Well, there basically never was a communist state in human history. Because, as far as I remember, a real communist state has no government, but is governed from the bottom up. Those government in those states are supposed to be temporary, to implement the changes, and then dissolve themselves. Yeah, that never happens.;)
The thing is, that the communist idea, in theory is really nice. Just as democracy. The problem is, that both ideas are based on faulty theory. The communist one even more than the democracy one. The error is, that they assume there would be such a thing as 100% altruistic people who could ignore their own interests in favor of the general public. To put them in charge. Basically as a medium. A channel for the interests of the people.
Of course that is just a pretty dream, as there is no such thing in reality. The whole evolution is the exact opposite of this. Any organism of that kind would die out in the blink of an eye. To be replaced by something that only cares for itself. But the idea stems from the fact, that we as humans, are really great at teamwork. We are the only ones who have a “society” which is basically a huge team, working together. The thing is though: While for most of the time that humans existed, we were small groups of 20-30 people, we now are huge teams. Way too huge. Our common good has taken a back seat, and we focus more on personal gain.
I think, a nice model is the Arabic philosophy of “me and you, against the town. me, you and the town, against the [county]. me, you, the town and the [county] against the country.... etc” Basically a fractal model of priority. That way you can still profit from team work, and only look at the large groups if needed. You don’t become egocentric that easily. But I’m digressing.
What we need is small groups. Where you can’t survive if you act egocentric and try to become a dictator. Where the group can easily personally come up to you, and throw you out. Where the personal gain IS the gain of your group. Like a large family basically. Protecting your genes. Ever if you die, you will then live on. But also on that new level of ideas/mindsets. (You may be aware of the concept that one can look at those like lifeforms, and that the models then strangely still fit.) Small communities (and/or fractal ones) on the Internet, protecting your mindset/ideas, so they will live on.
In my opinion, our current forms of society don’t really work for that exact reason. A leader wants to have a personal (or small group) gain. It’s in his genes because of billions of years of evolution enforcing it. It’s only natural. So naturally, he always and without exception will have huge conflict with the interests of people that elected him. This is unavoidable.
But I still don’t know how this knowledge helps me, live in a society where my interests and that of my group don’t conflict. Other than starting a family and emigrating to the wilderness;)
How did you come up with the idea, that they are mutually exclusive?
By the way: You know that Bin Laden was a CIA agent, right? You know that the weapons they use, were paid for by the US military. (I know this from first-hand sources, since I have a photo of my father, with a US rocket launcher, trying to free his country from the Russian invasion. [Unfortunately, I have no contact with him anymore. Thanks for making the cold war hot in our country. {I don’t blame the people, I blame a part of some governments. And all terrorists can fuck right off too. ^^}:/])
I abstain from asking we we just can’t be friends and kick all our government’s asses”, because as George Carlin stated, those people usually get shot by an assassin. (Like Kennedy, Ghandi, etc. [By the way, a group that I don’t deserve to be in.]);)
You seem to have a quite simplistic view of religion. Religious beliefs arose out of one of the characteristics that makes us human - our seemingly innate desire to ask questions about reality and know chains of cause-and-effect.
No. I just had to simplify it for the comment. Else I could write a whole book about the topic.:)
I completely agree about the desire to ask questions. Even questions that “can’t be asked”. That’s our ultimate power and possibly the single most important thing we have. Interestingly, I tried to think this to the end (, like I always do). And it results in this: Our whole world is a endless graph of cause-and-effect relationships. We can measure the “now”. And know past states. But we can only go back so far. We now are at the big bang. But that does not stop us from asking what the big bang came from?. And it’s of course a valid question. Just as asking questions about everything that we do not understand, is a valid question. And we make up for the gaps in knowledge about recent events, by guessing, and creating rules of nature where everything fits in. That’s how far we came, nowadays. And as you said, we weren’t that lucky in earlier days. Yes the question of the ultimate cause, remains.
That is what the idea of a “god” was created for. It’s a ultimate source of everything. Its problem is, that it does not actually fix anything, because you can still ask, where god came from, and where he exists in. That’s why it is “forbidden” to ask that question. It’s basically willful ignorance, to be able to cope with that question, that would otherwise have the power to drive us crazy. This big importance of that question actually shows a very high intelligence.
We scientist are not better off. Because we’re not better at it. Because we also don’t know the ultimate cause. And just as much can’t handle that gap. Our minds are wired in a way, that if our model is not consistent, everything breaks down. (That’s those people you see in mental homes, who basically became vegetables, or zombies.) We scientists just usually choose, just not to think about it at all. It’s also ignorance by choice. Protective ignorance.
But let’s move on to why I did not say that this all was a bad thing:
Do you suppose this approach would work at say, the Harvard Divinity School? Do you feel that all religious people are a priori ignorant bumpkins, simply waiting for you to bring the blinding light of reason to raise them up?
No, no, no. It seems I did not work hard enough to make it clear, that I do not nee religious people as worse humans anymore! I’m really sorry for not making that clear enough.
Also, I noticed that many people think one means “batshit insane drooling retard, and all around lower-value human” when they hear the word “schizophrenia”. But In fact, there is a stepless gradient between normal workarounds of the internal model and full-scale schizophrenia-based insanity. And religion is just a sliight bit over the normal amount. Where it starts to be generally rather bad. But normally far from completely living in your own crazy reality.:)
I do not want anyone to “see the light”. In fact, my philosophy is not that of devoting my life to the advantage of others. And I don’t care much what others think of me and my ideas. But I can’t stand there and ignore people being in pain or desperate situations. Things where you know, that you happen to know a simple and elegant solution that could make their whole life so much better. Because I was in that very situation so often, and wished someone would come and be there for me for once. I would have been very thankful and given so much more back... I don’t expect anything. But it doesn’t hurt
Yes, but that is incredibly fucked up. Because there is no reason at all for this. And nobody has the right to tell another human to do with his body what he wants. But nobody of the retards ever even questions this? You know why?
Because there actually is a reason: The egocentric assholes who are so extremely dickish, that they won’t even let another human die, because that would prevent them from profiting from him anymore! And that’s the only real reason it’s illegal! Insurance companies, “family” (read “parasites), tax authorities, etc. They all want to continue bleeding you dry, and would go as far as trying to override the most basic of all human rights ever on this whole planet: The right to do with your own body what you want.
Oh, and it’s a totally pointless law anyway. Because what do you wanna do when someone did it? Punish him? LOL. By death? LOL. Ridiculous.
And if it’s one of those cries for help, where one does not intent to really kill oneself, then what is needed is that HELP. Not some lawsuit/punishment that will make him try it again. This time properly, and without telling anyone!
Dumb, dumb, dumb. And one of the dickishest dick rules ever.
Exactly. I was once dragged out of a club by two giant bouncers, fully patted down and insulted by seven cops, because some new idiot bouncer who was a colleague of a bouncer friend of mine saw us exchange little pieces of paper (drink coupons) which he thought were drugs!
One cop even, after he told be to turn my back pockets inside-out (not possible with jeans), himself grabbed in there, and came out with a small bag of drugs! The pockets were empty when I had the hands inside, about 5 seconds earlier!! So he must have had it in his hand when doing this!!
If it weren’t for all the bouncers being embarrassed because of their colleague fucking up, them being my friends, and them getting very angry because of this obvious dick move of that cop, basically chasing them out of the venue, I would perhaps now sit in jail for dealing drugs and/or have my life ruined!
Needless to say, the bouncers were not very friendly to that new guy afterwards.;)
We later got a official, written excuse from the police headquarter. It was the Cologne police by the way. (Yeah Google, index this!) Cops here basically behave like criminals with a badge (except from some lone exceptions). I would not be surprised, if their reason for the theater was, that they smelled a competition to them controlling the drug market...
Protip: If someone creates a convoluted rule system, and you’re then buying into his rule system, and try to argue on the definition of those rules, you have already lost before you started.
The better way is, to not buy into their crapola in the first place, but have your own set of values that you are secure in. Then you can let them play in your reality, instead of you entering theirs.:)
And Haskell code tells you what. The compiler figures out the how.
Now all we need is a compiler that takes a motivation (the why) and automatically figures out the what and how.:) Is there such a thing, by any chance?
Yeah, try finding a Mac user who ever looked behind the shiny surface of his protective retard padded system enough, to even remotely understand what that article means.;))
Oh boy... prepare the fanboi pink dabber bombardement storm... ^^ *prepares heavy vulkan gatling gun*
It has nothing to do with “beliefs” that’s a straw-man word. Religion is a mild schizophrenia. A disease where people don’t use the outside world as a reference for their internal model of it, but a made-up internal model. E.g. “God wants it to be that way, therefore it’s OK that I lost my house, and I don’t have to break down and shoot myself.” In some way it is a useful mechanism, because it helps people who can’t cope with the actual real world, not to go crazy. We all do an even milder form of it, where we just twist reality a bit... which is basically repression, for the same reason. The difference between what we do, and what is religion, is that at their level of mind-twisting, tryin to reason with them is a lost cause.
Because I now understand this, I do not have any hatred for religious people anymore. Everyone is just trying to cope with reality in his way. And tomorrow, you could fall in a pit where your only choices would be to go crazy, or to twist your mind just as badly. Hell, half our behavior is based on wrong social condidioning, which basically also is a mind-twist that is not attached to reality anymore.
Yes, religious statements have no place in any debate. Not in school, not in government, not anywhere. But there is also no point in just calling them idiots and hating them. We, as a community, must face the roots of what caused people to fall back to religion to manage their lives. Because otherwise, we also are only repressing the problem.
If you see someone who is very religious (and normally also very easily driven out of his calm state, when faced with the disparity of reality and his model of it), try to find the roots, help him face and fix them, and let him work the way up again, fixing the disparities in the process. Or at least don’t make his life even worse.:)
(Be warned though, as that reality bubble can span multiple generations, many people and many things. You may find that you’re simply unable to do anything about it, other than invent a time machine and prevent a couple of wars.)
To come to the end: Can I sue any religion-infected idiot out there who dares to insult the holy flying spaghetti-monster? (E.g. by eating spaghetti in a non-ceremonial way.)
Oh boy... oh boy... ready the lawyer army!:D
P.S.: What happens, if all ceremonies in one religion involve actions that are “blasphemous” in another one? Because my religion involves pissing on every religious symbol out there. It’s called a “healthy brain”. ^^
That is STATIC layout. Unbelievable... is that all the imagination you got?
Flexible widths, flexible heights, percentage values, flexible spaces, SVG, MIP mapping for all UI elements (so if you use a bigger screen, they have more details/functions and show things right in-place, instead of opening separate screens, etc)... there. Is that so hard to come up with??
That’s because, as I always say: It’s not about what you have to hide. It’s about what they want to find.
Cardinal Richelieu also had a nice saying about seven lines of the honest man being enough, to find something, to let him hang.
The “funniest” thing is, that the exact description of what the TSA does to people, is “terror”. They’re the real terrorists. But as all terrorists, they have more powerful backroom figures who control the big picture. The “terrorists” are just straw-men.
That’s like saying that a website’s fatal flaw is, that it can’t be used in that criminally on-purpose incompatible and on top of that more buggy than a bag of insects horrible piece of shit that is the Internet Explorer!
It’s the other way around: Mircosoft’s fatal flaw, that will completely kill off Microsoft and will make Ballmer eat his own chairs, is that they are unable to adapt to modern platforms. Small mobile computers, huge supercomputern, hell, Microsoft works how many years on the shitty DRM wrapped in colorful clickables that is Vista? And the Compiz crows ruins the whole thing in less than 3 months by having even more colorful clickables, programmed for fun, in their spare time!
Microsoft is a dinosaur, and Netbooks have just gotten the ball rolling. Now it’s going downwards on the steepest rollercauster they have ever seen.
Well, Napster was one of (!) the first. And despite it not even being the biggest by far, it was the one that got the most media coverage. I remember using Scour Exchange back then. It was a wayy bigger network. So in my book, SX is the one to remember. But hey, you can’t argue, that Napster fell from even that little grace, when they became a Bertelsmann pay-service with DRM.
Sexist?? WTF. That does not have anything to do with “sexism”. By far most men are hetero. By far most women too. (Hetero) men watch by far more porn than women. So obviously, nearly all porn is for hetero men. Some for hetero women or couples. Some for gay men. And very little for gay women. Everything else would be a weirdly distorted market.
Buy enough porn that you like, and you get more. But don’t act as if you were entitled to anything. Especially if you most likely don’t pay anything for it anyway.
The worst *ists, are people who call others *ists.
No. It does not sell anyway. It sells exactly because of that! If we wanted realistic entertainment, we would go outside. Realistic entertainment sucks and blows.
But: WTF? There are women at Top Gear? I have never seen any... except for that crowd that stands around them.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, there basically never was a communist state in human history. ;)
Because, as far as I remember, a real communist state has no government, but is governed from the bottom up.
Those government in those states are supposed to be temporary, to implement the changes, and then dissolve themselves.
Yeah, that never happens.
The thing is, that the communist idea, in theory is really nice. Just as democracy.
The problem is, that both ideas are based on faulty theory. The communist one even more than the democracy one.
The error is, that they assume there would be such a thing as 100% altruistic people who could ignore their own interests in favor of the general public. To put them in charge. Basically as a medium. A channel for the interests of the people.
Of course that is just a pretty dream, as there is no such thing in reality. The whole evolution is the exact opposite of this. Any organism of that kind would die out in the blink of an eye. To be replaced by something that only cares for itself.
But the idea stems from the fact, that we as humans, are really great at teamwork. We are the only ones who have a “society” which is basically a huge team, working together. The thing is though: While for most of the time that humans existed, we were small groups of 20-30 people, we now are huge teams. Way too huge.
Our common good has taken a back seat, and we focus more on personal gain.
I think, a nice model is the Arabic philosophy of “me and you, against the town. me, you and the town, against the [county]. me, you, the town and the [county] against the country. ... etc” Basically a fractal model of priority. That way you can still profit from team work, and only look at the large groups if needed. You don’t become egocentric that easily.
But I’m digressing.
What we need is small groups. Where you can’t survive if you act egocentric and try to become a dictator. Where the group can easily personally come up to you, and throw you out. Where the personal gain IS the gain of your group. Like a large family basically. Protecting your genes. Ever if you die, you will then live on.
But also on that new level of ideas/mindsets. (You may be aware of the concept that one can look at those like lifeforms, and that the models then strangely still fit.) Small communities (and/or fractal ones) on the Internet, protecting your mindset/ideas, so they will live on.
In my opinion, our current forms of society don’t really work for that exact reason. A leader wants to have a personal (or small group) gain. It’s in his genes because of billions of years of evolution enforcing it. It’s only natural.
So naturally, he always and without exception will have huge conflict with the interests of people that elected him. This is unavoidable.
But I still don’t know how this knowledge helps me, live in a society where my interests and that of my group don’t conflict. Other than starting a family and emigrating to the wilderness ;)
Damnit! And I had planned such a nice mass-murdering spree... ;)))
How did you come up with the idea, that they are mutually exclusive?
By the way: You know that Bin Laden was a CIA agent, right? You know that the weapons they use, were paid for by the US military. (I know this from first-hand sources, since I have a photo of my father, with a US rocket launcher, trying to free his country from the Russian invasion. [Unfortunately, I have no contact with him anymore. Thanks for making the cold war hot in our country. {I don’t blame the people, I blame a part of some governments. And all terrorists can fuck right off too. ^^} :/])
I abstain from asking we we just can’t be friends and kick all our government’s asses”, because as George Carlin stated, those people usually get shot by an assassin. (Like Kennedy, Ghandi, etc. [By the way, a group that I don’t deserve to be in.]) ;)
You don’t wanna know what i did with my...uum...spaghetti. (Actually more like cannelloni. ;)
You seem to have a quite simplistic view of religion. Religious beliefs arose out of one of the characteristics that makes us human - our seemingly innate desire to ask questions about reality and know chains of cause-and-effect.
No. I just had to simplify it for the comment. Else I could write a whole book about the topic. :)
I completely agree about the desire to ask questions. Even questions that “can’t be asked”. That’s our ultimate power and possibly the single most important thing we have.
Interestingly, I tried to think this to the end (, like I always do). And it results in this:
Our whole world is a endless graph of cause-and-effect relationships. We can measure the “now”. And know past states. But we can only go back so far. We now are at the big bang. But that does not stop us from asking what the big bang came from?. And it’s of course a valid question. Just as asking questions about everything that we do not understand, is a valid question. And we make up for the gaps in knowledge about recent events, by guessing, and creating rules of nature where everything fits in. That’s how far we came, nowadays. And as you said, we weren’t that lucky in earlier days.
Yes the question of the ultimate cause, remains.
That is what the idea of a “god” was created for. It’s a ultimate source of everything.
Its problem is, that it does not actually fix anything, because you can still ask, where god came from, and where he exists in.
That’s why it is “forbidden” to ask that question. It’s basically willful ignorance, to be able to cope with that question, that would otherwise have the power to drive us crazy.
This big importance of that question actually shows a very high intelligence.
We scientist are not better off. Because we’re not better at it. Because we also don’t know the ultimate cause. And just as much can’t handle that gap. Our minds are wired in a way, that if our model is not consistent, everything breaks down. (That’s those people you see in mental homes, who basically became vegetables, or zombies.)
We scientists just usually choose, just not to think about it at all. It’s also ignorance by choice. Protective ignorance.
But let’s move on to why I did not say that this all was a bad thing:
Do you suppose this approach would work at say, the Harvard Divinity School? Do you feel that all religious people are a priori ignorant bumpkins, simply waiting for you to bring the blinding light of reason to raise them up?
No, no, no. It seems I did not work hard enough to make it clear, that I do not nee religious people as worse humans anymore! I’m really sorry for not making that clear enough.
Also, I noticed that many people think one means “batshit insane drooling retard, and all around lower-value human” when they hear the word “schizophrenia”. But In fact, there is a stepless gradient between normal workarounds of the internal model and full-scale schizophrenia-based insanity. And religion is just a sliight bit over the normal amount. Where it starts to be generally rather bad. But normally far from completely living in your own crazy reality. :)
I do not want anyone to “see the light”. In fact, my philosophy is not that of devoting my life to the advantage of others. And I don’t care much what others think of me and my ideas.
But I can’t stand there and ignore people being in pain or desperate situations. Things where you know, that you happen to know a simple and elegant solution that could make their whole life so much better. Because I was in that very situation so often, and wished someone would come and be there for me for once. I would have been very thankful and given so much more back...
I don’t expect anything. But it doesn’t hurt
Yes, but that is incredibly fucked up. Because there is no reason at all for this. And nobody has the right to tell another human to do with his body what he wants. But nobody of the retards ever even questions this? You know why?
Because there actually is a reason: The egocentric assholes who are so extremely dickish, that they won’t even let another human die, because that would prevent them from profiting from him anymore! And that’s the only real reason it’s illegal! Insurance companies, “family” (read “parasites), tax authorities, etc. They all want to continue bleeding you dry, and would go as far as trying to override the most basic of all human rights ever on this whole planet:
The right to do with your own body what you want.
Oh, and it’s a totally pointless law anyway. Because what do you wanna do when someone did it? Punish him? LOL. By death? LOL. Ridiculous.
And if it’s one of those cries for help, where one does not intent to really kill oneself, then what is needed is that HELP. Not some lawsuit/punishment that will make him try it again. This time properly, and without telling anyone!
Dumb, dumb, dumb. And one of the dickishest dick rules ever.
Exactly. I was once dragged out of a club by two giant bouncers, fully patted down and insulted by seven cops, because some new idiot bouncer who was a colleague of a bouncer friend of mine saw us exchange little pieces of paper (drink coupons) which he thought were drugs!
One cop even, after he told be to turn my back pockets inside-out (not possible with jeans), himself grabbed in there, and came out with a small bag of drugs! The pockets were empty when I had the hands inside, about 5 seconds earlier!! So he must have had it in his hand when doing this!!
If it weren’t for all the bouncers being embarrassed because of their colleague fucking up, them being my friends, and them getting very angry because of this obvious dick move of that cop, basically chasing them out of the venue, I would perhaps now sit in jail for dealing drugs and/or have my life ruined!
Needless to say, the bouncers were not very friendly to that new guy afterwards. ;)
We later got a official, written excuse from the police headquarter. It was the Cologne police by the way. (Yeah Google, index this!) Cops here basically behave like criminals with a badge (except from some lone exceptions). I would not be surprised, if their reason for the theater was, that they smelled a competition to them controlling the drug market...
Let’s find out. I’m assuming your Slashdot user name is also your WoW name, right? ^^
Protip: If someone creates a convoluted rule system, and you’re then buying into his rule system, and try to argue on the definition of those rules, you have already lost before you started.
The better way is, to not buy into their crapola in the first place, but have your own set of values that you are secure in. Then you can let them play in your reality, instead of you entering theirs. :)
Aaah, another troll, moderating me, before reading the sig. ^^
And Haskell code tells you what. The compiler figures out the how.
Now all we need is a compiler that takes a motivation (the why) and automatically figures out the what and how. :)
Is there such a thing, by any chance?
Yeah, try finding a Mac user who ever looked behind the shiny surface of his protective retard padded system enough, to even remotely understand what that article means. ;))
Oh boy... prepare the fanboi pink dabber bombardement storm... ^^ *prepares heavy vulkan gatling gun*
An another note: It also was more expensive than two of the second-most powerful one. ;))
It has nothing to do with “beliefs” that’s a straw-man word.
Religion is a mild schizophrenia. A disease where people don’t use the outside world as a reference for their internal model of it, but a made-up internal model. E.g. “God wants it to be that way, therefore it’s OK that I lost my house, and I don’t have to break down and shoot myself.”
In some way it is a useful mechanism, because it helps people who can’t cope with the actual real world, not to go crazy. We all do an even milder form of it, where we just twist reality a bit... which is basically repression, for the same reason.
The difference between what we do, and what is religion, is that at their level of mind-twisting, tryin to reason with them is a lost cause.
Because I now understand this, I do not have any hatred for religious people anymore. Everyone is just trying to cope with reality in his way. And tomorrow, you could fall in a pit where your only choices would be to go crazy, or to twist your mind just as badly.
Hell, half our behavior is based on wrong social condidioning, which basically also is a mind-twist that is not attached to reality anymore.
Yes, religious statements have no place in any debate. Not in school, not in government, not anywhere. But there is also no point in just calling them idiots and hating them. We, as a community, must face the roots of what caused people to fall back to religion to manage their lives. Because otherwise, we also are only repressing the problem.
If you see someone who is very religious (and normally also very easily driven out of his calm state, when faced with the disparity of reality and his model of it), try to find the roots, help him face and fix them, and let him work the way up again, fixing the disparities in the process. :)
Or at least don’t make his life even worse.
(Be warned though, as that reality bubble can span multiple generations, many people and many things. You may find that you’re simply unable to do anything about it, other than invent a time machine and prevent a couple of wars.)
Fear, cause they might never leave, and show that everlastingness with a change of their name to: Epic Fail. ^^
To come to the end: Can I sue any religion-infected idiot out there who dares to insult the holy flying spaghetti-monster? (E.g. by eating spaghetti in a non-ceremonial way.)
Oh boy... oh boy... ready the lawyer army! :D
P.S.: What happens, if all ceremonies in one religion involve actions that are “blasphemous” in another one? Because my religion involves pissing on every religious symbol out there. It’s called a “healthy brain”. ^^
Actually, Dreamweaver is quite good at dynamic layouts and assisting you in proper website creation. The HTML is usually pretty clean.
But static HTML is so last millenium. ^^
Look at the code of that page (Warning: This was never finished, so expect bugs.), and count the number of HTML tags in there, compared to the actual content. ;))
That is STATIC layout. Unbelievable... is that all the imagination you got?
Flexible widths, flexible heights, percentage values, flexible spaces, SVG, MIP mapping for all UI elements (so if you use a bigger screen, they have more details/functions and show things right in-place, instead of opening separate screens, etc)... there. Is that so hard to come up with??
That’s because, as I always say: It’s not about what you have to hide. It’s about what they want to find.
Cardinal Richelieu also had a nice saying about seven lines of the honest man being enough, to find something, to let him hang.
The “funniest” thing is, that the exact description of what the TSA does to people, is “terror”. They’re the real terrorists. But as all terrorists, they have more powerful backroom figures who control the big picture. The “terrorists” are just straw-men.
I’m sorry???
That’s like saying that a website’s fatal flaw is, that it can’t be used in that criminally on-purpose incompatible and on top of that more buggy than a bag of insects horrible piece of shit that is the Internet Explorer!
It’s the other way around: Mircosoft’s fatal flaw, that will completely kill off Microsoft and will make Ballmer eat his own chairs, is that they are unable to adapt to modern platforms. Small mobile computers, huge supercomputern, hell, Microsoft works how many years on the shitty DRM wrapped in colorful clickables that is Vista? And the Compiz crows ruins the whole thing in less than 3 months by having even more colorful clickables, programmed for fun, in their spare time!
Microsoft is a dinosaur, and Netbooks have just gotten the ball rolling. Now it’s going downwards on the steepest rollercauster they have ever seen.
Are you talking about Windows, or what? ^^
Well, Napster was one of (!) the first. And despite it not even being the biggest by far, it was the one that got the most media coverage.
I remember using Scour Exchange back then. It was a wayy bigger network. So in my book, SX is the one to remember.
But hey, you can’t argue, that Napster fell from even that little grace, when they became a Bertelsmann pay-service with DRM.
Sexist?? WTF. That does not have anything to do with “sexism”.
By far most men are hetero. By far most women too. (Hetero) men watch by far more porn than women.
So obviously, nearly all porn is for hetero men. Some for hetero women or couples. Some for gay men. And very little for gay women.
Everything else would be a weirdly distorted market.
Buy enough porn that you like, and you get more. But don’t act as if you were entitled to anything. Especially if you most likely don’t pay anything for it anyway.
The worst *ists, are people who call others *ists.
No. It does not sell anyway. It sells exactly because of that! If we wanted realistic entertainment, we would go outside. Realistic entertainment sucks and blows.
But: WTF? There are women at Top Gear? I have never seen any... except for that crowd that stands around them.
Pics or it didn’t happen! ^^
Oh, and when you find that one girl on Slashdot... she’s gay... I don’t even know what to say to that anymore... ^^