The thing is that it is impossible to compare sex to abstinence. (Over a sufficiently long period of time). If you have ever experienced sex, then you have not fully experienced abstinence. If, when you die, you have fully experienced abstinence, then you have never experienced sex.
Comparing on the short term is futile. Sex obviously has a much better short term consiquence (it feels good). However, it can have negative side effects, which is why abstinence is touted as a good long term solution.
I am not sure if this is a troll or not. Oh well, I will feed the troll.
After a couple of minutes of rocking back and forth and moaning, she climbed back off, giggled, and ran back to her room
You let this continue for a couple minutes? Whats wrong with you? The second you discovered what was going on, you should have stopped the situation and explained why it was wrong. Letting it ride, even untill she gets to her room removes the act from the consequence. Stop the situation right away. Deal with it right away. Explain right away.
I'm going to take my pants off right now and spank her
The second reason I think this is a troll. Do you always take your pants off when you spank your daughter? Seems quite sick to me.
How about hiring your own experts to examine the knife to check if those are really your finger prints on the knife, and if there are any other finger prints that the police aren't telling you about?
I thought that the defense was supposed to have full access to all the evidence laid against them. It is the only way they can come up with a meaningful defense.
"But your honour, we had no knowledge of this bloody knife!"
"Over-ruled. If we let you know about the knife you could have killed someone else with it."
While we are at it, lets design a virus that targets alien archeolgists.
"I wonder how this puny civilization died off suddenly hundreds of years ago. Hey, look what I found, its a ACH GAG"
I bet aliens would be as stupid as people in our science fiction movies. "Hey, the air contains roughly the right ammount of oxygen, I think I will take off my helmet. What, air bourne virii, damn, I didn't think of that. ACH GAG"
Adolf Hitler is certainly not an admirable person either. He may have influenced the thoughts and lives of many people, but in a negative way.
I would argue that Hitler has influenced many more people positively than negatively.
During his life, Hitler negatively influenced the lives of one generation in Europe, North America, and North Africa. He repressed all occupied Europe, killed millions of Jews, millions of Germans, Russians, English, Americans, Canadians, etc died fighting in the war. Lets say that half of one generation was negatively influenced by Hitler. Then add in the percentage of neo-nazis running around since then (and the people they persicute).
On the benifited side: Jewish people now enjoy their own homeland, anti-semitism is no longer socially acceptable for most of socity (this is possitive for both jews and the people who were spared from being anti-semites). The anti racism sentiment that he stirred up as a result of his extreme racism has done wonders in reducing racism around the world. People value freedom and democracy much more because we have seen the alternative. The events that led up to WWII have taught us some lessons on how to avoid such things from happening again.
Dispite the fact that Hitler's actions had some good side benifits, he was still a very bad man. If I had the choice, I would likely rather live in a world that Hitler had not existed, to save the suffering inflicted upon those that did suffer from him. Perhaps the good things would have come about without him. However I would not go so far as to say that the world is worse off today because he existed.
Sometimes is takes something really really bad to happen before we take action to right the wrongs in society. Nuclear reactors need to break down and send billows of deadly radio active dust into the atmosphere before we start taking nuclear power seriously. Gaping holes need to be created in our ozone layer before we start to take the environment seriously. Children need to be killed by abusive parents before we start to take action against child abusers. Thousands of people needed to die from aids before we began to herald safe sex (thus aleviating many other problems).
It is sad that in society needs to be kicked in the groin before it listens to anything. We would rather ignore problems and say "its not that bad." or "it doesn't affect me at all." In a perfect world we could change without catastrophy. But I dont have enough faith in human nature to hold out for this happening. Sometimes in the long run, it may be good that bad things happen. Is it good that one child starves to death if it means that from then on thousands of other children will be well fed? Is it good that the American Civil War happened if it garanteed that slavery would not continue in the south? These are hard questions. I don't think that there are easy answers.
Everything you said supports the fact that Mao signifigantly shaped this century. BTW, Hitler is on the list. You should at least read the little story blurb before posting.
Right on. The most scared I have ever been watching a movie was _Flatliners_. A mildly scary movie on its own, but not really scary enough to scare me normally (I have never been actually _scared_ in a movie besides this one time)
I was watching it in my dorm where we were not allowed to have watch tv or movies at all. I was in the room right beside the dean's office with two other people watching the movie. The volume was down so low you had to concentrate to hear it. The fear of getting caught added to the overall fear from the movie (fairly harsh penalty for watching movies in the dorm). The kicker though was that the two people I was watching it with were also freaking out over the movie. Whenever a scary part came we all let out quite moans of fear. Each person's fear multiplied the fear of the other people. It was great. By the end, we couldn't walk down the dark dorm hallways without being in mortal irrational fear for our lives.
I don't think I will ever be scared in a movie again. BWP was likely the closest I will ever get again (I sympathised with the fear and felt uneasy in the movie (and afterwards) but not actually scared for my own life)
This aspect was covered by about an hour of whining and about 15 solid minutes of "turn that damn thing off"
Heather said that she kept filming because it was the only thing she had left. I can understand that. I could also understand them filming to record a history of events that might (did) out live them. If this was happening to me, and I thought that there was a good chance I would die, I think I would want to record it so that other people might find what really happened. At the point they were at, it was the only thing they had left.
The point of all movies (or any other kind of art) is not just for exposure and/or money. I have an idea for a short film that I would love to be made. I would not care if I made any money on it (I would spend money on it) and I would not care if I got recognition for it (I would like credit though). Just seeing my ideas well done on the screen would be reward enough. Any recognition and/or money received would be gravey. Many many musicians make write and play music for no money and get little recognition for it. They do it for love of the art. Why does movie making need to be different. Granted, studios who spend hundreds of millions of dollars on movies are in it for the money, just like manufactured bands like backstreet boys and n-sync are likely in it for the money (or at least their producer is). But not everyone marches to the same drum in art-land.
Think outside your box of money. Life is richer out there.
This is an artistic film. The film makers are supposed to make the best piece of art possible. This means they make what _they_ want.
It may be that most people (not me) want tidy stories with cute happy endings with all the ends tied up, but film makers should not be bound to providing that. I wish that more film makers would leave things unsaid and have the good guys loose. That way there would be suspense about how a movie actually ends. When I see any holywood movie, it is not a question of "will the good guy win?", it is a question of "how will the good guy win?". When the good guy is in mortal danger, I know he wont die because he is the good guy. He has to win because that is what the audience expects. BAH! I would really like more movies to have the main character die part way through and another character take up the rest of the story. Take Psycho for example. (if you havent seen psycho, stop reading now). For the first part of the movie, the main character is the girl (I forget her name). Then she gets hacked up by Mrs. Bates in the classic shower scene and now other people become main characters. Even hichcock was a slave to the audience though. I remember hearing an interview with him about a scene with a boy sitting in the bus holding a bomb that was set to explode in a few moments. The audience knew that there was a bomb, so there was suspense about if the kid would get blown up. Hitchcock said that he had to save the kid otherwise the audience would not accept it. BAH. I say if it fits the story, blow the kid up. Next time we won't know that the kid gets away (real suspense). The end of _The Player_ was also very telling (more spoilers, this time about the player). A sub-plot of the movie was that they wanted to create a movie where an innocent woman gets killed in the gas chamber for a murder she didn't commit. (at the very end). The whole point of the movie was the tragic ending. However, when the movie was actually made, test audiences didn't like the ending so they replaced it with the hero saving her at the last second. BAH. They sacrificed the soul of the film for the sake of the test audience. (for those who havent seen the player, it is a movie about movie makers so this all happens inside the plot).
Movies should be more art than bussiness. More focus should be spent on making an artistically sound movie than pleasing the lowest denominator in the audience.
All that you know is that the camera fell to the floor. He could have just dropped it to go stand in the corner. (must be some kind of mind contol or something, if someone told me to go stand in the corner after all that, I would not comply).
Now, is anyone interested in my One-time-pad encryption system? $40 per disk set. Guaranteed no two disk sets the same!
I hope you are not relying on a computer's pseudo-random number generator to produce your one time pad. If you are, then the encryption is only as secure as the pseudo-random algorithm you used (very bad). Also, your essential key length would only be as long as the random seed. I can try all random seeds quite quickly for all common random algorithms.
You missed it. His point was that java is very in-efficient. When processors get fast enough that a processor upgrade makes no difference in c games, developers will start developing in slow languages like java to save time and money in the development stage. This will cause another need for faster cpus and will drive the hardware race futher into the future.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is that it is impossible to compare sex to abstinence. (Over a sufficiently long period of time). If you have ever experienced sex, then you have not fully experienced abstinence. If, when you die, you have fully experienced abstinence, then you have never experienced sex.
Comparing on the short term is futile. Sex obviously has a much better short term consiquence (it feels good). However, it can have negative side effects, which is why abstinence is touted as a good long term solution.
I am not sure if this is a troll or not. Oh well, I will feed the troll.
After a couple of minutes of rocking back and forth and moaning, she climbed back off, giggled, and ran back to her room
You let this continue for a couple minutes? Whats wrong with you? The second you discovered what was going on, you should have stopped the situation and explained why it was wrong. Letting it ride, even untill she gets to her room removes the act from the consequence. Stop the situation right away. Deal with it right away. Explain right away.
I'm going to take my pants off right now and spank her
The second reason I think this is a troll. Do you always take your pants off when you spank your daughter? Seems quite sick to me.
Good thing you posted as AC.
How about hiring your own experts to examine the knife to check if those are really your finger prints on the knife, and if there are any other finger prints that the police aren't telling you about?
I thought that the defense was supposed to have full access to all the evidence laid against them. It is the only way they can come up with a meaningful defense.
"But your honour, we had no knowledge of this bloody knife!"
"Over-ruled. If we let you know about the knife you could have killed someone else with it."
No, you came here for an argument!
cat > /vmlinuz
You had better get it right!
If they were beaming actual spam into space, we could feed all those hungry aliens. They might actually like the stuff.
While we are at it, lets design a virus that targets alien archeolgists.
"I wonder how this puny civilization died off suddenly hundreds of years ago. Hey, look what I found, its a ACH GAG"
I bet aliens would be as stupid as people in our science fiction movies. "Hey, the air contains roughly the right ammount of oxygen, I think I will take off my helmet. What, air bourne virii, damn, I didn't think of that. ACH GAG"
Adolf Hitler is certainly not an admirable person either. He may have influenced the thoughts and lives of many people, but in a negative way.
I would argue that Hitler has influenced many more people positively than negatively.
During his life, Hitler negatively influenced the lives of one generation in Europe, North America, and North Africa. He repressed all occupied Europe, killed millions of Jews, millions of Germans, Russians, English, Americans, Canadians, etc died fighting in the war. Lets say that half of one generation was negatively influenced by Hitler. Then add in the percentage of neo-nazis running around since then (and the people they persicute).
On the benifited side: Jewish people now enjoy their own homeland, anti-semitism is no longer socially acceptable for most of socity (this is possitive for both jews and the people who were spared from being anti-semites). The anti racism sentiment that he stirred up as a result of his extreme racism has done wonders in reducing racism around the world. People value freedom and democracy much more because we have seen the alternative. The events that led up to WWII have taught us some lessons on how to avoid such things from happening again.
Dispite the fact that Hitler's actions had some good side benifits, he was still a very bad man. If I had the choice, I would likely rather live in a world that Hitler had not existed, to save the suffering inflicted upon those that did suffer from him. Perhaps the good things would have come about without him. However I would not go so far as to say that the world is worse off today because he existed.
Sometimes is takes something really really bad to happen before we take action to right the wrongs in society. Nuclear reactors need to break down and send billows of deadly radio active dust into the atmosphere before we start taking nuclear power seriously. Gaping holes need to be created in our ozone layer before we start to take the environment seriously. Children need to be killed by abusive parents before we start to take action against child abusers. Thousands of people needed to die from aids before we began to herald safe sex (thus aleviating many other problems).
It is sad that in society needs to be kicked in the groin before it listens to anything. We would rather ignore problems and say "its not that bad." or "it doesn't affect me at all." In a perfect world we could change without catastrophy. But I dont have enough faith in human nature to hold out for this happening. Sometimes in the long run, it may be good that bad things happen. Is it good that one child starves to death if it means that from then on thousands of other children will be well fed? Is it good that the American Civil War happened if it garanteed that slavery would not continue in the south? These are hard questions. I don't think that there are easy answers.
Everything you said supports the fact that Mao signifigantly shaped this century. BTW, Hitler is on the list. You should at least read the little story blurb before posting.
Atmosphere is everything!
Right on. The most scared I have ever been watching a movie was _Flatliners_. A mildly scary movie on its own, but not really scary enough to scare me normally (I have never been actually _scared_ in a movie besides this one time)
I was watching it in my dorm where we were not allowed to have watch tv or movies at all. I was in the room right beside the dean's office with two other people watching the movie. The volume was down so low you had to concentrate to hear it. The fear of getting caught added to the overall fear from the movie (fairly harsh penalty for watching movies in the dorm). The kicker though was that the two people I was watching it with were also freaking out over the movie. Whenever a scary part came we all let out quite moans of fear. Each person's fear multiplied the fear of the other people. It was great. By the end, we couldn't walk down the dark dorm hallways without being in mortal irrational fear for our lives.
I don't think I will ever be scared in a movie again. BWP was likely the closest I will ever get again (I sympathised with the fear and felt uneasy in the movie (and afterwards) but not actually scared for my own life)
you get better.
You dont have to conjure up a whole new reality, just alter it in the minds of three scared students. Much easier.
This aspect was covered by about an hour of whining and about 15 solid minutes of "turn that damn thing off"
Heather said that she kept filming because it was the only thing she had left. I can understand that. I could also understand them filming to record a history of events that might (did) out live them. If this was happening to me, and I thought that there was a good chance I would die, I think I would want to record it so that other people might find what really happened. At the point they were at, it was the only thing they had left.
The point of all movies (or any other kind of art) is not just for exposure and/or money. I have an idea for a short film that I would love to be made. I would not care if I made any money on it (I would spend money on it) and I would not care if I got recognition for it (I would like credit though). Just seeing my ideas well done on the screen would be reward enough. Any recognition and/or money received would be gravey. Many many musicians make write and play music for no money and get little recognition for it. They do it for love of the art. Why does movie making need to be different. Granted, studios who spend hundreds of millions of dollars on movies are in it for the money, just like manufactured bands like backstreet boys and n-sync are likely in it for the money (or at least their producer is). But not everyone marches to the same drum in art-land.
Think outside your box of money. Life is richer out there.
***spoiler***
no, they went south all day, to come back to the same log bridge.
***Spoilers about BWP, Psycho, and The Player***
This is an artistic film. The film makers are supposed to make the best piece of art possible. This means they make what _they_ want.
It may be that most people (not me) want tidy stories with cute happy endings with all the ends tied up, but film makers should not be bound to providing that. I wish that more film makers would leave things unsaid and have the good guys loose. That way there would be suspense about how a movie actually ends. When I see any holywood movie, it is not a question of "will the good guy win?", it is a question of "how will the good guy win?". When the good guy is in mortal danger, I know he wont die because he is the good guy. He has to win because that is what the audience expects. BAH! I would really like more movies to have the main character die part way through and another character take up the rest of the story. Take Psycho for example. (if you havent seen psycho, stop reading now). For the first part of the movie, the main character is the girl (I forget her name). Then she gets hacked up by Mrs. Bates in the classic shower scene and now other people become main characters. Even hichcock was a slave to the audience though. I remember hearing an interview with him about a scene with a boy sitting in the bus holding a bomb that was set to explode in a few moments. The audience knew that there was a bomb, so there was suspense about if the kid would get blown up. Hitchcock said that he had to save the kid otherwise the audience would not accept it. BAH. I say if it fits the story, blow the kid up. Next time we won't know that the kid gets away (real suspense). The end of _The Player_ was also very telling (more spoilers, this time about the player). A sub-plot of the movie was that they wanted to create a movie where an innocent woman gets killed in the gas chamber for a murder she didn't commit. (at the very end). The whole point of the movie was the tragic ending. However, when the movie was actually made, test audiences didn't like the ending so they replaced it with the hero saving her at the last second. BAH. They sacrificed the soul of the film for the sake of the test audience. (for those who havent seen the player, it is a movie about movie makers so this all happens inside the plot).
Movies should be more art than bussiness. More focus should be spent on making an artistically sound movie than pleasing the lowest denominator in the audience.
All that you know is that the camera fell to the floor. He could have just dropped it to go stand in the corner. (must be some kind of mind contol or something, if someone told me to go stand in the corner after all that, I would not comply).
The old man was doing the bidding of the old ghost witch. I assume that the old ghost witch was doing the killing herself this time.
At least the chances of having to read a "God Emperor" of sorts drone on for hundreds and hundreds of pages is minimal.
Man, that got tedius
Tracked vehicles (tanks) were invented to kill people
Tanks borrowed track technology from civilian use. They are just the most well known early application of the technology.
Now, is anyone interested in my One-time-pad encryption system? $40 per disk set. Guaranteed no two disk sets the same!
I hope you are not relying on a computer's pseudo-random number generator to produce your one time pad. If you are, then the encryption is only as secure as the pseudo-random algorithm you used (very bad). Also, your essential key length would only be as long as the random seed. I can try all random seeds quite quickly for all common random algorithms.
--brent nelson
not as much as turning off your computer
Running this in java will take away valuable alien search'in cpu cycles.
What does the ac11 in the version number stand for?
You missed it. His point was that java is very in-efficient. When processors get fast enough that a processor upgrade makes no difference in c games, developers will start developing in slow languages like java to save time and money in the development stage. This will cause another need for faster cpus and will drive the hardware race futher into the future.