"proposal has led to pornographers and religious groups finding themselves on the same side of an issue"
Finally religious porn. Its amusing and it teaches you good values. I'll leave the specifics up to your imagination.
Selex
Re:He might be on to something here
on
SCO Vs. Groklaw
·
· Score: 1
That can't be true. I saw his picture in PC Magazine last week, which is now sitting in the garbage because thats were the magazine belongs, but anyway how can you photograph someone that doesn't exist. PC Magazine reads can't be delusional about his existence, they can be delusional about how much computer knowledge they have.
This is how it is where I go to school. You don't quote the encyclopedia, but get a starting point from them. I remember doing a paper last semester, and I looked up two terms on Wikipedia. I knew the definitions of the terms were correct because I had basically heard the same thing in a prior class, but couldn't find my notes to quote the teacher for these terms. I cited the paraphrase in the citation page as Wikipedia, but put the citation at the bottom of the page not included in primary sources. The other ten sources were books, and no where close to Wikipedia, but I heard that some of the students used Wikipedia as a primary source, and got marked whole letter grades for it. Then we had a whole speech about how encyclopedias, ie Wikipedia, are not primary sources.
Oh come on, why don't you people stomp my only joy in life some more. It causes cancer, it smells, it yellows your teeth, it stunts your growth, it makes you sterile, it slaughters small puppies with a chainsaw...and now its radioactive. Son of a bitch! I'm about to start smoking crack...seems less harmful.
I am still trying to figure out why I should give a damn what Novell does? So Novell has this nice new agreement with Microsoft. Since I don't use Suse, Netware or anything Novell makes that I signed a legally binding agreement for I am not bound by anything Novell does. Novell's agreement can't trickle back the Linux programmers, because the programmers agreeed to the GPL, not the Novell agreement. If you do use something Novell has, then remove it, and keep your project moving without it. If Novell adds code to your project, and you are under the GPL, then they must agree to the GPL legally. If Microsoft wants to sue "commerical" opensource what was stopping them before this agreement? What stops them after this agreement? Its an agreement between Novell, who does not own a majority of GNU/Linux, and Microsoft, who does not own a majority of GNU/Linux. I didn't sign the agreement, none of the other open-source people signed the agreement, Novell signed the agreement. Let Novell agree to this, tell them to shove this software up their ass, and get another distro. Thats competition.
You are not legally bound by what Microsoft and Novell does.
I bought a pack and got a god damn crappy Golden Ticket!
It said:
1. If you are a fat kid, WoW probably are, I saw that South Park.
2. You have way too much time on your hands, probably since you're bitching about freebies.
3. You have no life, thats a given for WoW.
Then you can claim your special prize.
Damn you Willy Wonka chocolate isn't worth crap in WoW...oh wait it might be.
Futurologist? Does a accredited school, maybe those diploma mill universities might, offer a doctorate in that? They've been predicting androids, strong AI, smart computers, and a totalatarian superstate for years. Actually if memory serves me correctly I think I read a sci-fi story from the 50's (ie every damn one) that predicted this by 1999, and 7 years later I'm still waiting to live on the damn moon. I'm starting to think Back to the Future II lied to me, but we got 9 years to go for that. The future does not unfold the exact way anyone predicts. So you get these guys who claim to know exactly where we are going, they throw in a few buzz words, show their credidentials and claim they know everything just to get some exposure in a magazine. As your view progresses along a straight line you lose focus on the horizon, because everything mixes together.
Predictions for two years from now I can see. The companies are developing them right now, and so you have evidence and fact they exist. 10? 20? I don't even think the Japanese are developing anything with that far of a development cycle (crap buzz word!).
An example is the video phone. Everyone predicted and thought we'd have them by now, and we do, but they suck. If they were marketable then we'd have them in every Best Buy and Walmart, but I still see the normal phones sitting there. So where does that leave us? We don't know what is in store for us 10 years from now, I'm going to hurt our Cylon masters when they come (if its the 1978 version I think I'll laugh my ass off, if its the 2005 model, I'm going to need a bigger gun).
Selex, my prediction, everyone reading this in 2000 years will be decomposed and dead.
I had Verizon for years, but I pretty much had to have them. There are 2 local cable companies in my area, but neither had 2-way cable going to my house. So it was get the phone and the cable service, or just get DSL from Verizon who already supplied my phoneline. Now there are numerous other ISP with DSL, but you need to get a Verizon line, because they are all subcontracted for the fibers. So I told everyone to just forget the alternative and just go with Verizon. You only had to call Verizon, not the Cable company and then Verizon. It ended up being cheaper anyhow. Then the cable companies got moving (and so did I), and now I have 2-way cable and no phone. Its more then Verizon DSL, but now Verizon doesn't offer DSL in my area. I don't have the outages I used to have with DSL, and the cable company is there that day to fix the line if there is a problem. The cable company is one of the oldest anywhere, but its small and has good customer service.
So what has been bothering me about this whole thing? I want the service, and I don't care what the infrastructure looks like. I want to connect to the internet really fast. So I don't care if its DSL or Cable. I always thought there was a better way to deal with the infrastructure, but all I could ever come up with was government run telecommunication lines, kind of like the national roadways. A system not owned by a company, and one which any service provider could use. The problem being this smacks of communism/socialism, and even beyond the political ideals we all know what the roadways look like. I don't know what a pothole looks like on the internet, but its probably got Paris Hilton in it. The government, without another competitor, will probably take forever to fix the problems, and never completely fix it right which returns me to the previous problem.
So what are we left with? I guess I'll stick with my 2-way cable until something better comes along, because at least its better then dial-up. One day everything will be wireless and million little bits will be whizzing by my head, and give me a tumor.
First of all please never refer to my spin as Fox-style...its more Colbert Report style, still working on the Daily Show style.
Secondly, the time table doesn't matter. Research breakthrough A was discovered by experiment B, which used an animal. So if you're against experiment B because it used an animal in the experiment then breakthrough A is not valid according to your own code of ethics. Just because it was discovered 20-30 years ago doesn't make a difference. An animal was still used to extend your life. So if hypothetically insulin had not been discovered 20-30 years ago, but was found tomorrow would the PETA person still use it even though animals were used? My guess would be yes, because they have the same self-preservation instincts that every animal has, and their rational would be that they need to take the insulin now to help animals in the future. So your life is more important then the people who you harass and hurt, because you're not willing to be a martyr for your cause, but will to kill others for it. Thats just selfishness.
So at some point there should have been something that clicked, call it logic, call it something else that says "well not all animal testing is bad, and some of it might be benefical to the world." Yes I agree that some forms of testing are immoral, like make-up on the rabbits, but not all of it is bad. Much of it helps.
As was pointed out on Penn and Teller's Bullshit! the CEO, director, whatever you want to call this person of PETA is diabetic. So she needs insulin to live. Well insulin was tested on animals, and certain strains are made by animals. So for her to live she must abuse animals. Now the point being natural selection should have kicked in here at some point, and well taken care of her, but because humans use research on animals to help humans AND animals (the vet didn't learn how to take care of cats and dogs by magic) with sickness, this person lives to make her wacko friends blown crap up.
Also pointed out was that PETA spent some money on a large freezer. This freezer was used for cadavers, animal cadavers, because they end up euthanizing animals they take in but cannot find homes for, ie what the Human Society has do sometimes. Check out the episode, its on 2nd season I believe which is out on DVD.
So the moral of this story is that, fine have ideals, have crazy ideals no normal person would find moral, but don't be a hypocrit...makes you look like an asshole.
So we're taking a subjective idea (violence) and trying to quantify it using objective data (a percentage). Pac-man eats little bits of white dots, (could be food, could be babies), and defends himself from ghosts (probably don't exist). What I remember learning from Pac-man was that in order to survive you needed to eat. Then there were these ghosts trying to kill me (could be white people). Then by either fate or determination you can turn the fight back on the "ghosts" and take them out, because they are trying to exterminate you. So the true lesson I should be learning, according to PhDs, is that when "ghosts" come after you, you roll over and let them gut you, because survival is violence.
Pac-man doesn't teach crap. Its a game to waste twenty minutes of your life. It means nothing else. I'm not slaughtering people in the name of Pac-man. I'm not even thinking about it. Though I do want to run people down in the future in the name of F-zero. Also destroy large stacks of blocks in the name of Tetris.
I think I'm going to sue God or Nature (which ever one is in control, I'll cover the bases) for inventing the brain. Right now you are reading this message, the message is being copied onto your eyes through lens, being processed (copied again), and then being stored in your brain. If I were to copyright this message then everyone reading this would be in violation of the Induce Act. Then if you went and told someone else about this message you'd be infringing on my copyright, by copying it and then editing it, because I doubt you're going to recite this message verbatim. Your brain makes it possible to steal.
Once again stupidity taken to the extreme is dangerous, and we are all aware of how stupid the RIAA is.
I say we reelect Teddy. It doesn't say anything in the Constitution about electing dead people, so lets go for it. We have to bring him up to snuff about computers, but we'll send him after Exxon/Mobil first (a refresher course). He'll get his feet wet, but I think he'll grasp the idea of how much corporation suck.
Slashdot Mirror
Finally religious porn. Its amusing and it teaches you good values. I'll leave the specifics up to your imagination.
Selex
That can't be true. I saw his picture in PC Magazine last week, which is now sitting in the garbage because thats were the magazine belongs, but anyway how can you photograph someone that doesn't exist. PC Magazine reads can't be delusional about his existence, they can be delusional about how much computer knowledge they have.
Selex
This is how it is where I go to school. You don't quote the encyclopedia, but get a starting point from them. I remember doing a paper last semester, and I looked up two terms on Wikipedia. I knew the definitions of the terms were correct because I had basically heard the same thing in a prior class, but couldn't find my notes to quote the teacher for these terms. I cited the paraphrase in the citation page as Wikipedia, but put the citation at the bottom of the page not included in primary sources. The other ten sources were books, and no where close to Wikipedia, but I heard that some of the students used Wikipedia as a primary source, and got marked whole letter grades for it. Then we had a whole speech about how encyclopedias, ie Wikipedia, are not primary sources.
Selex
Oh come on, why don't you people stomp my only joy in life some more. It causes cancer, it smells, it yellows your teeth, it stunts your growth, it makes you sterile, it slaughters small puppies with a chainsaw...and now its radioactive. Son of a bitch! I'm about to start smoking crack...seems less harmful.
Selex
Does the United Nuclear's webpage sell that too?
I am still trying to figure out why I should give a damn what Novell does? So Novell has this nice new agreement with Microsoft. Since I don't use Suse, Netware or anything Novell makes that I signed a legally binding agreement for I am not bound by anything Novell does. Novell's agreement can't trickle back the Linux programmers, because the programmers agreeed to the GPL, not the Novell agreement. If you do use something Novell has, then remove it, and keep your project moving without it. If Novell adds code to your project, and you are under the GPL, then they must agree to the GPL legally. If Microsoft wants to sue "commerical" opensource what was stopping them before this agreement? What stops them after this agreement? Its an agreement between Novell, who does not own a majority of GNU/Linux, and Microsoft, who does not own a majority of GNU/Linux. I didn't sign the agreement, none of the other open-source people signed the agreement, Novell signed the agreement. Let Novell agree to this, tell them to shove this software up their ass, and get another distro. Thats competition.
You are not legally bound by what Microsoft and Novell does.
Selex
I bought a pack and got a god damn crappy Golden Ticket!
It said:
1. If you are a fat kid, WoW probably are, I saw that South Park.
2. You have way too much time on your hands, probably since you're bitching about freebies.
3. You have no life, thats a given for WoW.
Then you can claim your special prize.
Damn you Willy Wonka chocolate isn't worth crap in WoW...oh wait it might be.
Selex
Futurologist? Does a accredited school, maybe those diploma mill universities might, offer a doctorate in that? They've been predicting androids, strong AI, smart computers, and a totalatarian superstate for years. Actually if memory serves me correctly I think I read a sci-fi story from the 50's (ie every damn one) that predicted this by 1999, and 7 years later I'm still waiting to live on the damn moon. I'm starting to think Back to the Future II lied to me, but we got 9 years to go for that. The future does not unfold the exact way anyone predicts. So you get these guys who claim to know exactly where we are going, they throw in a few buzz words, show their credidentials and claim they know everything just to get some exposure in a magazine. As your view progresses along a straight line you lose focus on the horizon, because everything mixes together.
Predictions for two years from now I can see. The companies are developing them right now, and so you have evidence and fact they exist. 10? 20? I don't even think the Japanese are developing anything with that far of a development cycle (crap buzz word!).
An example is the video phone. Everyone predicted and thought we'd have them by now, and we do, but they suck. If they were marketable then we'd have them in every Best Buy and Walmart, but I still see the normal phones sitting there. So where does that leave us? We don't know what is in store for us 10 years from now, I'm going to hurt our Cylon masters when they come (if its the 1978 version I think I'll laugh my ass off, if its the 2005 model, I'm going to need a bigger gun).
Selex, my prediction, everyone reading this in 2000 years will be decomposed and dead.
Patent #56010201920191 pending on this new revolutionary idea under the general patent idea of annoying the customer even more.
Selex
I had Verizon for years, but I pretty much had to have them. There are 2 local cable companies in my area, but neither had 2-way cable going to my house. So it was get the phone and the cable service, or just get DSL from Verizon who already supplied my phoneline. Now there are numerous other ISP with DSL, but you need to get a Verizon line, because they are all subcontracted for the fibers. So I told everyone to just forget the alternative and just go with Verizon. You only had to call Verizon, not the Cable company and then Verizon. It ended up being cheaper anyhow. Then the cable companies got moving (and so did I), and now I have 2-way cable and no phone. Its more then Verizon DSL, but now Verizon doesn't offer DSL in my area. I don't have the outages I used to have with DSL, and the cable company is there that day to fix the line if there is a problem. The cable company is one of the oldest anywhere, but its small and has good customer service.
So what has been bothering me about this whole thing? I want the service, and I don't care what the infrastructure looks like. I want to connect to the internet really fast. So I don't care if its DSL or Cable. I always thought there was a better way to deal with the infrastructure, but all I could ever come up with was government run telecommunication lines, kind of like the national roadways. A system not owned by a company, and one which any service provider could use. The problem being this smacks of communism/socialism, and even beyond the political ideals we all know what the roadways look like. I don't know what a pothole looks like on the internet, but its probably got Paris Hilton in it. The government, without another competitor, will probably take forever to fix the problems, and never completely fix it right which returns me to the previous problem.
So what are we left with? I guess I'll stick with my 2-way cable until something better comes along, because at least its better then dial-up. One day everything will be wireless and million little bits will be whizzing by my head, and give me a tumor.
Selex
First of all please never refer to my spin as Fox-style...its more Colbert Report style, still working on the Daily Show style.
Secondly, the time table doesn't matter. Research breakthrough A was discovered by experiment B, which used an animal. So if you're against experiment B because it used an animal in the experiment then breakthrough A is not valid according to your own code of ethics. Just because it was discovered 20-30 years ago doesn't make a difference. An animal was still used to extend your life. So if hypothetically insulin had not been discovered 20-30 years ago, but was found tomorrow would the PETA person still use it even though animals were used? My guess would be yes, because they have the same self-preservation instincts that every animal has, and their rational would be that they need to take the insulin now to help animals in the future. So your life is more important then the people who you harass and hurt, because you're not willing to be a martyr for your cause, but will to kill others for it. Thats just selfishness.
So at some point there should have been something that clicked, call it logic, call it something else that says "well not all animal testing is bad, and some of it might be benefical to the world." Yes I agree that some forms of testing are immoral, like make-up on the rabbits, but not all of it is bad. Much of it helps.
Selex
As was pointed out on Penn and Teller's Bullshit! the CEO, director, whatever you want to call this person of PETA is diabetic. So she needs insulin to live. Well insulin was tested on animals, and certain strains are made by animals. So for her to live she must abuse animals. Now the point being natural selection should have kicked in here at some point, and well taken care of her, but because humans use research on animals to help humans AND animals (the vet didn't learn how to take care of cats and dogs by magic) with sickness, this person lives to make her wacko friends blown crap up.
Also pointed out was that PETA spent some money on a large freezer. This freezer was used for cadavers, animal cadavers, because they end up euthanizing animals they take in but cannot find homes for, ie what the Human Society has do sometimes. Check out the episode, its on 2nd season I believe which is out on DVD.
So the moral of this story is that, fine have ideals, have crazy ideals no normal person would find moral, but don't be a hypocrit...makes you look like an asshole.
Selex
So we're taking a subjective idea (violence) and trying to quantify it using objective data (a percentage). Pac-man eats little bits of white dots, (could be food, could be babies), and defends himself from ghosts (probably don't exist). What I remember learning from Pac-man was that in order to survive you needed to eat. Then there were these ghosts trying to kill me (could be white people). Then by either fate or determination you can turn the fight back on the "ghosts" and take them out, because they are trying to exterminate you. So the true lesson I should be learning, according to PhDs, is that when "ghosts" come after you, you roll over and let them gut you, because survival is violence.
Pac-man doesn't teach crap. Its a game to waste twenty minutes of your life. It means nothing else. I'm not slaughtering people in the name of Pac-man. I'm not even thinking about it. Though I do want to run people down in the future in the name of F-zero. Also destroy large stacks of blocks in the name of Tetris.
Selex
It doesn't matter who says it, its what you say.
I think I'm going to sue God or Nature (which ever one is in control, I'll cover the bases) for inventing the brain. Right now you are reading this message, the message is being copied onto your eyes through lens, being processed (copied again), and then being stored in your brain. If I were to copyright this message then everyone reading this would be in violation of the Induce Act. Then if you went and told someone else about this message you'd be infringing on my copyright, by copying it and then editing it, because I doubt you're going to recite this message verbatim. Your brain makes it possible to steal.
Once again stupidity taken to the extreme is dangerous, and we are all aware of how stupid the RIAA is.
I say we reelect Teddy. It doesn't say anything in the Constitution about electing dead people, so lets go for it. We have to bring him up to snuff about computers, but we'll send him after Exxon/Mobil first (a refresher course). He'll get his feet wet, but I think he'll grasp the idea of how much corporation suck.