I very much enjoyed your philosophy lesson. You also either have no idea what the word "bigot" means, or you have misjudged me. I have nothing against human pin-cushions as people. They are simply not welcome to work for my company. There is a difference.
Regarding discrimination, I'll grant you that discrimination can be different from the legal definition, if you grant me that discrimination is not always a bad thing. For instance, in my apartment rental business I discriminate against low-income individuals who could not afford to pay rent. I also discriminate against individuals with poor credit and against those with felony convictions. I discriminate based on criteria that you would never understand why. This is all perfectly legal and desirable. I have not yet had to follow through on an eviction because I discriminate effectively up front during the application process. Fewer evictions means fewer people getting tossed out into the street by the county sheriff, a humiliating experience.
Just so you know, I do have (and have had in the past) tenants with body piercings and tattoos. I've never had a tenant who looked like a pin-cushion, but I would not reject an applicant for having too many piercings or tattoos.
By the way, a qualified applicant could not win in court if it could be proven that I rejected him or her because of too many piercings. Neither could a rental applicant win. I see that this bothers you, but no one has the right to work for a particular company. No company is required to hire anyone. And "people with tattoos" are not a protected class. Obviously I would never tell someone that I rejected him on account of his appearance, even though the law is on my side. I don't really feel like paying my lawyer to demonstrate that fact, so I don't go out of my way to offend people.
The fact that I am allowed to run (more than) one corporation has little to do with the government. Oh, sure, they are chartered by the state of Delaware, but nothing says that I have to have that piece of paper. I could simply provide a service in exchange for compensation and pay others to help me. Call it a corporation, a sole-proprietorship, or just some guy trying to make a living. It doesn't matter.
You said you think it hurts me that I would exclude human pin-cushions from working for me. Well, my company will not be represented by people with such an appearance. When you modify your body in such a way, you are making a statement. If you want to make an individual statement, please be my guest! State all you want and state some more to your little heart's content. But you will not be making such a statement as a representative of any company I own.
So I use the Debian packaged version of qmail-src and their patches, which include QMAILQUEUE.
Using QMAILQUEUE, I can use my own binary which calls spamc and clamdscan (but not necessarily in that order...) and returns locally-defined error codes for spams and viruses.
Then I modify qmail.c to handle those error codes and give a 443 for viruses and spam instead of a bounce.
case 31: return "Dmail server permanently rejected message (#5.3.0)"; case 32: return "Dmail server permanently rejected message: message contained a VIRUS (#5.3.0)";
case 33: return "Dmail server permanently rejected message: message was deemed SPAM (#5.3.0)";
Really frustrating that qmail isn't smart enough to do this without patching. What's the point of having qmail be so secure or whatever if nobody can actually use unpatched qmail in production? I'd ditch it in a heartbeat if I felt like learning a new MTA (I don't).
Some people here are so hung up on thinking that "businesses have more rights than people" that they don't even fucking think before they post.
Businesses aren't even a "mental construct", as you put it. A business is a piece of paper. Nothing more. That piece of paper gives people the right to act in the name of that piece of paper. Real people.
People (like me) who own businesses should be able to set whatever dress code we want. You are free to work for whichever company you want to or even start your own company. My right to set a dress code does not impede your right to modify your body in any way you see fit. But realize if you walk into my office looking for a job with a bunch of metal spikes embedded in your head, you're not going to get very far.
Also, what the parent poster was saying about "human rights" was that the body-mod crowd is trying to tell everybody else how to think and we object to it. You have no right to tell me what to think.
Also, you have no idea what discrimination is. Discrimination is a legal concept that says for certain "protected classes" of people, the fact that they are a protected class member cannot be considered in hiring/firing/promotion/etc. decisions. I could not have a policy in my business that says "we do not hire black people". The reason for this is "race" is a protected class. Does that mean I have to hire every black person who applies? No, it just means that I cannot consider race at all in hiring decisions.
I can tell you for a fact that "people with 6 pounds of metal embedded in their face for non-medical reasons" are NOT a protected class, and I can (and would) discriminate against such a person legally.
How you act makes a statement. Like it or not. Your appearance makes a statement. Like it or not.
Personally, I don't care how you act, what you wear, or how you present yourself. But you need to realize that people are judging you by your appearance. It's human nature.
If you want to walk into a business meeting looking like an oversized pin cushion, be my guest. But you should be aware that there are consequences, and you should be prepared to accept them.
Ok, you got me. I was really trying to hawk my expensive dating course at www.shortmotherfuckersdeservetogetlaidtoo.tv.
Ok, maybe not.
Are you honestly trying to tell me that if you were 5'7" instead of 2 inches shorter you'd be getting laid every night? Do you think your average drunk bitch at a bar could really figure your height, accurate to within 2 inches?
Which means I've got only 5'4"-5'6" to work with. Ack.
Would now be a bad time to remind you that the average height for American chicks is 5'4"? 5'5" - 5'6" in heels.
No excuses, big guy.
P.S. Most women you meet are not seriously considering having kids with you, short or otherwise.
Chicks can smell fear from a mile away. Your problem is not your height. It's that you're ashamed of your height. I'm short, but I've dated tall chicks before (5'10" max).
If it bothers you so much, how do you feel about short chicks? Then you'll be taller than her and feel more confident.
bear in mind that women have different standards of what they consider physically attractive
And thank god for that.
Attractive women insist on high-quality men, as they should. Fortunately, there are many ways for men to be high-quality, and looks is only one of them.
We have it easy.
By the way, no single man on this board understood your wallpaper analogy. Of course, as a married man, I could readily tell you what color ecru is. Not that I would ever admit that in public.
If you move abroad, without giving up your citizenchip, to live in an other country, you have to pay both local taxes and US taxes at the same time?? [...] In Sweden, our taxation laws are made especially so that you should never be taxed twice for the same income. You might have to pay swedish taxes when living abroad, but only if you don't pay local taxes on the same income
Well, you pay income taxes on your income and then VAT on that income when you spend it. Double taxation. Anyhow, US tax policy is the same as you describe for Sweden. Foreign taxes paid are a credit on your US taxes, so if I lived and worked in Sweden, I'd have to pay Swedish taxes. But since Swedish taxes are higher than US taxes, I would just claim all my Swedish taxes as credits on my US taxes and owe zero US tax.
Btw, how does the US taxation office get to know about your income when living in another country anyway? It's not like your local employer will be forced by local law to send in your income details to them...
Actually, the US does have tax information sharing treaties with some other countries, so they know your income based on your tax information for that other country. A lot of it hinges on the honor system, though.
Just some quick googling showed that 65% of Americans are considered "overweight", whatever the hell that means. I have no idea about the correctness of this source, but it was the first result on Google, so it must be correct, right?:)
Anyhow, that leaves about 90M Americans who are not overweight and 36M who are starving in the streets. Are we to believe that only 54M (20% of) Americans eat a healthy amount of food? Neither too much nor too little?
That sounds a little implausable to me. But that shouldn't interrupt a good round of US-bashing.
I remember saying the pledge of allegiance as young as in first grade. I remember having not a clue what it meant. It was just some empty words you recited before class.
It might as well have been in Swedish. It would have had the same amount of meaning for me. I think it's hard to be brainwashed when you don't even know what you're saying.
Is there any benefit to having an appendix? Other than your 1 in 700 shot of having acute Appendicitis, which was deadly before modern medicine? Or any advantage of having tonsils, which are prone to infection?
Or what about the genetic predisposition to certain cancers that this study talks about? Could it be that they weren't selected out because a) most people didn't tend to live long enough for the cancer to manifest itself, or b) the cancer manifested itself long after parents passed their prime reproductive age?
The human genome is vast, human populations are large, and there are many forces at work. Saying, "Well, my gut tells me this is true." doesn't really cut it. And, anyway, what was this huge benefit that kept these genes in? 5 IQ points, on average? Whoopdee doo.
Perhaps there just wasn't enough pressure to select these genes out. The chances of two random Ashkenazi Jews having a Tay-Sachs baby are roughly 1 in 3,600. The effect of having a Tay-Sachs baby is the kid dies within a few years. Well, lots of babies die for lots of reasons. The incidence rate for SIDS is in the 2.5 per 1,000 range (but not much is known about SIDS, so it's not diagnosed as easily as T-S.) Even among parents who are both T-S carriers, each of their kids only has a 25% chance of having T-S. So a couple has a kid that dies young. Lots of kids die young (especially a few hundred years ago). That's why you have lots of kids (back then, anyway).
We may never know why these genetic diseases were never selected out. For all we know, there just wasn't enough time and in a thousand years they might be gone.
Hmmm. Reading your_mother_sews_soc's original post, he never applies his observed intelligence of his friends and relatives to Ashkenazi Jews as a whole. You put those words into his mouth all by yourself.
His whole point was that he observed that his family and Jewish friends seemed smarter, but that it is politically incorrect to speak of this phenomenon, let alone study it, because the subject is so politically charged. I must say I think he may have misidentified which groups in particular would squelch such research, but that's neither here nor there.
At any rate, the research in this study looks extremely preliminary at this point. I'm actually excited that people are studying neurological genetics more closely. My wife has Multiple Sclerosis, so any research on that area could lead to the next major breakthrough.
The issue isn't running out of air so much as having big tanks strapped to your back.
The article I read said the first issue is running out of air:
"There are a number of limitations to the existing oxygen tank underwater breathing method. The first is the amount of time a diver can stay underwater, which is the result of the oxygen tank capacity."
Well, actually the limiting factor is the amount of nitrogen in your bloodstream.
If you just have some batteries and this device, it's less awkward.
You want to know what's awkward? Whatever happens when this device fails. Call me old-fashioned, but I would rather have a simple tank of air strapped to my back than the device in the article, which would have many points of failure. Being 100' under water with no source of air leaves you mighty frickin' vulnerable.
Yeah, I know. SCUBA tanks fail (normally a problem with seals). But they fail early to the tune of, "Dude, there are a fuckload of bubbles coming outta yer tank. Maybe you shouldn't frickin' dive with it."
Ahhh. Simplicity. Simplicity is good.
I normally breathe plain old air when I SCUBA dive. Some divers use Nitrox, which is a blend of nitrogen and oxygen.
Does anyone dive with just a pure oxygen tank? Or is this writeup totally whacked?
As others have pointed out, this won't really let anyone stay underwater longer. Most experienced divers don't run out of air while diving. They surface when their dive computers tell them to surface based on the amount of nitrogen in their bloodstream. This device does nothing to address that issue.
I certainly have never run out of air while diving.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the assignment of more work than you could actually do is most likely intentional. When I was in high school, the teachers readily admitted that they did this.
They assigned too much reading, with the idea that you learn how to pick out the most important points. They assigned too many math problems, with the intent that you only do the ones you don't already know how to do.
The point being you are going to need to learn to prioritize better. If you read Blum cover-to-cover, you totally screwed up AP American History. If you never read the Cliff Notes for any novel, congratulations! you screwed up AP American Lit, too. I'm not saying you should shortcut every novel, but you need to learn to half-ass some stuff! More importantly, you need to learn which stuff is a good candidate for half-assing.
Personally, I did zero homework in high school. Never needed to. I banged out research papers the night before. I slept through class. I have never once found myself wishing that I had actually read "A Scarlet Letter". I personally give you permission not to read it. It's probably the worst book ever written.
At 16, you shouldn't be so stressed over your schoolwork. You should be stressed over "will she reject me when I ask her out?" or "what will I say to her when we're sitting at dinner so she doesn't think I'm an ass?" or "should I kiss her on the first date or second date?" That is what a 16 year old should stress over.
Seriously, dude. You're going to have a heart attack before your 20th birthday if you keep this up. Go get some pussy. Smoke a few (but not too many!) bowls. You'll thank yourself later in life, trust me.
A friend of mine is allergic to all different types of meat. If she eats a little, she will break out in hives and have difficulty breathing due to airway constriction. If she ate too much, she would be quite dead. Presumably, she has been this way since birth. The first time her parents fed her meat (in infancy), they were surprised when she turned blue.
Sure, she "chooses" not to eat meat. In the same way that you or I "choose" not to drink hemlock. Yeah, you could drink it, but the results would be unacceptable to you.
She never chose to be deathly allergic to meat, and given the lack of social acceptance gay people receive, I doubt anyone would choose of their own free will to be gay, either.
My wife was on birth control for years before we decided to have a child. In that time we could have had several children, but did not. Should birth control be outlawed, too?
I mean, think of all the children we never had. How do you think they feel about the pill?
Tay-Sachs is totally different from Downs Syndrome. With Tay-Sachs, the baby will not under any circumstances live past age 5. I can not conceive of a reason to carry a TSD child to term who has a 100% chance of being dead within 5 years.
With Downs, there are varying degrees of severity. Many people with Downs can lead long and productive (and challenged) lives. My wife and I would not consider aborting a pregnancy where the child was likely to develop Downs. However, if we were carriers for TSD and a PGD revealed that the baby had TSD, we would abort before implantation.
Our doctors wanted to advise us about our "options". They wanted to run all kinds of tests, including amniocentesis and genetic testing, in order to be sure one way or another,so we could make an "informed" decision.
Seriously. Get a new doctor for your second child. My wife and I just had her 12 week doctor's appointment this morning, and the doc told us that at the next appointment, we would be asked if we wanted to do the blood test that screens for Downs (high false-positive rate, by the way).
The way she put it was that we should be asking ourselves two questions: 1. Would we abort if the blood test and subsequent amnio showed positive? 2. If not, would you want to know this type of thing early?
If the answer to the previous two questions is no, then they won't even bother with the blood screening. My wife and I haven't discussed it yet, but we probably won't do the screen, and judging by your outlook, your doctor should have recommended you not do it, either.
At any rate. Congratulations. The best of luck to you. And ditch your lousy, insensitive doc.
Slashdot Mirror
I just thought I'd ask someone since I didn't see any obvious answer in the release notes. Thanks for the info.
I very much enjoyed your philosophy lesson. You also either have no idea what the word "bigot" means, or you have misjudged me. I have nothing against human pin-cushions as people. They are simply not welcome to work for my company. There is a difference.
Regarding discrimination, I'll grant you that discrimination can be different from the legal definition, if you grant me that discrimination is not always a bad thing. For instance, in my apartment rental business I discriminate against low-income individuals who could not afford to pay rent. I also discriminate against individuals with poor credit and against those with felony convictions. I discriminate based on criteria that you would never understand why. This is all perfectly legal and desirable. I have not yet had to follow through on an eviction because I discriminate effectively up front during the application process. Fewer evictions means fewer people getting tossed out into the street by the county sheriff, a humiliating experience.
Just so you know, I do have (and have had in the past) tenants with body piercings and tattoos. I've never had a tenant who looked like a pin-cushion, but I would not reject an applicant for having too many piercings or tattoos.
By the way, a qualified applicant could not win in court if it could be proven that I rejected him or her because of too many piercings. Neither could a rental applicant win. I see that this bothers you, but no one has the right to work for a particular company. No company is required to hire anyone. And "people with tattoos" are not a protected class. Obviously I would never tell someone that I rejected him on account of his appearance, even though the law is on my side. I don't really feel like paying my lawyer to demonstrate that fact, so I don't go out of my way to offend people.
The fact that I am allowed to run (more than) one corporation has little to do with the government. Oh, sure, they are chartered by the state of Delaware, but nothing says that I have to have that piece of paper. I could simply provide a service in exchange for compensation and pay others to help me. Call it a corporation, a sole-proprietorship, or just some guy trying to make a living. It doesn't matter.
You said you think it hurts me that I would exclude human pin-cushions from working for me. Well, my company will not be represented by people with such an appearance. When you modify your body in such a way, you are making a statement. If you want to make an individual statement, please be my guest! State all you want and state some more to your little heart's content. But you will not be making such a statement as a representative of any company I own.
Cheers!
If I've been using the "testing" moniker, do I have to do a dist-upgrade to stay on testing?
Using QMAILQUEUE, I can use my own binary which calls spamc and clamdscan (but not necessarily in that order...) and returns locally-defined error codes for spams and viruses.
Then I modify qmail.c to handle those error codes and give a 443 for viruses and spam instead of a bounce.
Really frustrating that qmail isn't smart enough to do this without patching. What's the point of having qmail be so secure or whatever if nobody can actually use unpatched qmail in production? I'd ditch it in a heartbeat if I felt like learning a new MTA (I don't).Businesses aren't even a "mental construct", as you put it. A business is a piece of paper. Nothing more. That piece of paper gives people the right to act in the name of that piece of paper. Real people.
People (like me) who own businesses should be able to set whatever dress code we want. You are free to work for whichever company you want to or even start your own company. My right to set a dress code does not impede your right to modify your body in any way you see fit. But realize if you walk into my office looking for a job with a bunch of metal spikes embedded in your head, you're not going to get very far.
Also, what the parent poster was saying about "human rights" was that the body-mod crowd is trying to tell everybody else how to think and we object to it. You have no right to tell me what to think.
Also, you have no idea what discrimination is. Discrimination is a legal concept that says for certain "protected classes" of people, the fact that they are a protected class member cannot be considered in hiring/firing/promotion/etc. decisions. I could not have a policy in my business that says "we do not hire black people". The reason for this is "race" is a protected class. Does that mean I have to hire every black person who applies? No, it just means that I cannot consider race at all in hiring decisions.
I can tell you for a fact that "people with 6 pounds of metal embedded in their face for non-medical reasons" are NOT a protected class, and I can (and would) discriminate against such a person legally.
What, exactly, is a "squarehead"?
Personally, I don't care how you act, what you wear, or how you present yourself. But you need to realize that people are judging you by your appearance. It's human nature.
If you want to walk into a business meeting looking like an oversized pin cushion, be my guest. But you should be aware that there are consequences, and you should be prepared to accept them.
Ok, maybe not.
Are you honestly trying to tell me that if you were 5'7" instead of 2 inches shorter you'd be getting laid every night? Do you think your average drunk bitch at a bar could really figure your height, accurate to within 2 inches?
Would now be a bad time to remind you that the average height for American chicks is 5'4"? 5'5" - 5'6" in heels.No excuses, big guy.
P.S. Most women you meet are not seriously considering having kids with you, short or otherwise.
Then you'll have the whole trifecta of "things that women say they find attractive but don't."
If it bothers you so much, how do you feel about short chicks? Then you'll be taller than her and feel more confident.
Attractive women insist on high-quality men, as they should. Fortunately, there are many ways for men to be high-quality, and looks is only one of them.
We have it easy.
By the way, no single man on this board understood your wallpaper analogy. Of course, as a married man, I could readily tell you what color ecru is. Not that I would ever admit that in public.
Anyhow, that leaves about 90M Americans who are not overweight and 36M who are starving in the streets. Are we to believe that only 54M (20% of) Americans eat a healthy amount of food? Neither too much nor too little?
That sounds a little implausable to me. But that shouldn't interrupt a good round of US-bashing.
It might as well have been in Swedish. It would have had the same amount of meaning for me. I think it's hard to be brainwashed when you don't even know what you're saying.
Is there any benefit to having an appendix? Other than your 1 in 700 shot of having acute Appendicitis, which was deadly before modern medicine? Or any advantage of having tonsils, which are prone to infection?
Or what about the genetic predisposition to certain cancers that this study talks about? Could it be that they weren't selected out because a) most people didn't tend to live long enough for the cancer to manifest itself, or b) the cancer manifested itself long after parents passed their prime reproductive age?
The human genome is vast, human populations are large, and there are many forces at work. Saying, "Well, my gut tells me this is true." doesn't really cut it. And, anyway, what was this huge benefit that kept these genes in? 5 IQ points, on average? Whoopdee doo.
Perhaps there just wasn't enough pressure to select these genes out. The chances of two random Ashkenazi Jews having a Tay-Sachs baby are roughly 1 in 3,600. The effect of having a Tay-Sachs baby is the kid dies within a few years. Well, lots of babies die for lots of reasons. The incidence rate for SIDS is in the 2.5 per 1,000 range (but not much is known about SIDS, so it's not diagnosed as easily as T-S.) Even among parents who are both T-S carriers, each of their kids only has a 25% chance of having T-S. So a couple has a kid that dies young. Lots of kids die young (especially a few hundred years ago). That's why you have lots of kids (back then, anyway).
We may never know why these genetic diseases were never selected out. For all we know, there just wasn't enough time and in a thousand years they might be gone.
His whole point was that he observed that his family and Jewish friends seemed smarter, but that it is politically incorrect to speak of this phenomenon, let alone study it, because the subject is so politically charged. I must say I think he may have misidentified which groups in particular would squelch such research, but that's neither here nor there.
At any rate, the research in this study looks extremely preliminary at this point. I'm actually excited that people are studying neurological genetics more closely. My wife has Multiple Sclerosis, so any research on that area could lead to the next major breakthrough.
Yeah, I know. SCUBA tanks fail (normally a problem with seals). But they fail early to the tune of, "Dude, there are a fuckload of bubbles coming outta yer tank. Maybe you shouldn't frickin' dive with it." Ahhh. Simplicity. Simplicity is good.
Does anyone dive with just a pure oxygen tank? Or is this writeup totally whacked?
As others have pointed out, this won't really let anyone stay underwater longer. Most experienced divers don't run out of air while diving. They surface when their dive computers tell them to surface based on the amount of nitrogen in their bloodstream. This device does nothing to address that issue.
I certainly have never run out of air while diving.
They assigned too much reading, with the idea that you learn how to pick out the most important points. They assigned too many math problems, with the intent that you only do the ones you don't already know how to do.
The point being you are going to need to learn to prioritize better. If you read Blum cover-to-cover, you totally screwed up AP American History. If you never read the Cliff Notes for any novel, congratulations! you screwed up AP American Lit, too. I'm not saying you should shortcut every novel, but you need to learn to half-ass some stuff! More importantly, you need to learn which stuff is a good candidate for half-assing.
Personally, I did zero homework in high school. Never needed to. I banged out research papers the night before. I slept through class. I have never once found myself wishing that I had actually read "A Scarlet Letter". I personally give you permission not to read it. It's probably the worst book ever written.
At 16, you shouldn't be so stressed over your schoolwork. You should be stressed over "will she reject me when I ask her out?" or "what will I say to her when we're sitting at dinner so she doesn't think I'm an ass?" or "should I kiss her on the first date or second date?" That is what a 16 year old should stress over.
Seriously, dude. You're going to have a heart attack before your 20th birthday if you keep this up. Go get some pussy. Smoke a few (but not too many!) bowls. You'll thank yourself later in life, trust me.
You have been warned.
Go Badgers!
Sure, she "chooses" not to eat meat. In the same way that you or I "choose" not to drink hemlock. Yeah, you could drink it, but the results would be unacceptable to you.
She never chose to be deathly allergic to meat, and given the lack of social acceptance gay people receive, I doubt anyone would choose of their own free will to be gay, either.
I mean, think of all the children we never had. How do you think they feel about the pill?
With Downs, there are varying degrees of severity. Many people with Downs can lead long and productive (and challenged) lives. My wife and I would not consider aborting a pregnancy where the child was likely to develop Downs. However, if we were carriers for TSD and a PGD revealed that the baby had TSD, we would abort before implantation.
The way she put it was that we should be asking ourselves two questions: 1. Would we abort if the blood test and subsequent amnio showed positive? 2. If not, would you want to know this type of thing early?
If the answer to the previous two questions is no, then they won't even bother with the blood screening. My wife and I haven't discussed it yet, but we probably won't do the screen, and judging by your outlook, your doctor should have recommended you not do it, either.
At any rate. Congratulations. The best of luck to you. And ditch your lousy, insensitive doc.
Both Sprint and Verizon have money-back trial periods of a week or two. Why not take one for a test drive and see if it meets your needs?