If Microsoft today wrote a new implementation of TCP/IP, it would bring about the end of the internet. Witness the allegedly "secure" Windows NT descendents, Windows XP and Windows 2000. If you do so much as plug one of them into the internet without a firewall, they're hacked quite quickly. Ironically, 98 never had these problems unless you activated file sharing!
I think SMB(not sure if the original poster meant Super Mario World as in the huge game for SNES, in which case I'm sort of confused since they really started adding variety to the gameplay after the first, and it REALLY picked up after the third) is one of those things you need to be there to understand. If you can get instant gratification visiting a website, why try timing that jump just right and risk failing and getting no gratification at all?
What a strange world we live in where I'm talking about instant gratification compared to a VIDEO GAME!
heh, you're right! a library of thousands of games, many of which went on to be classics in their own right are nothing beside Goldeneye 64, Mario 64, and Zelda!
Now I'm going to go play on my halobox--I mean, X-box.;)
You make some very good points. It's funny though, that there isn't an actual name for the genetic background one might call "jewish". Until I find one, I guess I'll just have to tollerate the duality of the term. A homeland for the descendants of a particular semitic tribe does seem like something noble, and takes a lot of the sinister edge of the phrase "jewish homeland"(the jews could be a religion filled with mother teresa clones and it would STILL sound sort of sinister, I think...:/ )
WWII affected many peoples bloodlines, such a waste, no matter how one looks at it... Personally, I can only be glad that we're in an era of relative peace(there has been war in the middle east since before I was even born, hence the relative part), and we can work towards the future, reparing the mistakes of the past, rather than dwelling on them.:)
I find it ironic that above your post is a post where someone compares peoples lives in Afganistan and Iraq to a soda can, to be crushed without afterthought.:P
Heh, call me a hopeless idealist, but I think both sides are wrong. Israel shouldn't be treating criminals like soldiers(assasinations by missle?!), palestinians shouldn't be trying to blow themselves and others up.
Ideally, they'd both realize that they're made of the same flesh and bone and come to an agreement where both sides get what they want without any bloodshed or ill will. This is the real world though, so I have to go with the secular belief that there's no reason Israel has to be in the middle of "we hate other religions" land, and barring the religious significance of the location of israel(and obviously the cost), finding a homeland somewhat closer to a freindly face(and somewhat further from those who hate everything that isn't muslum) might be a good idea, since they ARE so obviously out numbered.
Of course, I'm the sort of person who probably would have moved. Regardless of the righeousness of either side, there's no reason you couldn't find a place to live elsewhere. Judaism is a religion, not a race, and the idea of a jewish homeland is as ludicrious as the idea of a secular homeland, a christian homeland, or a muslim homeland.
And if I sound anti-Israel, it's only because it's not worth trying to argue with someone who is so convinced they're right that they'll blow themselves to bits. I sound anti-kid when I'm watching a Friday the 13th movie too.:P
For the record, I FUCKING HATE minority scholarships. I'm a white male, but I've had to work my ass off in some of the most demeaning and disgusting jobs out there to get to school and stay here, and I'll have to sacrifice a hell of a lot more to stay here on the money I have. Is my money somehow worth less than theirs? Is my suffering, sacrifice, and hard work somehow inferior to theirs because their skin is a different colour or because they have something that isn't a penis between their legs? I don't think so.
There. I said it. I feel better now after this completely off topic venting session. It was bound to happen sooner or later, seeing as my school offers not one scholarship for everyone, but dozens for "women or people of a visible minority". I'm going to get another beer.
Actually, Bushs dishonesty is something which astounds me. Not so much because he is dishonest, but because he is so openly two-faced and dishonest, but the right still rants on about clintons penis.
("We have to support the troops!" + "combat pay cut in half") != "I had my way with an intern, but didn't want to tell anybody"...
Honor is a concept born of traditional armies and warriors. These people are not warriors, they are shadows. Unlike the Samurai(yeah, I like Japan. Eat me. I like medivial europe too, but haven't done as much research into the period), they follow no code of honor. Like the ninja, or the guerilla, they hide in the shadows, strike quickly, and fade away, lest they be caught and killed.
Ironically, this is why the plan to invade nations to eliminate them is so fatally flawed, at least in the short term.
It translates to "well, we weren't going to use bio weapons or nukes, but the folks out west kept on telling us that they're just so dang easy to make, so we're going to give it a shot".
Talk about your self-fulfilling prophecies!!:D
(yes, I'm aware that it's only funny until you realize how horrible it is. I'd just rather think of the funny part, rather than the millions dead part)
You know, if you're going to be pissy about it, make sure you've accounted for all the wars.
Remember Afganistan? We weren't there for freaking leprechauns, you know! Now I don't recall exactly when the war started, but it was definitely late 2001, early 2002...
I see, you're being melodramatic. What we did was a nice gesture, but to suggest that it was heroic, or that if we hadn't that 800,000 people would have died is just silly. I should remind you that we WEREN'T the ones under attack, and even if we WERE, and had closed our airspace as well, neither the US or Canada would have let those planes just run out of fuel and crash!!
It would seem that this conversation is over. Grow up, and work on your english BEFORE you start hurling insults attacking my bloodline.
Odds are, you didn't even understand my original message. Lord knows I didn't understand yours, which is why I asked you, "What exactly are you saying?".
Something tells me you haven't seen the law. Behold. From the Government of Canada:
318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Definition of "genocide"
(2) In this section, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,
(a) killing members of the group; or
(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.
Consent
(3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.
Definition of "identifiable group"
(4) In this section, "identifiable group" means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin.
So no, abortion isn't covered. Neither is birth control, unless you propose birth control in order to bring about the physical destruction of that identifiable group.
It seems to me that such laws are infinitely more likely to be abused to silence non-racists, than to be used "as directed" to silence real racists in cases where silencing them will actually prevent anything bad from happening.
Since genocide laws clearly state that you must advocate one of the definitions of genocide, you must mean the second part of the law, which is as follows.
From the Government of Canada
Public incitement of hatred
319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Wilful promotion of hatred
(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Defences
(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)
(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.
Pay attention to articles 3C and 3D, specifically protecting against a situation you've described.
I am speaking of the coureagous act , of valor , integrity solidarity and selfless disregard for its own safety act of saving 800 000 lives that Canada did that day and that the people of the US Have yet to officially acknowledge to this day.
I don't think I know what you're talking about. What happened to save 800,000 lives?
Dude , if your drug taking is clouwding your mind and disrepecting your fellow countryman and ancestor , and maybe teacher ( not sure you whent to highschool and add geographical class), just stay out of this discussion.
I think what makes people worried is that what is said in a two thousand year old book may be guiding the leadership of the nation rather than the needs and desires of the people.
I've always thought of Freedom and fiscal responsibility as a conservative value(and I've always thought that a lot of "conservatives" thought it was synonymous with "we step on anyone we don't like"). Guess not.:)
This is a dangerous attitude. An uninformed voting population is even more dangerous than a non-voting population. Sure, the number of voters is high, but it degrades the importance of issues, as people who don't know what's going on will vote on notions which may or may not be based on reality. Think: "Wow, that kerry guy has really nice eyes! I should vote for him!".
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think there are any emacs zealots left on slashdot?
How about a VB app with embedded MP3 playing, internet, word processing, etc etc etc?
:P
Much easier. On the other hand, knowing microsoft, I'm betting that installing litestep will be enough to break their limit.
If Microsoft today wrote a new implementation of TCP/IP, it would bring about the end of the internet. Witness the allegedly "secure" Windows NT descendents, Windows XP and Windows 2000. If you do so much as plug one of them into the internet without a firewall, they're hacked quite quickly. Ironically, 98 never had these problems unless you activated file sharing!
My thoughts exactly.
;)
I bet it'll be HUGE with the aol crowd.
I think SMB(not sure if the original poster meant Super Mario World as in the huge game for SNES, in which case I'm sort of confused since they really started adding variety to the gameplay after the first, and it REALLY picked up after the third) is one of those things you need to be there to understand. If you can get instant gratification visiting a website, why try timing that jump just right and risk failing and getting no gratification at all?
What a strange world we live in where I'm talking about instant gratification compared to a VIDEO GAME!
Hello? PC Gamers abound here? :P
heh, you're right! a library of thousands of games, many of which went on to be classics in their own right are nothing beside Goldeneye 64, Mario 64, and Zelda!
;)
Now I'm going to go play on my halobox--I mean, X-box.
You make some very good points. It's funny though, that there isn't an actual name for the genetic background one might call "jewish". Until I find one, I guess I'll just have to tollerate the duality of the term. A homeland for the descendants of a particular semitic tribe does seem like something noble, and takes a lot of the sinister edge of the phrase "jewish homeland"(the jews could be a religion filled with mother teresa clones and it would STILL sound sort of sinister, I think... :/ )
:)
WWII affected many peoples bloodlines, such a waste, no matter how one looks at it... Personally, I can only be glad that we're in an era of relative peace(there has been war in the middle east since before I was even born, hence the relative part), and we can work towards the future, reparing the mistakes of the past, rather than dwelling on them.
I find it ironic that above your post is a post where someone compares peoples lives in Afganistan and Iraq to a soda can, to be crushed without afterthought. :P
Heh, call me a hopeless idealist, but I think both sides are wrong. Israel shouldn't be treating criminals like soldiers(assasinations by missle?!), palestinians shouldn't be trying to blow themselves and others up.
:P
Ideally, they'd both realize that they're made of the same flesh and bone and come to an agreement where both sides get what they want without any bloodshed or ill will. This is the real world though, so I have to go with the secular belief that there's no reason Israel has to be in the middle of "we hate other religions" land, and barring the religious significance of the location of israel(and obviously the cost), finding a homeland somewhat closer to a freindly face(and somewhat further from those who hate everything that isn't muslum) might be a good idea, since they ARE so obviously out numbered.
Of course, I'm the sort of person who probably would have moved. Regardless of the righeousness of either side, there's no reason you couldn't find a place to live elsewhere. Judaism is a religion, not a race, and the idea of a jewish homeland is as ludicrious as the idea of a secular homeland, a christian homeland, or a muslim homeland.
And if I sound anti-Israel, it's only because it's not worth trying to argue with someone who is so convinced they're right that they'll blow themselves to bits. I sound anti-kid when I'm watching a Friday the 13th movie too.
For the record, I FUCKING HATE minority scholarships. I'm a white male, but I've had to work my ass off in some of the most demeaning and disgusting jobs out there to get to school and stay here, and I'll have to sacrifice a hell of a lot more to stay here on the money I have. Is my money somehow worth less than theirs? Is my suffering, sacrifice, and hard work somehow inferior to theirs because their skin is a different colour or because they have something that isn't a penis between their legs? I don't think so.
There. I said it. I feel better now after this completely off topic venting session. It was bound to happen sooner or later, seeing as my school offers not one scholarship for everyone, but dozens for "women or people of a visible minority". I'm going to get another beer.
Interesting. How do YOU intend to defend against an enemy bound to use the most covert and deadly means possible to attack?
If you're going to hate the man, hate him for the right reasons, rather than just because anti-bush is in vogue.
Actually, Bushs dishonesty is something which astounds me. Not so much because he is dishonest, but because he is so openly two-faced and dishonest, but the right still rants on about clintons penis.
("We have to support the troops!" + "combat pay cut in half") != "I had my way with an intern, but didn't want to tell anybody"...
Honor is a concept born of traditional armies and warriors. These people are not warriors, they are shadows. Unlike the Samurai(yeah, I like Japan. Eat me. I like medivial europe too, but haven't done as much research into the period), they follow no code of honor. Like the ninja, or the guerilla, they hide in the shadows, strike quickly, and fade away, lest they be caught and killed.
Ironically, this is why the plan to invade nations to eliminate them is so fatally flawed, at least in the short term.
That's okay, I'm still trying to figure out how wanting a balanced budget makes me a lefty socialist pinko commie fag.
I find it extremely hilarious.
:D
It translates to "well, we weren't going to use bio weapons or nukes, but the folks out west kept on telling us that they're just so dang easy to make, so we're going to give it a shot".
Talk about your self-fulfilling prophecies!!
(yes, I'm aware that it's only funny until you realize how horrible it is. I'd just rather think of the funny part, rather than the millions dead part)
You know, if you're going to be pissy about it, make sure you've accounted for all the wars.
Remember Afganistan? We weren't there for freaking leprechauns , you know! Now I don't recall exactly when the war started, but it was definitely late 2001, early 2002...
I see, you're being melodramatic. What we did was a nice gesture, but to suggest that it was heroic, or that if we hadn't that 800,000 people would have died is just silly. I should remind you that we WEREN'T the ones under attack, and even if we WERE, and had closed our airspace as well, neither the US or Canada would have let those planes just run out of fuel and crash!!
It would seem that this conversation is over. Grow up, and work on your english BEFORE you start hurling insults attacking my bloodline.
Odds are, you didn't even understand my original message. Lord knows I didn't understand yours, which is why I asked you, "What exactly are you saying?".
Something tells me you haven't seen the law. Behold.
From the Government of Canada:
318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Definition of "genocide"
(2) In this section, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,
(a) killing members of the group; or
(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.
Consent
(3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.
Definition of "identifiable group"
(4) In this section, "identifiable group" means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin.
So no, abortion isn't covered. Neither is birth control, unless you propose birth control in order to bring about the physical destruction of that identifiable group.
It seems to me that such laws are infinitely more likely to be abused to silence non-racists, than to be used "as directed" to silence real racists in cases where silencing them will actually prevent anything bad from happening.
Since genocide laws clearly state that you must advocate one of the definitions of genocide, you must mean the second part of the law, which is as follows.
From the Government of Canada
Public incitement of hatred
319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Wilful promotion of hatred
(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Defences
(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)
(a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;
(b) if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject;
(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or
(d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.
Pay attention to articles 3C and 3D, specifically protecting against a situation you've described.
I am speaking of the coureagous act , of valor , integrity solidarity and selfless disregard for its own safety act of saving 800 000 lives that Canada did that day and that the people of the US Have yet to officially acknowledge to this day.
I don't think I know what you're talking about. What happened to save 800,000 lives?
Dude , if your drug taking is clouwding your mind and disrepecting your fellow countryman and ancestor , and maybe teacher ( not sure you whent to highschool and add geographical class), just stay out of this discussion.
What exactly are you saying?
I think what makes people worried is that what is said in a two thousand year old book may be guiding the leadership of the nation rather than the needs and desires of the people.
Well I'll be damned. I'm a centrist libertarian.
:)
I've always thought of Freedom and fiscal responsibility as a conservative value(and I've always thought that a lot of "conservatives" thought it was synonymous with "we step on anyone we don't like"). Guess not.
VOTE. I don't care who for.
This is a dangerous attitude. An uninformed voting population is even more dangerous than a non-voting population. Sure, the number of voters is high, but it degrades the importance of issues, as people who don't know what's going on will vote on notions which may or may not be based on reality. Think: "Wow, that kerry guy has really nice eyes! I should vote for him!".
no, you just don't have a sense of humour.
Could you be quiet? I'm TRYING to enjoy some poutine here!!