That is such a vague statement that it is impossible to argue for or against. What do you mean by "at the hands of their own government?" Does that include an office killing a man in self defense? Does that include the death penalty? Does that include homeless left to starve? Does that include those who can't afford health care? Does a soldier dying for his country count?
And how do you define a terrorist network? Were McVeigh and Nichols a terrorist network? Were the Minutemen terrorists? Was Hitler a terrorist in his own country?
This may sound silly but isn't that the same argument that the government is making?
Serious and frightening attacks have occurred in the past. Here is a ton of evidence. Let's try to avoid such things in the future.
That's not to say that I agree with this law (far from it) but it is not a valid argument. It is like that warning on funds - Past performance does not guarantee future results.
If I were a member of management would I be getting nothing paid for? Not sure how your comment makes sense. Senior management gets whatever the hell they want. Obviously if I make business calls on my cell phone I can expense them but that doesn't mean that the company is going to pay for my phone. I am not sure what using my internet connection for company purposes means.
First of all you are dead if you get audited. If you use your laptop even 1% of the time for personal you are screwed.
Second, if you are not self-employed and those business expenses are not part of your schedule C then you are still subject to the 2% of AGI.
Finally, Tax accountants are typically as much lying scum as lawyers. You can do what he says but realize that you are gambling against the audit lottery.
You can try putting it is a unreimbursed business expense but you better have some good documentation as to how much you use it for personal and how much for business in case you get audited. Either way you can only deduct anything above 2% of your AGI.
No for broadband connection and no for Palms, cell phones, etc. Yes for Blackberries since they are part of the disaster recovery plan. If you do have broadband and you can justify needing VPN access they will hook you up with the necessary equipment and software.
According to this site 75% of homes have internet access and 48.6% of them have broadband. That works out to 36% of Americans who have broadband at Home.
Well I really don't have time to do 1000 logos and checking their file size. I can tell you from experience, though, that tranparency does not cause bloat. That was really my main point.
bloating their sites with transparent effects where it is not needed.
Every once in a while somebody seems to open their mouth without realizing they have no clue what they are talking about.
How exactly is a transparent image bloat? I did a test. As a gif a logo I have is 3.32K without alpha and 3.33K with alpha. A PNG (both regular and alpha) it was 3.45K. That should dispel both the claims that PNG is bigger and that transparency adds bloat.
And what do you do everytime you change a websites background color? Change the image?
I am probably one of the most discriminated-against individuals
No such thing as a "discriminated-against individual." Discrimination by its very definition is being distinguished categorically instead of individually. You could have said you were a member of one of the most discriminated-against groups in the western world and that would have been fine.
Of course it would still be false since as a smoker you have far more places that you are allowed to smoke than you are not allowed to smoke. As a non-smoker I am helpless when encountering a smoker walking down the street or outside my office building's door. I am willing to be that I am inconvienced more often by a smokers smoke than they are by a non-smoking area.
I would hope that the businesses are just calculating their prices based on their cost to provide the service plus whatever markup they feel the market will bear. It would be rather odd for them to base their prices on what other countries charge. Do you think that rent, employee wages, bandwidth, and other overhead costs are the same in Ghana as they are in the US?
Glad I checked back before I left. You finally got my point. There is no real evidence one way or the other. I have anecdotal bullshit studies and you have anecdotal bullshit studies. The difference is that I am not clinging to mine as an excuse for my belief structure.
I also never said that porn is healthy or good. I just don't think it is bad. Not everything is black or white.
Now I really am leaving. Great talking to you, though. You are definitely a worthy debate opponent which is something rare on Slashdot.
What's your point? Doctors get paid a boatload of money to help people. Does this make them any less valuable to society? I don't care what the intentions behind the pornographers are. That has nothing to do with my point.
I would also argue that there is no such thing as altruism. Everything we do has some self-serving aspect - even if it is just happiness at making somebody else's life better.
Pornographic Attitude in everyday life. - Anecdotal. Not a shred of science in there.
See the section on "Dehumanization of Women towrds the bottom - A link to links?
Edward Donnerstein, 1983 - I can't even think where to begin with this. Irresponsible bullshit. Saying that porn makes men want to rape women is so disgusting as to not need a response.
Men and porn - A blog? You linked to a blog?
The Surgeon Generals report on Pornography and Public Health - Ok. I read through as much of that as I could but I am guessing you didn't read much. There is not much in the way of concrete results in there. The only thing they concluded really is that you should teach young men to respect women and that helps counter any ill effects that may occur. I could have told you that.
Female Objects of Semantic Dehumanization and Violence - Has little to do with porn and more about the history of the dehumanization of women which was a lot worse BEFORE porn even existed. If anything this goes against your point.
I think perhaps you misunderstood my posts. I did not say that porn exists SOLELY to help people but that there is porn that is designed to help couples. Of course they were made to make money. Every self-help author out there writes to make money but that doesn't change that in some cases it does good.
I am not sure why making money off of helping somebody is necessarily bad. You don't have to start a not-for-profit foundation to help somebody.
I'm not trolling for arguments, but stating my own discoveries and representation of the facts.
But where are these so called facts? I have not seen anything from you that could be called more than opinion. The religious label comes becomes most non-religious adults realize the silliness of the attack on pornography. People get so worked up and yet there is no concrete evidence.
If you are not religious then what is it that led you to your opinion?
It is debatable whether the constitution covers it or not but it is pretty clear cut that America was founded on the idea that the government should not be a specific religion (as was the case in a lot of Europe at the time).
I also said you can't tell me what to believe. You can tell me what YOU believe but you can't force me to believe it.
Obviously I read your link. That is why I said there is not one scientific study. Your anecdotal "studies" by "doctors" are nothing more than bullshit. Perhaps you (and they) need a lesson on the scientific process. These studies use anecdotal evidence, back into conclusions, don't include control groups, don't do double-blind tests, and don't use significant sample sizes.
I am fine with your opinion of pornography so long as we agree the government shouldn't be used as a substitute for good parenting. I have no problem with you keeping porn from your children. Just don't tell me how to raise my kids. I'd rather discuss sexuality and porn with my children. It may be awkward but I believe it is better than just saying it is outright bad.
Prove it. Show me the unbiased scientific evidence. All you do is tow the typical religous fanatical line about pornography. You are just repeating what you heard your priest say a thousand times over. Break free dammit. People like you are tearing down this country.
There is not one scientific study that has ever shown the negative effect of pornography. That site doesn't understand the difference between correlation and causation. Even the first line exposes them for the frauds they are. To think that Ted Bundy was a serial killer because he liked porn is so disgusting to even assume that it amazes me that anybody would even approach it.
Your religous beliefs about pornography should have no place in deciding law. That is what this country is built on - separation of church and state. I won't tell you what to believe and you damn well better not tell me.
That is such a boldface bullshit lie that I can't even fathom why you would even say it. There are tons of adult films that are intended for couples and show to enrich a relationship through exploration and experimentation. To deny that is just ignorant and childish.
Are you an absolute asshole? Can you not read the timestamps on the posts? His reply about the DVD's was after I made my reply and I wasn't the only one who misunderstood what he said. He said Illegal porn. The most common type of illegal porn is child porn.
God damn that you posted as AC because I really would like to get an apology from you.
I actually say in one of my other posts that laws should not compensate for bad parenting. There is no doubt that parents need to discuss this stuff with their children and make their own decisions on what their children do or do not see.
Slashdot Mirror
That is such a vague statement that it is impossible to argue for or against. What do you mean by "at the hands of their own government?" Does that include an office killing a man in self defense? Does that include the death penalty? Does that include homeless left to starve? Does that include those who can't afford health care? Does a soldier dying for his country count?
And how do you define a terrorist network? Were McVeigh and Nichols a terrorist network? Were the Minutemen terrorists? Was Hitler a terrorist in his own country?
This may sound silly but isn't that the same argument that the government is making?
Serious and frightening attacks have occurred in the past. Here is a ton of evidence. Let's try to avoid such things in the future.
That's not to say that I agree with this law (far from it) but it is not a valid argument. It is like that warning on funds - Past performance does not guarantee future results.
If I were a member of management would I be getting nothing paid for? Not sure how your comment makes sense. Senior management gets whatever the hell they want. Obviously if I make business calls on my cell phone I can expense them but that doesn't mean that the company is going to pay for my phone. I am not sure what using my internet connection for company purposes means.
First of all you are dead if you get audited. If you use your laptop even 1% of the time for personal you are screwed.
Second, if you are not self-employed and those business expenses are not part of your schedule C then you are still subject to the 2% of AGI.
Finally, Tax accountants are typically as much lying scum as lawyers. You can do what he says but realize that you are gambling against the audit lottery.
You can try putting it is a unreimbursed business expense but you better have some good documentation as to how much you use it for personal and how much for business in case you get audited. Either way you can only deduct anything above 2% of your AGI.
No for broadband connection and no for Palms, cell phones, etc. Yes for Blackberries since they are part of the disaster recovery plan. If you do have broadband and you can justify needing VPN access they will hook you up with the necessary equipment and software.
According to this site 75% of homes have internet access and 48.6% of them have broadband. That works out to 36% of Americans who have broadband at Home.
Well I really don't have time to do 1000 logos and checking their file size. I can tell you from experience, though, that tranparency does not cause bloat. That was really my main point.
bloating their sites with transparent effects where it is not needed.
Every once in a while somebody seems to open their mouth without realizing they have no clue what they are talking about.
How exactly is a transparent image bloat? I did a test. As a gif a logo I have is 3.32K without alpha and 3.33K with alpha. A PNG (both regular and alpha) it was 3.45K. That should dispel both the claims that PNG is bigger and that transparency adds bloat.
And what do you do everytime you change a websites background color? Change the image?
I am probably one of the most discriminated-against individuals
No such thing as a "discriminated-against individual." Discrimination by its very definition is being distinguished categorically instead of individually. You could have said you were a member of one of the most discriminated-against groups in the western world and that would have been fine.
Of course it would still be false since as a smoker you have far more places that you are allowed to smoke than you are not allowed to smoke. As a non-smoker I am helpless when encountering a smoker walking down the street or outside my office building's door. I am willing to be that I am inconvienced more often by a smokers smoke than they are by a non-smoking area.
I would hope that the businesses are just calculating their prices based on their cost to provide the service plus whatever markup they feel the market will bear. It would be rather odd for them to base their prices on what other countries charge. Do you think that rent, employee wages, bandwidth, and other overhead costs are the same in Ghana as they are in the US?
Glad I checked back before I left. You finally got my point. There is no real evidence one way or the other. I have anecdotal bullshit studies and you have anecdotal bullshit studies. The difference is that I am not clinging to mine as an excuse for my belief structure.
I also never said that porn is healthy or good. I just don't think it is bad. Not everything is black or white.
Now I really am leaving. Great talking to you, though. You are definitely a worthy debate opponent which is something rare on Slashdot.
And to prove that there are two sides to every story. Here is one link with links to a bunch of studies that mostly go the other way:
Porn Studies
There is a lot of stuff there and I have to run (beautiful day for softball) otherwise I would have read through more of it.
Moral of the story. Believe what you want but don't say it is based on anything but your opinion.
I responded in said thread. Good hunting.
What's your point? Doctors get paid a boatload of money to help people. Does this make them any less valuable to society? I don't care what the intentions behind the pornographers are. That has nothing to do with my point.
I would also argue that there is no such thing as altruism. Everything we do has some self-serving aspect - even if it is just happiness at making somebody else's life better.
One at a time:
Pornographic Attitude in everyday life. - Anecdotal. Not a shred of science in there.
See the section on "Dehumanization of Women towrds the bottom - A link to links?
Edward Donnerstein, 1983 - I can't even think where to begin with this. Irresponsible bullshit. Saying that porn makes men want to rape women is so disgusting as to not need a response.
Men and porn - A blog? You linked to a blog?
The Surgeon Generals report on Pornography and Public Health - Ok. I read through as much of that as I could but I am guessing you didn't read much. There is not much in the way of concrete results in there. The only thing they concluded really is that you should teach young men to respect women and that helps counter any ill effects that may occur. I could have told you that.
Female Objects of Semantic Dehumanization and Violence - Has little to do with porn and more about the history of the dehumanization of women which was a lot worse BEFORE porn even existed. If anything this goes against your point.
Watchtower Destruction - Another blog.
Where is the scientific evidence? Keep trying.
I think perhaps you misunderstood my posts. I did not say that porn exists SOLELY to help people but that there is porn that is designed to help couples. Of course they were made to make money. Every self-help author out there writes to make money but that doesn't change that in some cases it does good.
I am not sure why making money off of helping somebody is necessarily bad. You don't have to start a not-for-profit foundation to help somebody.
I'm not trolling for arguments, but stating my own discoveries and representation of the facts.
But where are these so called facts? I have not seen anything from you that could be called more than opinion. The religious label comes becomes most non-religious adults realize the silliness of the attack on pornography. People get so worked up and yet there is no concrete evidence.
If you are not religious then what is it that led you to your opinion?
It is debatable whether the constitution covers it or not but it is pretty clear cut that America was founded on the idea that the government should not be a specific religion (as was the case in a lot of Europe at the time).
I also said you can't tell me what to believe. You can tell me what YOU believe but you can't force me to believe it.
Obviously I read your link. That is why I said there is not one scientific study. Your anecdotal "studies" by "doctors" are nothing more than bullshit. Perhaps you (and they) need a lesson on the scientific process. These studies use anecdotal evidence, back into conclusions, don't include control groups, don't do double-blind tests, and don't use significant sample sizes.
I am fine with your opinion of pornography so long as we agree the government shouldn't be used as a substitute for good parenting. I have no problem with you keeping porn from your children. Just don't tell me how to raise my kids. I'd rather discuss sexuality and porn with my children. It may be awkward but I believe it is better than just saying it is outright bad.
Prove it. Show me the unbiased scientific evidence. All you do is tow the typical religous fanatical line about pornography. You are just repeating what you heard your priest say a thousand times over. Break free dammit. People like you are tearing down this country.
There is not one scientific study that has ever shown the negative effect of pornography. That site doesn't understand the difference between correlation and causation. Even the first line exposes them for the frauds they are. To think that Ted Bundy was a serial killer because he liked porn is so disgusting to even assume that it amazes me that anybody would even approach it.
Your religous beliefs about pornography should have no place in deciding law. That is what this country is built on - separation of church and state. I won't tell you what to believe and you damn well better not tell me.
That is such a boldface bullshit lie that I can't even fathom why you would even say it. There are tons of adult films that are intended for couples and show to enrich a relationship through exploration and experimentation. To deny that is just ignorant and childish.
Are you an absolute asshole? Can you not read the timestamps on the posts? His reply about the DVD's was after I made my reply and I wasn't the only one who misunderstood what he said. He said Illegal porn. The most common type of illegal porn is child porn.
God damn that you posted as AC because I really would like to get an apology from you.
I actually say in one of my other posts that laws should not compensate for bad parenting. There is no doubt that parents need to discuss this stuff with their children and make their own decisions on what their children do or do not see.