"The fact is we don't know *exactly* how petroleum came to be."
Again this is a silly statement. Not knowing EXACTLY how it came to be is not the same as not knowing ANYTHING about it. The fact is we know a shitload but not everything.
Note your quotes. They use the typical "weazel" words and phrases that advertisers are so fond of. Things like "it may soon be" which says nothing. It may soon be feasable to explore deeper but then again monkeys may fly out of my butt. Both of those statements are equally true because they convey no real information.
You seem to claim that we know nothing about oil or that we knoe very little about oil. Of course that's nonsense. We know a ton aboout oil having studied it for decades now. I doubt there is a lot more know. Sure maybe we can find out about better ways of extracting it or more efficient ways of using it but to claim that we do know how oil gets made is just silly.
One thing we know for sure is that we are using it faster then it is being made. Eventually it will run out. Before it runs out the prices will climb very high. During all that time burning it will add hydrocarbons into the air. None of those facts are in dispute.
AOTC had terrible acting. I have seen better acting in high school plays then the effort put out by Portman and what's his face.
Mind numbingly bad dialog. Poor Ewan having to say those those awful lines while trying to preserve some dignity was actually painful to watch. The other actors didn't even try to make the best of the dialog.
Re-hashed plot and scenarios. Oh wow let me hold my breath while yet another chase takes place inside of a asteroid field. Didn't we see that in SW III? how many episodes of star trek has the same thing?
In fact it seems like they simply took a spoof like Galaxy Quest and tried to present it as a "real" movie chompers and all.
In the end this was not even a movie. It was an exucse to make more action figures and to design a new video game. Half of the action sequences had nothing to with the plot but simply put in place because they would make a decent (if cliched) video game level.
"Now, I understand why Microsoft is trying to muddy the waters, but why in the world is the DoD playing along? "
Spoken like a man who was never in the military. As a veteran let me assure you that the DOD is playing along because they are profoundly stupid people. MS said something and they believed it. They are not used to questioning authority in the first place.
Eventually you will fill out a form which asks you for a credit card number, name, address, and phone number. At that point that information will be stored on some partner of Microsoft and will find it's way to every partner of MS. If you think that "fake information" will protect you then I have a bridge I want to sell.
"Some people will put the global community first even if it means less profits."
This is where your analogy falls apart. Corporations become globalists because it puts MORE money in their pockets not less. They don't give a flying fuck about America. Recently Stanley corporation "moved" to a carribian nation (I forget which one). It did this by dissolving the american corporation and re-incorporating in another country. Why? Less taxes!. Now Americans have less money for schools, roads, police, fireman, national defence etc. I wonder if anybody who works at stanley flies the American flag on their car or house, if they do they ought to take them down and put up the bermuda flag (or whatever island the company incorporated in).
The difference is a subtle one. Think country instead of commerce. Most Americans are unable to think past their narrow self interest and don't mind if their decisions harm other Americans as long as it puts more money in their own pockets. Some people will put their country first even if it means less profits. You may think of them suckers perhaps but they exist.
So this guy gets the short end of the stick and he is pissed do you blame him? I don't.
So your theory is that free amrkets allow for monoplies to exist for decades right? How does one topple a monopoly that has been entrenched for decades if not by the force of law? It's impossible.
You think the anti semitism in arab countries has anything to do with jews occupying arabs, killing arabs, torturing arabs, imprisoning arabs, denying arabs basic human rights etc?
Maybe nobody is afraid of the FBI but I bet nobody is afraid of the moderator either. You have to admit that this administration has very successfully instituted an atmosphere of paranoia and fear which suits their purposes just fine. They are able to shut down all dissent on all topics. Like the attorney general said "if you disagree with us you are giving aid and comfort to the terrorists". People are afraid to critize the govt and that should scare you.
Although one could make a compelling argument that making as much money as possible is indeed evil (certainly evil as defined by Jesus) I don't think that is what is argued here. Condeming capitalism as an evil pursuit in order to excuse the behaviour of M$ is a novel argument and I congratulate you on your originality but your argument falls short on several accounts.
1) Although all corporations pursue money not all of them are run by evil persons like M$ is. 2) Most corporations try very hard to obey the laws of the united states whereas M$ has repeatedly and willfully broken them. 3) No corporation has 40 billion in cash reserves so the degree of capital aggregation (and therefore evilness in your definition) is immense. An analogy might be to say that both lying and gonocide are sins but we are able to make moral distinctions between liers and murderers. So therefore not everybody gets the $ just M$.
BTW? Why do M$ trolls find it so offensive? I would think they would be proud to have their company be associated with it's cash horde.
" but overdosing on comic relief characters and fluffy teddybears makes it apparent that Lucas should concentrate on childrens cartoons"
In a very real sense that's what these movies are children's cartoons. There is no evidence of any adult level interaction between any of the characters. Not even a kiss.
The truth of the matter is that it does not matter how good or bad this movie is. The last one sucked massively yet everybody went to see it anyway. Everybody will rush out and see this one too just because it says star wars in the title and geekboys think they will be super cool if they are first in line.
There is a sucker born every minute and two to take him. Lucas knows how to milk the suckers for all they are worth.
" But Lewinski was about having sex with a subordinate. You don't diddle your staff. If the CEO of my company rolled one of our interns, the board would throw him out on his butt."
Bullshit about 50 thousand times. You mean to say no person in the corporate world ever fucked their secretary? If a CEO did this nothing would happen. It happens every day in every workplace. People hook up, have affairs, and fuck for the fun of it. I spent four years in the military and every girl I knew slept with at least one person of higher rank and frequently with officers.
"Dammit, Packwood was a Republican and thus Evil Incarnate, but why did we demand his ouster but not Bill's?"
Because what Packwood did was non consentual. Big difference there.
"Fourth, and most important, Bill lied about it. He lied to the newspapers, on television and during depositions."
Sure he lied I would have too and so would you. The question I have is why was he asked about his cock in the first place? The republicans were obsessed with his cock and kept asking him about it. Why?
What is it with the republican obsession with Bill Clintons cock? All we heard about for years was Bill Clintons cock did this and bill clintons cock did that, bill clinton's cock looked like this, bill clinton's cock touched this this chick in the mount, bill clintons cock spewed on this chicks dress, bill clinton showed his cock to this other chick.
Why were you asking about his cock, why do you care where he put his cock, why do you care what his cock looks like. Whr are republicans so obsessed with his cock? Please answer I really want to know. Before the republicans started talking about it I never thought about his cock. Maybe it's because I am not a homosexual (out, represed or otherwise) I guess. From where I stand I say good for him. A president ought to get his rocks off once in a while. It will clear his head and make him less likely to fuck the public.
"Eudora lite: nasty ads, could not find out whether/how to configure for multiple accounts,"
Well if you pay for eudora you won't get the ads, if you can't figure out how to configure eudora for multiple accounts you are just plain stupid. I'l give you a hint. Tools->personalitites (ooh wow that was really well hidden wasn't it). Or you could have clicked on the human being icon (get it a person) and then a right click->new.
You can figure out how to use GnuPG but can't figure that out? WTF?
Don't despair obviously Bill Gates has no confidence in capitalism either. If Bill Gates had confidence in capitalism or the US economy he would not be sitting on that much cash. He would have bought other companies or invested it. If he was a truly good person he would have given more then.001% to the poor and the needy. The fact is that Bill Gates sees something in the future that you and I don't that being a total and worldwide colapse of the economy. When that happens all assets that are based on paper will be worthless and whoever has cash will be sitting pretty. He wants to stay in the driving seat when the world's economic system collapses.
There is one more likely explanation. Bill Gates must realize by now that he (and MS) is a prime target for terrorist attacks. A "dirty" or an atomic weapon exploded in redmond would wipe out MS and drive their stock down to almost zero. The collapse of the MS stock will also take down every single mutual fund in the country and will in most likelyhood thrust the country into a very deep depression. If and when that day comes (presuming Bill Survives of course) he can attempt to rebuild MS from scratch in a pretty short time someplace else. MS may be a world wide operation but most important work gets done in Redmond and most important brains are there too. It's an easy target and he and bin laden both know it.
Slashdot Mirror
"The fact is we don't know *exactly* how petroleum came to be."
Again this is a silly statement. Not knowing EXACTLY how it came to be is not the same as not knowing ANYTHING about it. The fact is we know a shitload but not everything.
Note your quotes. They use the typical "weazel" words and phrases that advertisers are so fond of. Things like "it may soon be" which says nothing. It may soon be feasable to explore deeper but then again monkeys may fly out of my butt. Both of those statements are equally true because they convey no real information.
You seem to claim that we know nothing about oil or that we knoe very little about oil. Of course that's nonsense. We know a ton aboout oil having studied it for decades now. I doubt there is a lot more know. Sure maybe we can find out about better ways of extracting it or more efficient ways of using it but to claim that we do know how oil gets made is just silly.
One thing we know for sure is that we are using it faster then it is being made. Eventually it will run out. Before it runs out the prices will climb very high. During all that time burning it will add hydrocarbons into the air. None of those facts are in dispute.
James from the apache group can use an SQL datastore.
Trust me compared to AOTC it was great. If you didn't like spiderman then you'll absolutely hate AOTC.
Start here.
AOTC had terrible acting. I have seen better acting in high school plays then the effort put out by Portman and what's his face.
Mind numbingly bad dialog. Poor Ewan having to say those those awful lines while trying to preserve some dignity was actually painful to watch. The other actors didn't even try to make the best of the dialog.
Re-hashed plot and scenarios. Oh wow let me hold my breath while yet another chase takes place inside of a asteroid field. Didn't we see that in SW III? how many episodes of star trek has the same thing?
In fact it seems like they simply took a spoof like Galaxy Quest and tried to present it as a "real" movie chompers and all.
In the end this was not even a movie. It was an exucse to make more action figures and to design a new video game. Half of the action sequences had nothing to with the plot but simply put in place because they would make a decent (if cliched) video game level.
"Now, I understand why Microsoft is trying to muddy the waters, but why in the world is the DoD playing along? "
Spoken like a man who was never in the military. As a veteran let me assure you that the DOD is playing along because they are profoundly stupid people. MS said something and they believed it. They are not used to questioning authority in the first place.
Nevertheless it's run by the same ruthless, slimy, evil bastards at the top. No good can come from evil people with evil motives.
Eventually you will fill out a form which asks you for a credit card number, name, address, and phone number. At that point that information will be stored on some partner of Microsoft and will find it's way to every partner of MS. If you think that "fake information" will protect you then I have a bridge I want to sell.
"Some people will put the global community first even if it means less profits."
This is where your analogy falls apart. Corporations become globalists because it puts MORE money in their pockets not less. They don't give a flying fuck about America. Recently Stanley corporation "moved" to a carribian nation (I forget which one). It did this by dissolving the american corporation and re-incorporating in another country. Why? Less taxes!. Now Americans have less money for schools, roads, police, fireman, national defence etc. I wonder if anybody who works at stanley flies the American flag on their car or house, if they do they ought to take them down and put up the bermuda flag (or whatever island the company incorporated in).
"Simple question. Why?"
The difference is a subtle one. Think country instead of commerce. Most Americans are unable to think past their narrow self interest and don't mind if their decisions harm other Americans as long as it puts more money in their own pockets.
Some people will put their country first even if it means less profits. You may think of them suckers perhaps but they exist.
So this guy gets the short end of the stick and he is pissed do you blame him? I don't.
So your theory is that free amrkets allow for monoplies to exist for decades right? How does one topple a monopoly that has been entrenched for decades if not by the force of law? It's impossible.
Oh yes those things are much more important then being occupied and tortured.
You think the anti semitism in arab countries has anything to do with jews occupying arabs, killing arabs, torturing arabs, imprisoning arabs, denying arabs basic human rights etc?
Maybe nobody is afraid of the FBI but I bet nobody is afraid of the moderator either. You have to admit that this administration has very successfully instituted an atmosphere of paranoia and fear which suits their purposes just fine. They are able to shut down all dissent on all topics. Like the attorney general said "if you disagree with us you are giving aid and comfort to the terrorists". People are afraid to critize the govt and that should scare you.
Although one could make a compelling argument that making as much money as possible is indeed evil (certainly evil as defined by Jesus) I don't think that is what is argued here. Condeming capitalism as an evil pursuit in order to excuse the behaviour of M$ is a novel argument and I congratulate you on your originality but your argument falls short on several accounts.
1) Although all corporations pursue money not all of them are run by evil persons like M$ is.
2) Most corporations try very hard to obey the laws of the united states whereas M$ has repeatedly and willfully broken them.
3) No corporation has 40 billion in cash reserves so the degree of capital aggregation (and therefore evilness in your definition) is immense. An analogy might be to say that both lying and gonocide are sins but we are able to make moral distinctions between liers and murderers. So therefore not everybody gets the $ just M$.
BTW? Why do M$ trolls find it so offensive? I would think they would be proud to have their company be associated with it's cash horde.
" but overdosing on comic relief characters and fluffy teddybears makes it apparent that Lucas should concentrate on childrens cartoons"
In a very real sense that's what these movies are children's cartoons. There is no evidence of any adult level interaction between any of the characters. Not even a kiss.
The truth of the matter is that it does not matter how good or bad this movie is. The last one sucked massively yet everybody went to see it anyway. Everybody will rush out and see this one too just because it says star wars in the title and geekboys think they will be super cool if they are first in line.
There is a sucker born every minute and two to take him. Lucas knows how to milk the suckers for all they are worth.
Pick up a copy of the illuminati trilogy firsth though.
" But Lewinski was about having sex with a subordinate. You don't diddle your staff. If the CEO of my company rolled one of our interns, the board would throw him out on his butt."
Bullshit about 50 thousand times. You mean to say no person in the corporate world ever fucked their secretary? If a CEO did this nothing would happen. It happens every day in every workplace. People hook up, have affairs, and fuck for the fun of it. I spent four years in the military and every girl I knew slept with at least one person of higher rank and frequently with officers.
"Dammit, Packwood was a Republican and thus Evil Incarnate, but why did we demand his ouster but not Bill's?"
Because what Packwood did was non consentual. Big difference there.
"Fourth, and most important, Bill lied about it. He lied to the newspapers, on television and during depositions."
Sure he lied I would have too and so would you. The question I have is why was he asked about his cock in the first place? The republicans were obsessed with his cock and kept asking him about it. Why?
What is it with the republican obsession with Bill Clintons cock? All we heard about for years was Bill Clintons cock did this and bill clintons cock did that, bill clinton's cock looked like this, bill clinton's cock touched this this chick in the mount, bill clintons cock spewed on this chicks dress, bill clinton showed his cock to this other chick.
Why were you asking about his cock, why do you care where he put his cock, why do you care what his cock looks like. Whr are republicans so obsessed with his cock? Please answer I really want to know. Before the republicans started talking about it I never thought about his cock. Maybe it's because I am not a homosexual (out, represed or otherwise) I guess. From where I stand I say good for him. A president ought to get his rocks off once in a while. It will clear his head and make him less likely to fuck the public.
Groupwise.
"Eudora lite: nasty ads, could not find out whether/how to configure for multiple accounts,"
Well if you pay for eudora you won't get the ads, if you can't figure out how to configure eudora for multiple accounts you are just plain stupid. I'l give you a hint. Tools->personalitites (ooh wow that was really well hidden wasn't it). Or you could have clicked on the human being icon (get it a person) and then a right click->new.
You can figure out how to use GnuPG but can't figure that out? WTF?
I would so hate to be sysadmin at an MS shop. COnstantly going from desk to desk patching up outlook, IE, and whatever else was hacked that week.
How can they possibly sue somebody with a .COM TLD?
.edu is for schools .com is not.
Thei domain is lsu.edu which makes perfect sense.
Don't despair obviously Bill Gates has no confidence in capitalism either. If Bill Gates had confidence in capitalism or the US economy he would not be sitting on that much cash. He would have bought other companies or invested it. If he was a truly good person he would have given more then .001% to the poor and the needy. The fact is that Bill Gates sees something in the future that you and I don't that being a total and worldwide colapse of the economy. When that happens all assets that are based on paper will be worthless and whoever has cash will be sitting pretty. He wants to stay in the driving seat when the world's economic system collapses.
There is one more likely explanation. Bill Gates must realize by now that he (and MS) is a prime target for terrorist attacks. A "dirty" or an atomic weapon exploded in redmond would wipe out MS and drive their stock down to almost zero. The collapse of the MS stock will also take down every single mutual fund in the country and will in most likelyhood thrust the country into a very deep depression. If and when that day comes (presuming Bill Survives of course) he can attempt to rebuild MS from scratch in a pretty short time someplace else. MS may be a world wide operation but most important work gets done in Redmond and most important brains are there too. It's an easy target and he and bin laden both know it.