Re:While I'm not the first to say it...
on
Lawsuits Suck
·
· Score: 1
{ahem}... fuck you.
In case you were not paying attention in school, that's how the US got started you dolt. Unlike Canada, we had the brass cajones to tell the limeys to take a hike. Our nation was founded by BOMBING and SHOOTING the cocksuckers who were ripping us off.
You may meekly submit to the indignities heaped upon you, that is your perogitive, but I won't. Give me liberty or give me death.... oh yea, you wouldn't understand that would you?
I don't hate Canadians, I just feel better when they are not around.
You make a good point, I'm a network admin (and general screwdriver jockey) BTW and am, of course, looking out for my interests. To me unionisation looks good, perhaps us hardware types should hit up the electricians unions and let you coders stay non-unionised rather than create a general IT union?
While I'm not the first to say it...
on
Lawsuits Suck
·
· Score: 1
...I'll reiterate the sentiment: No shit sherlock.
Every time these subjects come up on/., the favored response is: 'write your congressmen letters'; clue time, that ain't gonna work unless you include a big ole fucking check (cash would be better... what am I saying?! A bomb would be better) to buy off the slimebag. We can't win with moral indignation, not when the IP companies fly the judges out to LA to 'educate' them on the case with luxury hotels and kickbacks.
You want justice in America? Better get out that checkbook.... or a gun.
"Colleges cannot afford to just lay importance on sports teams."
Originally, considering my undergraduate alma matter the University of Tennessee, I was going to disagree with you. Then I remembered UT's reputation as an incredible party school and I figure you are right... sort of.
That is exactly why they want to open up immigration. The corporations hate that we have the power to easily switch jobs because it drives wages up. By importing cheap labor they make it harder for us to find new jobs and easier for them to screw us.
No, he described a conspiracy of crap employers. One crap employer does not matter much, but when they all get together and decide to screw us we must all get together to fight it. Have fun finding that new job when some pakistani is willing to do it for wages you wouldn't flip burgers for.
Write your politicians,
Write your local media,
Vote,
Organize the young and untainted,
DO SOMETHING!
Blow shit up?
My politicians are corrupt, the local media is a tool of the wealthy, my choices at the polling booth are virtualy identicle, the young and untainted have been denied an education and are dirt stupid. The system has failed, we need a new one.
"In science nothing is unique - if it happened once it'll happen again."
No doubt, but I believe the frquency of the rise of intellegence, especialy intellegence which we would comprehend as such, is far less often than those searching for it believe. I think I should point out that I'm all for SETI, wether I am right or wrong we need to search anyhow.
It seems to me that many assumptions are being made that are very terra-centric. For instance:
"To the extent that planets are necessary for the origin and evolution of life..."
How can such a statement be made? Planets are certainly necessary for terran life to evolve, but why the assumption that all life in the universe will be like us? Is this a remnant of the biblical 'Crown of Creation' story of the origin of man?
The way I see it, we are making two major eroneous assumptions. The first is that life in the universe will be like us; communicating, traveling, living, and reasoning like humans. The second is in the prevelance of intelligent life. I agree that life will be found to be fairly ubiquotous, I disagree that it follows that intellegent life will be. As far as we know, in all the history of life on earth exactly one intellegent species has arisen. This after at least four major epochs of the evolution of complex lifeforms: no intellegent fish, no intellegent reptiles, no intellegent proto-mammals, and no intellegent dinosaurs. (by intellegent here I mean tool makers, which are the only ones we seem to care about)
Don't forget the Archangel/Vladivostok invasions of Russia in 1919 by American, British, and French troops to support the Anti-Bolshevicks. It's not mentioned much in western history books, but the Russians have not forgotten.
The article mentioned that the flagship of the Kursk was the Peter the Great, a Kirov class nuclear guided-missle battlecruiser (BCGN).
My favorite misuse of the term flagship is in Star Trek. In the Next Generation they always call the Enterprise the 'flagship of the fleet'; two problems: no flag officer aboard and no fleet.
Apple is currently marketing OSX Server as a, well, server OS. The OSX slated for release in the first quarter of 2001 is meant to be a consumer OS as well as supplanting the current OSX Server.
Re:It doesn't matter if you believe
on
TigerCloning
·
· Score: 1
Ah yes, the religion of love and kindness. I'm hip to the adultery, you oughta see my neighbor's wife. As for pain and cruelty, that's life as the Buddha would say. I'll use sex and drugs for my crutch, you use god.
Heretics? Heracy is just a slightly different delusion than orthodoxy. ("If orthodoxy is my doxy, hetrodoxy is simply my neighbors doxy." Nepos was a freak, but a funny one.)
I'd sooner be buggered by a flock of heretics than by one deity. (Imagine, if you will, the size of the deific schlong!)
Re:It doesn't matter if you believe
on
TigerCloning
·
· Score: 1
"Look, if God exists he also defines what is right and wrong and there's no way around that."
Hell of a presumption. That should read "if the christian God exists he also defines what is right and wrong and there's no way around that." Hindu gods don't define what is right and wrong, the deist god does not define what is right and wrong. Other gods, like the Islamic one, have a different definition of right and wrong.
Also, acording to Christianity there is a way around it; simply beg for forgiveness, get baptised, or go to confession depending on which sect you believe in. All your actions right or wrong will be forgiven by your kind and mercifull god. Handy way to excuse acting like a total shithead.
"We are not in a position to judge him."
Speak for yourself. Even if it was shown that the god of the christians exists I would still spit at the twisted nasty piece of work that he is. The christian god is a god of slaves, I am a free man and will not bend knee to any tyrant; mundane or divine.
Re:It doesn't matter if you believe
on
TigerCloning
·
· Score: 1
How insulting. You know, you could be wrong as well and end up in the Islamic hell. Then you will suffer for your beliefs.
I feel no pity at all for you if such a thing happens, it would be quite a funny piece of irony.
"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." -Judges 1:19
Omnipotent my rosy red ass.
"but he is also Holy, full of perfect love."
"I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend mine arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust. The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs." -Dueteronomy 32:23-25
Yea, a real nice guy.
"You can't have faith in something like that when there's no reason to."
Faith is belief without evidence, reason does not come into it at all.
"Belief in revelation from the Bible does not exclude rational empirical research, nor can the latter disprove the former (much as people have tried)."
Empirical research can do so if you make the insane claim, like fundamentalists, that the bible is all true. According to the scientific method all one must do is show that one example is untrue and the infalibility of scripture is disproven, like say:
"And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt. And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword." -1st Samuel 15:7-8
"And David and his men went up, and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt.And David smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive..." -1st Samuel 27:8-9
"And it came to pass, when David and his men were come to Ziklag on the third day, that the Amalekites had invaded the south..." -1st Samuel 30:1
Those pesky Amalekites just won't stay dead. Voila, the verity of scripture is disproved due to scripture's inhearent self-contradiction. Of course if you (in the general sense, I don't know if you personally believe such a thing) drop the 'it's all true' crap you need not worry about disproof because there is nothing to disprove but the definitavely personal revelation.
Warships are supposed to have redundant systems so that they can soak up damage and remain combat capable. One sytem going down, for whatever reason, should not overly hinder a warship's combat effectiveness... much less leave it dead in the water. NT caused the problem, but the designers of the system should have included; no, should have been required to include redundancy into the control systems.
As for: "...in that capitalism has proven to be more favorable to the individual than any collectivist system...", Oh? I'm sure the people of Sweden (you know that northern european social democracy with the highest standard of living in the world) might argue that with you.
At least in a socialist state they don't consider your fucking health to be a commodity. It is morally bankrupt to let %30 percent of your nations children grow up in poverty when more socialist systems (like Sweden) get that number into the low single digits. All so the rich can stay massively wealthy while holding out the carrot of prosperity to the ill educated masses of poor they produce.
That's part of the point dickhead. In this country if you are a conservative you have only one choice who to vote for, and that party holds christianity to be the basis of our morality and laws.
Yea, that's one of the dumbest fucking things anyone could state, both our morality and laws owe more to pagan Greek and Roman philosophys than levantine theology, but too bad, you get only two choices. And the way they are both sucking up to god at the drop of a hat, on this issue you don't even get that much choice.
Slashdot Mirror
Clients.
In case you were not paying attention in school, that's how the US got started you dolt. Unlike Canada, we had the brass cajones to tell the limeys to take a hike. Our nation was founded by BOMBING and SHOOTING the cocksuckers who were ripping us off.
You may meekly submit to the indignities heaped upon you, that is your perogitive, but I won't. Give me liberty or give me death.... oh yea, you wouldn't understand that would you?
I don't hate Canadians, I just feel better when they are not around.
Every time these subjects come up on /., the favored response is: 'write your congressmen letters'; clue time, that ain't gonna work unless you include a big ole fucking check (cash would be better... what am I saying?! A bomb would be better) to buy off the slimebag. We can't win with moral indignation, not when the IP companies fly the judges out to LA to 'educate' them on the case with luxury hotels and kickbacks.
You want justice in America? Better get out that checkbook.... or a gun.
Originally, considering my undergraduate alma matter the University of Tennessee, I was going to disagree with you. Then I remembered UT's reputation as an incredible party school and I figure you are right... sort of.
Write your local media,
Vote,
Organize the young and untainted,
DO SOMETHING!
Blow shit up?
My politicians are corrupt, the local media is a tool of the wealthy, my choices at the polling booth are virtualy identicle, the young and untainted have been denied an education and are dirt stupid. The system has failed, we need a new one.
"In science nothing is unique - if it happened once it'll happen again."
No doubt, but I believe the frquency of the rise of intellegence, especialy intellegence which we would comprehend as such, is far less often than those searching for it believe. I think I should point out that I'm all for SETI, wether I am right or wrong we need to search anyhow.
"To the extent that planets are necessary for the origin and evolution of life..."
How can such a statement be made? Planets are certainly necessary for terran life to evolve, but why the assumption that all life in the universe will be like us? Is this a remnant of the biblical 'Crown of Creation' story of the origin of man?
The way I see it, we are making two major eroneous assumptions. The first is that life in the universe will be like us; communicating, traveling, living, and reasoning like humans. The second is in the prevelance of intelligent life. I agree that life will be found to be fairly ubiquotous, I disagree that it follows that intellegent life will be. As far as we know, in all the history of life on earth exactly one intellegent species has arisen. This after at least four major epochs of the evolution of complex lifeforms: no intellegent fish, no intellegent reptiles, no intellegent proto-mammals, and no intellegent dinosaurs. (by intellegent here I mean tool makers, which are the only ones we seem to care about)
My favorite misuse of the term flagship is in Star Trek. In the Next Generation they always call the Enterprise the 'flagship of the fleet'; two problems: no flag officer aboard and no fleet.
Windows, Gnome, CDE, etc., etc.... The Mac won long ago, now everything wants to look like one. ;)
Heretics? Heracy is just a slightly different delusion than orthodoxy. ("If orthodoxy is my doxy, hetrodoxy is simply my neighbors doxy." Nepos was a freak, but a funny one.)
I'd sooner be buggered by a flock of heretics than by one deity. (Imagine, if you will, the size of the deific schlong!)
Hell of a presumption. That should read "if the christian God exists he also defines what is right and wrong and there's no way around that." Hindu gods don't define what is right and wrong, the deist god does not define what is right and wrong. Other gods, like the Islamic one, have a different definition of right and wrong.
Also, acording to Christianity there is a way around it; simply beg for forgiveness, get baptised, or go to confession depending on which sect you believe in. All your actions right or wrong will be forgiven by your kind and mercifull god. Handy way to excuse acting like a total shithead.
"We are not in a position to judge him."
Speak for yourself. Even if it was shown that the god of the christians exists I would still spit at the twisted nasty piece of work that he is. The christian god is a god of slaves, I am a free man and will not bend knee to any tyrant; mundane or divine.
I feel no pity at all for you if such a thing happens, it would be quite a funny piece of irony.
"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." -Judges 1:19
Omnipotent my rosy red ass.
"but he is also Holy, full of perfect love."
"I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend mine arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust. The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs." -Dueteronomy 32:23-25
Yea, a real nice guy.
"You can't have faith in something like that when there's no reason to."
Faith is belief without evidence, reason does not come into it at all.
"Belief in revelation from the Bible does not exclude rational empirical research, nor can the latter disprove the former (much as people have tried)."
Empirical research can do so if you make the insane claim, like fundamentalists, that the bible is all true. According to the scientific method all one must do is show that one example is untrue and the infalibility of scripture is disproven, like say:
"And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt. And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword." -1st Samuel 15:7-8
"And David and his men went up, and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt.And David smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive..." -1st Samuel 27:8-9
"And it came to pass, when David and his men were come to Ziklag on the third day, that the Amalekites had invaded the south..." -1st Samuel 30:1
Those pesky Amalekites just won't stay dead. Voila, the verity of scripture is disproved due to scripture's inhearent self-contradiction. Of course if you (in the general sense, I don't know if you personally believe such a thing) drop the 'it's all true' crap you need not worry about disproof because there is nothing to disprove but the definitavely personal revelation.
Warships are supposed to have redundant systems so that they can soak up damage and remain combat capable. One sytem going down, for whatever reason, should not overly hinder a warship's combat effectiveness... much less leave it dead in the water. NT caused the problem, but the designers of the system should have included; no, should have been required to include redundancy into the control systems.
As for: "...in that capitalism has proven to be more favorable to the individual than any collectivist system...", Oh? I'm sure the people of Sweden (you know that northern european social democracy with the highest standard of living in the world) might argue that with you.
At least in a socialist state they don't consider your fucking health to be a commodity. It is morally bankrupt to let %30 percent of your nations children grow up in poverty when more socialist systems (like Sweden) get that number into the low single digits. All so the rich can stay massively wealthy while holding out the carrot of prosperity to the ill educated masses of poor they produce.
Yea, that's one of the dumbest fucking things anyone could state, both our morality and laws owe more to pagan Greek and Roman philosophys than levantine theology, but too bad, you get only two choices. And the way they are both sucking up to god at the drop of a hat, on this issue you don't even get that much choice.
I love that line.