Everyone has different reasons for divorce, but the moral of this story is simple - don't make a commitment you can't keep, and don't simply give up when things get difficult.
And realize that people can change over time, and "forever" isn't always a realistic option. Life really isn't that simple.
I was a kid once; I liked Disney, as did my sisters. Somehow my parents managed to not spend money on Disney crap for us -- of course, they also didn't just put a tape in the VCR and expect the TV to babysit us. We all survived, somehow.
Believe it or not, you can say "no" to kids. In fact, it's good for them sometimes.
Well according to my democratic acquaintances, money is not fairly distributed and needs to be taken from those who have too much regardless of how hard they work for it and given to those who have none regardless of how little they work for it.
Bull. Fucking. Shit. You haven't heard that. Ever. That's just your absolutely pathetic understanding of the "progressive" agenda.
It's probably not your fault though -- smart people with a lot of money have been painting progressives with that brush for a long time, and a lot of dupes have fallen for it.
if it were allowed to print Tolkien-related products with impunity, could do the Tolkien estate a lot more damage than one guy with some buttons ever could
Yeah -- the estate doesn't want there to be confusion with its exciting line of J.R.R. Tolkien action figures, or to cut in on its lucrative Tolkien-related apparel lines.
The reason that film boards try to attract movies is to get a piece of the economic activity that their production creates. You spend a few hundred grand (or whatever) to get a movie to shoot in your locale, and the movie crew end up spending a million or two in the local economy, you come out ahead: it's an investment. In many cases, the location is irrelevant to the movie: in fact, many times, the story may be set in a completely different place.
And the reason why you're also wrong about concert ticket/DVD sales: when you buy the concert ticket, you are paying to attend the concert and hear the band. Exactly as someone would expect. The fact that they then sell a DVD made from that performance has nothing to do with it. Now, if, on the other hand, you buy a concert ticket to go see your favorite band, and every few minutes someone walks across the stage with a giant APPLE or PEPSI advertisement, obscuring your view and distracting from the music, and between songs the band members take out their iPhones to make calls, then someone would definitely have a legitimate complaint about that.
Advertising apologists just don't make any sense to me. I'm guessing it's something like what abused spouses feel toward their abusers.
Also you know they might be a little more creative and artistic, might be a little more affluent, they might know what they like. Also you know they might have an iphone.
All money was created out of thin air. (well, out of a cotton/paper pulp, ink, and some printing presses, but I digress)
All money is only worth what other people are willing to give you in exchange for it. All gold is only worth what other people are willing to give you in exchange for it. What's the difference? With gold-backed currency, people are trading pieces of paper that they believe might be able to get them some amount of gold to other people who value the piece of paper that may be worth some small amount of gold, for some good or service that they believe is worth less (to themselves) than that amount of gold.
With fiat currency, all you do is take the 'gold' out of the equation; functionally, there's no other difference.
The set of people with IQ greater than 100 is 50% of the population by definition. When qualified by "average education", the set drops to less than 50%. But the structure of your sentence implies they hold a majority opinion.
That sounds like something that someone with an IQ less than or equal to 100 and/or a below-average education might might say.
You think Area 51 is better than Call of Duty: Black Ops???
What's funny is that you bring up how games are better than ever, and bring up CoD: Black Ops as an example.
It's a fucking FPS. We've been playing them in various forms for nearly 20 years now, with very few changes. Games are, largely, better now than they were during the arcades' heyday, but it's not because of yet-another-FPS.
I don't think I've ever had a single piece of malware, rootkit, or nastygram come from the App Store.
I would hope not -- isn't that basically the entire point of having a walled-garden approach to the app store? Apple personally vets each application -- if they let something like that slip through it would be a huge black mark on their "verification" process.
Also, I've never had a single piece of malware, rootkit, or nastygram come from the Android Marketplace either. Are they out there? Probably. Am I stupid enough to install a ringtone set that requires full internet permissions and the ability to read information off the phone? Haven't been fooled so far.
You're equating breaking into someone else's computer system or network with breaking into your own purchased hardware to get it to do what you want it to do?
1) "I have no attention span; I need flashes of light and loud noises to enjoy a movie" 2) "I can't follow a story more complex than 'good guy vs. bad guy' or 'guy wants to fuck/date/marry girl'" 3) "Nuance is lost on me. Even when I have characters that are textured enough to sleep with someone who attempted to rape them, I still can't see anything interesting in them." 4) see 1 5) "In a 2 hour movie, I focused on maybe 5 minutes of narration"
Please, give us more details on why you don't like this movie.
Also, what do you recommend? The "Ow My Balls" channel?
Oh, I see in addition to your mischaracterization of a "typical liberal," you also don't understand the difference between "fear" and "outrage".
Nobody's fucking afraid of any of that shit you just listed. Nobody's stocking up on guns because of a Prius waiting list. The closest-to-fear-inciting thing you list is AGW, which isn't so much of an "oh my god we're scared of this" as it is "hey, we should really do something about this while we can."
You aren't insightful. You don't have a single clue about what liberals think.
Yeah, and here's the difference between the things you listed and the things we have "thoroughly figured out" like evolution and climate change:
The idea that the sun revolved around the Earth was due to ignorance; there weren't people dedicating their lives to the study of geocentricity. Likewise, the reason we didn't know of the existence of relativistic effects was because nobody had discovered them.
Evolution and global climate change have both been studied and shaped into what they are today by lifetimes of research. They didn't just come into general belief because we didn't know any better: they became accepted because they have mountains of evidence supporting them. There were no mountains of evidence saying that relativistic effects *didn't* exist, or that geocentricity was correct.
Also, the only way creationism doesn't sound stupid is if it's presented as an origin-of-the-universe myth.
Maybe we wouldn't have such a shortage of scientists if we spent more effort producing scientists (or at least an educated public) instead of... well, whatever it is that passes for "education" that we have now.
It's a fucking waste of money to try to harden systems that won't ever be effective. Us "bleeding hearts" are generally just looking at the situation and calling a spade a spade, saying "well this clearly isn't working, why are we throwing good money after bad?"
Your "solution" doesn't really have anything to do with prisons, and on top of that it's a perfect illustration of what doesn't work: to always, without fail, catch the first guy to use the safety lane, we'd have to spend an inordinate amount of resources monitoring and patrolling every safety lane ensuring that people always got caught. At some point, you have to look at the "cost" of a crime and see if it outweighs the cost of trying to prevent the crime. If you can't come out ahead, or at least break even, you're probably better off just learning to deal with a little crime.
Retailers have it figured out: they all expect certain amounts of shoplifting will happen, deal with it, and budget for it accordingly. They *don't* put armed guards at every door and require everyone to subject to a strip search before they leave the building -- it would probably be 100% effective at stopping shoplifting, but the cost is obviously going to hugely outweigh the benefits.
I agree with you 100%, but it's a tough battle since it's apparently legal to enslave the imprisoned, and defending rights of prisoners isn't exactly a popular political move.
Not disagreeing, but it's another Larry Flynt argument: protect the prisoners, because if the laws can protect prisoners, you know they will protect everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
"The bad guys"
Someone's sense of right and wrong clearly hasn't passed 1st grade levels yet.
--Jeremy
And realize that people can change over time, and "forever" isn't always a realistic option. Life really isn't that simple.
--Jeremy
I was a kid once; I liked Disney, as did my sisters. Somehow my parents managed to not spend money on Disney crap for us -- of course, they also didn't just put a tape in the VCR and expect the TV to babysit us. We all survived, somehow.
Believe it or not, you can say "no" to kids. In fact, it's good for them sometimes.
--Jeremy
You're missing the point. Spun generally isn't someone who I'd classify as "tremendously out of touch" with reality.
--Jeremy
Bull. Fucking. Shit. You haven't heard that. Ever. That's just your absolutely pathetic understanding of the "progressive" agenda.
It's probably not your fault though -- smart people with a lot of money have been painting progressives with that brush for a long time, and a lot of dupes have fallen for it.
--Jeremy
Yeah -- the estate doesn't want there to be confusion with its exciting line of J.R.R. Tolkien action figures, or to cut in on its lucrative Tolkien-related apparel lines.
--Jeremy
The reason that film boards try to attract movies is to get a piece of the economic activity that their production creates. You spend a few hundred grand (or whatever) to get a movie to shoot in your locale, and the movie crew end up spending a million or two in the local economy, you come out ahead: it's an investment. In many cases, the location is irrelevant to the movie: in fact, many times, the story may be set in a completely different place.
And the reason why you're also wrong about concert ticket/DVD sales: when you buy the concert ticket, you are paying to attend the concert and hear the band. Exactly as someone would expect. The fact that they then sell a DVD made from that performance has nothing to do with it. Now, if, on the other hand, you buy a concert ticket to go see your favorite band, and every few minutes someone walks across the stage with a giant APPLE or PEPSI advertisement, obscuring your view and distracting from the music, and between songs the band members take out their iPhones to make calls, then someone would definitely have a legitimate complaint about that.
Advertising apologists just don't make any sense to me. I'm guessing it's something like what abused spouses feel toward their abusers.
--Jeremy
Looks like Apple's advertising is working.
--Jeremy
Pssst...
All money was created out of thin air. (well, out of a cotton/paper pulp, ink, and some printing presses, but I digress)
All money is only worth what other people are willing to give you in exchange for it. All gold is only worth what other people are willing to give you in exchange for it. What's the difference? With gold-backed currency, people are trading pieces of paper that they believe might be able to get them some amount of gold to other people who value the piece of paper that may be worth some small amount of gold, for some good or service that they believe is worth less (to themselves) than that amount of gold.
With fiat currency, all you do is take the 'gold' out of the equation; functionally, there's no other difference.
--Jeremy
That sounds like something that someone with an IQ less than or equal to 100 and/or a below-average education might might say.
--Jeremy
What's funny is that you bring up how games are better than ever, and bring up CoD: Black Ops as an example.
It's a fucking FPS. We've been playing them in various forms for nearly 20 years now, with very few changes. Games are, largely, better now than they were during the arcades' heyday, but it's not because of yet-another-FPS.
--Jeremy
I would hope not -- isn't that basically the entire point of having a walled-garden approach to the app store? Apple personally vets each application -- if they let something like that slip through it would be a huge black mark on their "verification" process.
Also, I've never had a single piece of malware, rootkit, or nastygram come from the Android Marketplace either. Are they out there? Probably. Am I stupid enough to install a ringtone set that requires full internet permissions and the ability to read information off the phone? Haven't been fooled so far.
--Jeremy
I'll refrain from ad hominems here.
You're equating breaking into someone else's computer system or network with breaking into your own purchased hardware to get it to do what you want it to do?
I really don't understand you Sony apologists.
--Jeremy
Translation:
1) "I have no attention span; I need flashes of light and loud noises to enjoy a movie"
2) "I can't follow a story more complex than 'good guy vs. bad guy' or 'guy wants to fuck/date/marry girl'"
3) "Nuance is lost on me. Even when I have characters that are textured enough to sleep with someone who attempted to rape them, I still can't see anything interesting in them."
4) see 1
5) "In a 2 hour movie, I focused on maybe 5 minutes of narration"
Please, give us more details on why you don't like this movie.
Also, what do you recommend? The "Ow My Balls" channel?
--Jeremy
Citation needed. Seriously. Proof or STFU.
--Jeremy
Oh, I see in addition to your mischaracterization of a "typical liberal," you also don't understand the difference between "fear" and "outrage".
Nobody's fucking afraid of any of that shit you just listed. Nobody's stocking up on guns because of a Prius waiting list. The closest-to-fear-inciting thing you list is AGW, which isn't so much of an "oh my god we're scared of this" as it is "hey, we should really do something about this while we can."
You aren't insightful. You don't have a single clue about what liberals think.
--Jeremy
None of those places are bastions of *any* political thought.
I'm sure it makes you feel better to think that all those worthless human leeches all vote in the opposite way that you do though.
Also, good job throwing in a good "the educated aren't really educated" rationalization as well.
--Jeremy
Or, if you *really* want fine control over what your system runs at startup, use Autoruns. Free from technet. It's what msconfig should have been.
--Jeremy
Hmm, interesting. So that's what happens in China and other over-seas schools?
Where, exactly, are you from? Do they speak English there?
--Jeremy
Yeah, and here's the difference between the things you listed and the things we have "thoroughly figured out" like evolution and climate change:
The idea that the sun revolved around the Earth was due to ignorance; there weren't people dedicating their lives to the study of geocentricity. Likewise, the reason we didn't know of the existence of relativistic effects was because nobody had discovered them.
Evolution and global climate change have both been studied and shaped into what they are today by lifetimes of research. They didn't just come into general belief because we didn't know any better: they became accepted because they have mountains of evidence supporting them. There were no mountains of evidence saying that relativistic effects *didn't* exist, or that geocentricity was correct.
Also, the only way creationism doesn't sound stupid is if it's presented as an origin-of-the-universe myth.
--Jeremy
That's why most of us stay away from you.
--Jeremy
Maybe we wouldn't have such a shortage of scientists if we spent more effort producing scientists (or at least an educated public) instead of ... well, whatever it is that passes for "education" that we have now.
--Jeremy
"I don't know how he got my SIM. He must have stolen my phone and replaced it without my knowledge."
--Jeremy
Who's talking bleeding hearts here?
It's a fucking waste of money to try to harden systems that won't ever be effective. Us "bleeding hearts" are generally just looking at the situation and calling a spade a spade, saying "well this clearly isn't working, why are we throwing good money after bad?"
Your "solution" doesn't really have anything to do with prisons, and on top of that it's a perfect illustration of what doesn't work: to always, without fail, catch the first guy to use the safety lane, we'd have to spend an inordinate amount of resources monitoring and patrolling every safety lane ensuring that people always got caught. At some point, you have to look at the "cost" of a crime and see if it outweighs the cost of trying to prevent the crime. If you can't come out ahead, or at least break even, you're probably better off just learning to deal with a little crime.
Retailers have it figured out: they all expect certain amounts of shoplifting will happen, deal with it, and budget for it accordingly. They *don't* put armed guards at every door and require everyone to subject to a strip search before they leave the building -- it would probably be 100% effective at stopping shoplifting, but the cost is obviously going to hugely outweigh the benefits.
--Jeremy
Not disagreeing, but it's another Larry Flynt argument: protect the prisoners, because if the laws can protect prisoners, you know they will protect everyone.
--Jeremy