my memory going bad, but were Spot and Guinan not in the last two movies? And if they weren't, did they ever give an explanation? I don't remember either of them leaving the ship...
How about the term "standard" (seeing as the name of the measurement system is US Standard)? And what's with this "imperial"? What empire are we talking about?
A few people have said that the EULA in some programs forces the user to agree with audits. My question is, how does the BSA know what software an organization is running? How do they even know they have computers? In this case, of course, the IT department invited the BSA over, but as for most companies/schools, the BSA has no basis for asking to inspect software in the first place.
Just out of curiosity... how does the 8-point font matter? I mean, I've heard of some people trying to save disk space by using smaller font sizes, but still...
Actually, Base2 numbers aren't stupid, Base10 numbers are. A logical course of action would be to convert our entire mathematical system to Base8, since Base10 has no actual basis in nature or math. It just happens to be the number of fingers we have, which is where Base10 came from.
Same with the 60 minutes in an hour, 24 hours in a day crap. This needs to go.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's because the oil has rabies.
Oh, I agree with you. I'm not saying Democrats are saints and Republicans are demons. In fact, I know a great number of Republicans, and most of them are level-headed, rational people who support freedom and democracy in many the same ways I do. I was just going off on what's-his-name's claim that Republicans have never encroached on anyone's freedom. As I said in my opening, I was simplifying the issue into the Democrat=liberal, Republican=conservative dichotomy. And, you have to admit that, statistically speaking, all of my points were accurate. The more conservative you go, the more you find resistance to personal freedoms, including drug use, abortion, "indecent" behaviour, etc. As for liberal tax collecting and social spending, that's a completely different issue that, actually, I agree with you on, regarding responsible spending, money != success, and so forth.
I must say, this is the most backwards, misinformed post I've read in quite a while. The evils of education? Rich, powermongering Democrats? Republicans not taking away rights? Huh? WTF? I realize there are conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, but for now let's just assume the typical two-party, two-ideology identities. Oh, sure, you admit the slave-owning thing, I'll grant you that. But Republicans have never taken away any other rights? Bullshit.
d attempt to help those in need and make society better, and you whine about that? You call that "taking your rights away"? Now I've heard everything...
Who wanted to deny women the right to vote?
Republicans.
Who wanted to deny blacks the right to use "white" restrooms/water fountains/bus seats?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to say what I want on television or radio?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to view what they define as "indecent"?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to gamble with my own money?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to pay or charge for sex?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to smoke a joint after work (even though their tobacco buddies kill hundreds of thousands a year)?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to have an abortion?
Republicans.
Who wants to deny me the right to marry another woman?
Republicans.
Who has taken every opportunity to force their Christian ideals down others' throats and done everything in their power to squash the rights of people who subscribe to a different faith, or no faith at all?
Republicans.
Who now, and, from what I can tell, always, has lobbied for the rights of corporations, or in this day and age, the goverment, in the name of "security", at the expense of people?
Republicans.
Oh, but wonderful Republicans could never deny us any rights, could they? Those evil Democrats take away some of your oh-so-precious money in a not-always-successful-but-atleast-well-intentione
...the Hubble is designed for looking at extremely dim objects...
Hmmmm... maybe we should point the Hubble down in this direction and see if we can find where all these hoax theorists are.
They probably *did* do a BASIC test:
;A$
10 INPUT "Was this bacteria found 41 kilometers in the atmosphere? (Y/N)"
20 IF A$ = "Y" THEN GOTO 40
30 PRINT "Not extraterrestrial." : END
40 PRINT "Extraterrestrial." : END
So when my modem used to tell me it was "handshaking", it was just lying to me?
I didn't understand it fully, but from what I can tell, it has something to do with rubber bands and doughnuts.
I hope Google wins a countersuit and Novak spends the rest of his natural life paying off his debt by cleaning up after their pigeons."
This reminds me of the story of the hundred and sixteen lavender chickens of Romania, who scoured the Rocky Mountains for many a year in search of the giant Spork of Wisdom. Their search was cut short, however, when Richard Nixon's Carriage of Death rolled by, and the glare from a giant wicker cabinet incinerated Vermont.
a dsf
Nothing is random indeed. =)
Alright, fine, how's this: ouasdfhbasfjkl;bafguoaerobu[asdfjo;asdf;gjasdfuo;
I have to agree with you regarding the abundance of life. We have no reason to suspect that Earth is unique, or even unusual, considering the vast number or star systems in our galaxy alone, many of which have been confirmed to have planetary bodies (something else I believe we will discover to be more common than not).
I have to point out a flaw in your fire analogy, though. Oxidation, as well as all other nonliving chemical reactions, have no free will. The outcome of a nonliving chemical reaction is based completely upon the location, velocity, and composition of preexisting particles and conditions of the system. Nothing occurs of its own volition in such a reaction, and there is no randomness, which are the defining characteristics of life.
But I do have to concur with your assessment that life will exist where it can exist, or atleast where it can be created or placed. Evidence shows that life appears on Earth relatively shortly (in cosmic terms) after it became possible for life to exist. I think we will eventually find that to be true in most of the universe, even if it is on the level or virii or bacteria.
This is exactly what I was thinking. If I remember correctly, the main requirements for the creation of life were large amounts of methane, carbon dioxide, and other gasses, as well as sustained electrical discharges over a long enough period of time to form complex proteins. While there may be sufficient pressure and heat far beneath the surface of these places to maintain existing life, I can't imagine the initial requirements existing there now or, considering the vast distance from the Sun, in the past either.
I'm just curious... is this really any different than what television stations do? I mean, 90% of the movies you'll see on TV will have a quarter of the film cut for commercial room, a quarter of it cut for material arbitrarily defined as indecent, "bad words" removed or redubbed, etc. All legal and ethical arguments aside, as I don't know who decides what to cut, who cuts it, and all that (they do have that "This movie has been edited for content/time."), but when you watch a movie on television, and when you watch one from Clean Flicks, aren't you gonna see about the same thing (the Clean Flicks version will probably have LESS cut because commercials aren't a consideration)?
Has anyone considered that they exist only as particles, and any wave function assigned to them exists because of inherent vibration? Sometimes the wavelength of the vibration exceeds the width of the particle, but so what?
Maybe it's just my memory going bad, but were Spot and Guinan not in the last two movies? And if they weren't, did they ever give an explanation? I don't remember either of them leaving the ship...
How about the term "standard" (seeing as the name of the measurement system is US Standard)? And what's with this "imperial"? What empire are we talking about?
That rules out just about all video games, doesn't it?
Yes, except it's Cardassia, and Bajorans... Those were too glaring.
A few people have said that the EULA in some programs forces the user to agree with audits. My question is, how does the BSA know what software an organization is running? How do they even know they have computers? In this case, of course, the IT department invited the BSA over, but as for most companies/schools, the BSA has no basis for asking to inspect software in the first place.
How about just placing a sign above the cat door: "NO HALF-DEAD RATS ALLOWED"?
Just out of curiosity... how does the 8-point font matter? I mean, I've heard of some people trying to save disk space by using smaller font sizes, but still...
Actually, Base2 numbers aren't stupid, Base10 numbers are. A logical course of action would be to convert our entire mathematical system to Base8, since Base10 has no actual basis in nature or math. It just happens to be the number of fingers we have, which is where Base10 came from. Same with the 60 minutes in an hour, 24 hours in a day crap. This needs to go.
Well, if we can't see it because of the sun's light, why don't we just look for it at NIGHT? Duuuuuh...
Yeah, and Plymouth stands for "Please Let Your Mother Out from Under The Hood"...
Everyone has a random string generator. It's called a "brain".
There are three types of people in the world: those that can do math, and those who can't.