I don't see why the ISP's don't simply claim immunity due to their common carrier status. Of course, that would make them concede to the FCC, but on the upside they also aren't liable for things like terrorist attacks coordinated through their infrastructure.
I wouldn't say that. Just yesterday I was downtown for jury duty and noticed a guy holding up a sign that says "need food", presumably under the premise of getting handouts from jurors routinely passing through.
The thing is, just around the corner is one of those shelters that freely give out all of the food and clothing you could ask for. I guarantee you that this guy knows that, and if you were to offer him a choice of money or food, which do you think he'd opt for?
And the reason for that is he doesn't want food; instead he wants one or more of booze, cigarettes, or to get high. Oh and did I mention he was smoking? If you know how expensive cigarettes are these days, you can see the disconnect.
The best way to help homeless people, in my opinion, is to only give them food and clothing and nothing else, with money absolutely being off limits. Seriously, why would any sane person want to feed the habits that keep them there to begin with?
I kind of doubt that would ever happen to earth, even if we started emitting more greenhouse gases over the next million years. Why? Because we simply aren't close enough to the sun to meet the same conditions.
I'm pretty sure that the only absolute I called out is the fact that wishing you were something else really badly doesn't make it so.
As for your numbers, I specifically called out straight men. If you're a man attracted to a man with a boob job and a large penis, you're by definition a homosexual. (And for what it's worth, I recognize gay as being a culture rather than a sexual preference. Many homosexuals don't want anything to do with the gay scene while still being comfortable in their skin, and there's nothing wrong with that. And unlike many in the gay scene, they do have my blessing, though not that they need it. After all, I'm a huge fan of James Rhandi.)
And yes, I have actually read about that scene, and in fact there are a sizeable portion of Johns who look specifically for trans people, but again, see the above paragraph. Also the AIDS statistics don't mean anything. You know as well as I do that intravenous drug use is highly common among trans people, which is a deliberate distortion by omission on your part.
And yes, I know the reason they often resort to that, which is unfortunate and I do think that they need better support. Contrary to your homophobic and transphobic opinion of me, I don't hate any particular group and I really hope they get the help they need because I wouldn't wish my chronic depression and PTSD symptoms on anybody, I just think the existing treatment methods are probably taking the wrong path because, as I'm sure you're aware, the mental state of those post op is too often not peaches and roses.
Indeed and when it comes to this, I don't issue prejudice. That includes not being prejudice against mental health statuses that people on slashdot frequently get upmodded for bashing, including psychopaths, rapists and pedophiles.
And on that last one, unlike most people, I recognize that somebody doesn't just wake up one day and decide to be a pedophile. For reasons not yet understood, some people become this way, much as they become a homosexual for example.
And no, I'm not equating the two. A pedophile often engages in unconsentual sex, whereas a homosexual typically does not. I also recognize that setting arbitrary limits on age of consent is a bit ridiculous. Sure, there needs to be a point, but I've even met adults who would feel harmed by consentual sex.
Rapists also tend to have a preference for dominating people who explicitly do not consent, and they too didn't just wake up one day and decide to have that preference. Nonetheless it is how they get their rocks off.
It's not as if I'm uneducated on the subject. I'm not you're typical frat bro, I do actually read in depth about something prior to forming an opinion on it.
Either that or I've read commentary from Stanly Biber, in addition to reading why Johns Hopkins University, the first organization to ever perform bottom surgery, no longer does so.
While Stanly Biber performed srs surgery until he died, he once testified that the resulting sex of somebody who goes through the procedure is in fact neuter. As for Hopkins, the reasoning for this should be easy enough to find with Google.
First, you're not sorry. Second there's kind of a difference here. An otherkin person cannot actually pass as non human. A post op trans woman for example can. The only way it would actually make any difference to you is if you wanted to bone her. Given that you don't even try to bone probably 99.99% of the women you meet there's really no way bumping into a trans woman versus a cis one would make the slightest bit of difference to you, to the extent that you wouldn't even know.
Well there was this one time, about a year ago, that I ran into one at a bar. I was being kind to the person, and just having a casual conversation, but it was kind of obvious that I was talking to a man with a boob job. And in probably most cases, I can in fact tell the difference. MtF trans have always had a certain kind of voice, which is admittedly a voice that some real women rarely have, in addition to a somewhat larger upper body frame. And that's just seeing them head on; as soon as they reveal their hands then it becomes kind of obvious at that point.
But you know, if he believes he is a woman then he is a woman, I guess? Though it probably didn't help the trans cause that, when this guy asked me where I was from, I told him Mesa Arizona, and he immediately responds with "Mesa is trash, you're trash." And after the bar closed he did go home alone that night from what I can tell.
I've yet to meet any straight guys who have said they would date a transgender person, and this includes those who are very outspoken in favor of lgbt issues. And I dare you to find a trans person who would date another trans person... Sure, it happens, but it's super uncommon, and if (for example) trans women were actually really real women, then this wouldn't even be an issue, even amongst themselves.
And sorry, but the idea that a dude can say "I feel in my heart and soul that I'm a woman makes me a woman" is just nuts. That would be like me saying "you know, I feel in my heart and soul that I'm a real dragon, therefore that makes me one". It's just silly, and believe it or not, there are people who actually do this. They call themselves otherkin and they think that they actually, really, truly are nonhuman animals, including fictitious animals.
And BTW before you get any ideas, my username (both words of it) is rooted in the common name of the MOS I had in the Army. I'll leave it up to an astute Googler to figure out what that MOS is.
I think that's Microsoft's way of resurrecting the browser wars of the 90's. They hope to win again under similar conditions as last time: Shut the competitors out of your operating system by making it disfavor them. Though this time it's different -- they no longer control the computing platform of the masses -- control of that now resides in the hands of Google.
It might be a better approach to fingerprint content (I.e scripts, images) and prevent them from running and then outright block anything that has either sound or animation, replacing it with a "click to play" placeholder.
That's the big difference in the laws in various states. What he did in Florida is legal in terms of self defense. However in Colorado it would get you in trouble. In CO, if you START a fight, you are then obliged to escape if you lose, not shoot to end what you started. He picked a fight with a kid, lost a fight, end ended it with the kid's death. In Florida that is legal.
There isn't any evidence anywhere to suggest that he started a fight. Getting out of your car and following somebody isn't starting a fight. Especially when the 911 tapes and physical evidence suggest that Zimmerman returned to his car, and the girl he was speaking to on the phone (remember that fat girl who spoke really quietly on the witness stand) even testified that Martin wanted to turn around and confront Zimmerman instead of proceeding home.
And no witness can deny that it was George Zimmerman who set the stage for that. He chose to get out of his car. Only he knows what was in his head, if he truly sought out Martin or was stupid. Well, unless the CIA had a satellite watching I guess.
Well just think about it: Gravity alone doesn't explain why galaxies, stars, and planets form. Gravity is a very weak force, and it's just too weak of a force for that to happen. A nebula would just forever remain a nebula if all it had was gravity. There's more going on here, we're just not sure what.
The religious take on it is a straight up answer of "Because god did it." The scientific take on it is "If we take existing mathematical models of physics, it looks like the missing variable could be explained by a form of matter different from the normal matter that we can observe. We don't know what it is though so we'll just call it dark matter."
Considering that cops killing black people have shown to be not correlated with black crime rates, it's looking very likely to be a rule. Keep denying facts all you want.
It's a good thing I'm not in the position to attack your credibility on this one, because you're doing a pretty good job of ruining it all by yourself.
Zimmerman wasn't a cop, racist or not, he was a member of a neighborhood watch, and ultimately, whatever you think about race, he should not have done what he did.
I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that the physical evidence and witness testimony fully supports his version of the events that transpired. And I don't know about you, but if somebody is slamming my head into pavement, and I had a gun on me, I would have done exactly as he did. Even the witnesses who were in favor of Trayvon Martin made this much clear.
They could have at least made him stand up in court and assert his affirmative claim of self-defense, but the prosecutor, nope, couldn't manage it.
You're quite uneducated, to be honest. No prosecutor anywhere ever can make the accused testify in their own defense; that would be a clear violation of the 5th amendment. And you know what? No defendant ever does unless either they're insane or they've literally run out of options. Why? Because the prosecutor will get to cross examine you, and during a cross examination a good prosecutor can make you look guilty of assassinating a pope that is still very much alive. The Zimmerman case was so airtight that they didn't even want to prosecute to begin with, as even the detectives who investigated the case honestly believed it to be justified homicide. There never, at any time, would have been any reason for Zimmerman "stand up" in court.
Classic tactic: racists calling everyone else the racist.
...Wow, you actually said that.
Reflect on it for a minute and then come back and explain to me why you feel that you aren't a racist.
Here's a hint: someone being violent is NOT a reason to kill them. Bunch of fascists suggesting that it's okay to kill anyone just for being violent.
The thing is, you yourself are behaving much like a fascist would, and you're being bigoted. The only difference between you and any other bigot is that you think speaking on behalf of minorities automatically gives you the high ground. But I'm here to tell you that you're quite wrong.
That said, if somebody is behaving violently, sometimes that is reason to kill them. It really depends on the circumstances. If we follow what you just said however, then the cops had no business shooting at the Pulse Nightclub shooter, and they should have just asked him to lay down his weapons and turn himself in. Of course, a rational person would say that's both insane and irrational. But, I don't think anybody has ever accused you of being neither sane nor rational.
And I love how even bigger assholes think that, in the grand scheme of things, this happens "many" times and is the rule rather than the exception.
Yes, cops are human. Yes, cops kill innocent people sometimes. But to attribute it to racism, especially in cases like Zimmerman who had a long pro-civil rights history, is just politically correct assfuckery meant to insert a motive that was never there.
This is actually true of most people who get their 15 minutes of fame these days. I mean shit, the black lives matter movement is all over the media, but they don't give a shit about an actual black life unless it involves all of 1) a gun 2) a cop 3) a stolen case of cigarettes, a stolen bike, or a stolen car. But, that's the world we live in today: The best way to get presidential involvement is to be a liar, a cheater, or a petty thug who happened to receive an overzealous (but in many cases, deserved) response. And everybody reading this knows it.
Correct, and the reason they spent billions of dollars to find GP's brain and never did was because his brain was on the mushrooms the whole time. You see, there's no missing piece of the puzzle, just a found one that nobody understands. Just because money doesn't solve that doesn't mean the premise is bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Or until Dudley Doright decides he doesn't want to use a stingray anymore.
I don't see why the ISP's don't simply claim immunity due to their common carrier status. Of course, that would make them concede to the FCC, but on the upside they also aren't liable for things like terrorist attacks coordinated through their infrastructure.
I wouldn't say that. Just yesterday I was downtown for jury duty and noticed a guy holding up a sign that says "need food", presumably under the premise of getting handouts from jurors routinely passing through.
The thing is, just around the corner is one of those shelters that freely give out all of the food and clothing you could ask for. I guarantee you that this guy knows that, and if you were to offer him a choice of money or food, which do you think he'd opt for?
And the reason for that is he doesn't want food; instead he wants one or more of booze, cigarettes, or to get high. Oh and did I mention he was smoking? If you know how expensive cigarettes are these days, you can see the disconnect.
The best way to help homeless people, in my opinion, is to only give them food and clothing and nothing else, with money absolutely being off limits. Seriously, why would any sane person want to feed the habits that keep them there to begin with?
I kind of doubt that would ever happen to earth, even if we started emitting more greenhouse gases over the next million years. Why? Because we simply aren't close enough to the sun to meet the same conditions.
I'm pretty sure that the only absolute I called out is the fact that wishing you were something else really badly doesn't make it so.
As for your numbers, I specifically called out straight men. If you're a man attracted to a man with a boob job and a large penis, you're by definition a homosexual. (And for what it's worth, I recognize gay as being a culture rather than a sexual preference. Many homosexuals don't want anything to do with the gay scene while still being comfortable in their skin, and there's nothing wrong with that. And unlike many in the gay scene, they do have my blessing, though not that they need it. After all, I'm a huge fan of James Rhandi.)
And yes, I have actually read about that scene, and in fact there are a sizeable portion of Johns who look specifically for trans people, but again, see the above paragraph. Also the AIDS statistics don't mean anything. You know as well as I do that intravenous drug use is highly common among trans people, which is a deliberate distortion by omission on your part.
And yes, I know the reason they often resort to that, which is unfortunate and I do think that they need better support. Contrary to your homophobic and transphobic opinion of me, I don't hate any particular group and I really hope they get the help they need because I wouldn't wish my chronic depression and PTSD symptoms on anybody, I just think the existing treatment methods are probably taking the wrong path because, as I'm sure you're aware, the mental state of those post op is too often not peaches and roses.
Indeed and when it comes to this, I don't issue prejudice. That includes not being prejudice against mental health statuses that people on slashdot frequently get upmodded for bashing, including psychopaths, rapists and pedophiles.
And on that last one, unlike most people, I recognize that somebody doesn't just wake up one day and decide to be a pedophile. For reasons not yet understood, some people become this way, much as they become a homosexual for example.
And no, I'm not equating the two. A pedophile often engages in unconsentual sex, whereas a homosexual typically does not. I also recognize that setting arbitrary limits on age of consent is a bit ridiculous. Sure, there needs to be a point, but I've even met adults who would feel harmed by consentual sex.
Rapists also tend to have a preference for dominating people who explicitly do not consent, and they too didn't just wake up one day and decide to have that preference. Nonetheless it is how they get their rocks off.
Your* sorry, swype error.
It's not as if I'm uneducated on the subject. I'm not you're typical frat bro, I do actually read in depth about something prior to forming an opinion on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Either that or I've read commentary from Stanly Biber, in addition to reading why Johns Hopkins University, the first organization to ever perform bottom surgery, no longer does so.
While Stanly Biber performed srs surgery until he died, he once testified that the resulting sex of somebody who goes through the procedure is in fact neuter. As for Hopkins, the reasoning for this should be easy enough to find with Google.
First, you're not sorry. Second there's kind of a difference here. An otherkin person cannot actually pass as non human. A post op trans woman for example can. The only way it would actually make any difference to you is if you wanted to bone her. Given that you don't even try to bone probably 99.99% of the women you meet there's really no way bumping into a trans woman versus a cis one would make the slightest bit of difference to you, to the extent that you wouldn't even know.
Well there was this one time, about a year ago, that I ran into one at a bar. I was being kind to the person, and just having a casual conversation, but it was kind of obvious that I was talking to a man with a boob job. And in probably most cases, I can in fact tell the difference. MtF trans have always had a certain kind of voice, which is admittedly a voice that some real women rarely have, in addition to a somewhat larger upper body frame. And that's just seeing them head on; as soon as they reveal their hands then it becomes kind of obvious at that point.
But you know, if he believes he is a woman then he is a woman, I guess? Though it probably didn't help the trans cause that, when this guy asked me where I was from, I told him Mesa Arizona, and he immediately responds with "Mesa is trash, you're trash." And after the bar closed he did go home alone that night from what I can tell.
I'll probably get downmodded, but so be it:
I've yet to meet any straight guys who have said they would date a transgender person, and this includes those who are very outspoken in favor of lgbt issues. And I dare you to find a trans person who would date another trans person... Sure, it happens, but it's super uncommon, and if (for example) trans women were actually really real women, then this wouldn't even be an issue, even amongst themselves.
And sorry, but the idea that a dude can say "I feel in my heart and soul that I'm a woman makes me a woman" is just nuts. That would be like me saying "you know, I feel in my heart and soul that I'm a real dragon, therefore that makes me one". It's just silly, and believe it or not, there are people who actually do this. They call themselves otherkin and they think that they actually, really, truly are nonhuman animals, including fictitious animals.
And BTW before you get any ideas, my username (both words of it) is rooted in the common name of the MOS I had in the Army. I'll leave it up to an astute Googler to figure out what that MOS is.
Arizona is a right to work state and doesn't have a single toll road in the entire state. I'm not making this up, there are zero of them.
I think this does more than anything:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I think that's Microsoft's way of resurrecting the browser wars of the 90's. They hope to win again under similar conditions as last time: Shut the competitors out of your operating system by making it disfavor them. Though this time it's different -- they no longer control the computing platform of the masses -- control of that now resides in the hands of Google.
I think the bigger surprise was that Microsoft claims that UWP apps are sandboxed, only they're not.
It might be a better approach to fingerprint content (I.e scripts, images) and prevent them from running and then outright block anything that has either sound or animation, replacing it with a "click to play" placeholder.
That's the big difference in the laws in various states. What he did in Florida is legal in terms of self defense. However in Colorado it would get you in trouble. In CO, if you START a fight, you are then obliged to escape if you lose, not shoot to end what you started. He picked a fight with a kid, lost a fight, end ended it with the kid's death. In Florida that is legal.
There isn't any evidence anywhere to suggest that he started a fight. Getting out of your car and following somebody isn't starting a fight. Especially when the 911 tapes and physical evidence suggest that Zimmerman returned to his car, and the girl he was speaking to on the phone (remember that fat girl who spoke really quietly on the witness stand) even testified that Martin wanted to turn around and confront Zimmerman instead of proceeding home.
And no witness can deny that it was George Zimmerman who set the stage for that. He chose to get out of his car. Only he knows what was in his head, if he truly sought out Martin or was stupid. Well, unless the CIA had a satellite watching I guess.
That isn't even relevant.
Well just think about it: Gravity alone doesn't explain why galaxies, stars, and planets form. Gravity is a very weak force, and it's just too weak of a force for that to happen. A nebula would just forever remain a nebula if all it had was gravity. There's more going on here, we're just not sure what.
The religious take on it is a straight up answer of "Because god did it." The scientific take on it is "If we take existing mathematical models of physics, it looks like the missing variable could be explained by a form of matter different from the normal matter that we can observe. We don't know what it is though so we'll just call it dark matter."
Considering that cops killing black people have shown to be not correlated with black crime rates, it's looking very likely to be a rule. Keep denying facts all you want.
It's a good thing I'm not in the position to attack your credibility on this one, because you're doing a pretty good job of ruining it all by yourself.
No further comment.
Zimmerman wasn't a cop, racist or not, he was a member of a neighborhood watch, and ultimately, whatever you think about race, he should not have done what he did.
I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that the physical evidence and witness testimony fully supports his version of the events that transpired. And I don't know about you, but if somebody is slamming my head into pavement, and I had a gun on me, I would have done exactly as he did. Even the witnesses who were in favor of Trayvon Martin made this much clear.
They could have at least made him stand up in court and assert his affirmative claim of self-defense, but the prosecutor, nope, couldn't manage it.
You're quite uneducated, to be honest. No prosecutor anywhere ever can make the accused testify in their own defense; that would be a clear violation of the 5th amendment. And you know what? No defendant ever does unless either they're insane or they've literally run out of options. Why? Because the prosecutor will get to cross examine you, and during a cross examination a good prosecutor can make you look guilty of assassinating a pope that is still very much alive. The Zimmerman case was so airtight that they didn't even want to prosecute to begin with, as even the detectives who investigated the case honestly believed it to be justified homicide. There never, at any time, would have been any reason for Zimmerman "stand up" in court.
Classic tactic: racists calling everyone else the racist.
...Wow, you actually said that.
Reflect on it for a minute and then come back and explain to me why you feel that you aren't a racist.
Here's a hint: someone being violent is NOT a reason to kill them. Bunch of fascists suggesting that it's okay to kill anyone just for being violent.
The thing is, you yourself are behaving much like a fascist would, and you're being bigoted. The only difference between you and any other bigot is that you think speaking on behalf of minorities automatically gives you the high ground. But I'm here to tell you that you're quite wrong.
That said, if somebody is behaving violently, sometimes that is reason to kill them. It really depends on the circumstances. If we follow what you just said however, then the cops had no business shooting at the Pulse Nightclub shooter, and they should have just asked him to lay down his weapons and turn himself in. Of course, a rational person would say that's both insane and irrational. But, I don't think anybody has ever accused you of being neither sane nor rational.
And I love how even bigger assholes think that, in the grand scheme of things, this happens "many" times and is the rule rather than the exception.
Yes, cops are human. Yes, cops kill innocent people sometimes. But to attribute it to racism, especially in cases like Zimmerman who had a long pro-civil rights history, is just politically correct assfuckery meant to insert a motive that was never there.
This is actually true of most people who get their 15 minutes of fame these days. I mean shit, the black lives matter movement is all over the media, but they don't give a shit about an actual black life unless it involves all of 1) a gun 2) a cop 3) a stolen case of cigarettes, a stolen bike, or a stolen car. But, that's the world we live in today: The best way to get presidential involvement is to be a liar, a cheater, or a petty thug who happened to receive an overzealous (but in many cases, deserved) response. And everybody reading this knows it.
Correct, and the reason they spent billions of dollars to find GP's brain and never did was because his brain was on the mushrooms the whole time. You see, there's no missing piece of the puzzle, just a found one that nobody understands. Just because money doesn't solve that doesn't mean the premise is bad.