To make Brown Jesus, you'd need to mix Red Jesus, Yellow Jesus, and Blue Jesus.
If you are making a watercolor Jesus, you'd need something like veridian Jesus and alizarin crimson Jesus mixed together. I'm not sure what the easiest RGB Jesus values would give you a Brown Jesus, but it shouldn't be too hard to find.
This is simply false, and a sign of incredible ignorance. America has the best beer, hands down. By far. The Germans, for example, have laws determining how your beer is produced and it can only be made a certain way. While their beers are good, this LIMITS the types of beers and variety they can produce.
On this alone the US is better than any country in the world; we have huge varieties of beet that are produced, and many of them truly are the best in the world. You can't brush of the US just because we win competitions others don't attend; that's what the French did with regards to wine in the 70's and 80's until we came over there and kicked their ass.
You have a brewpub in Little Rock that is very good. I went there last year. One of the best I've been to, actually, on the Arkansas River. They had quite a few good microbrews available. Nothing to be ashamed of in Arkansas on the beer front.
Whoosh whoosh. No one here cares what # of oz the glass holds. The question is whether or not I'm getting enough beer for my purchase. I don't care if they lie to me; the amount of beer int he glass does not lie. If I am charged 7$ for something that is in a half-pint glass and isn't a Belgian beer, I will complain. The # of oz advertised or pored is irrelevant.
So, I don't understand this anger. Can't you just go to maps.google.com on Safari on your phone and access the functions there?
This entire post is based on the idea that massive amounts of people are going to be "upset" that they will "lose" functionality.
Instead of clicking a maps app, you open safari, type in maps.google.com, and there you go. How is this a big problem? Why is there even an article about this?
2. You think Mohammed was NOT REAL? What do you think of the huge number of historians and writers who say he is real?
The same thing I think about the huge number of historians and writers who say Jesus/Buddha/other fictional deity was real - good for you, please don't murder me because I disagree.
No one will murder you. We will just think you an idiot. There are few historical records of jesus existing, but it is generally accepted by real historians,.e., those that make a living doing hsitory and reading Greek, Latin and Aramaic that a man named Jesus, who eventually was called King of the Jews, did exist. There's some debate, but not much.
As for Mohammed, there are TONS of historical documents that this person existed and led multiple warlike raids upon the Wahabis in the Saudi deserts. No one will murder you. You are just an idiot.
The instrurctions in the Bible to kill folks are contextual. This is the main difference between the violence in the Bible (which apologists of Islam always like to point out is much worse) and the violence in the Quran.
No one today seriously thinks that when God told Saul to Kill all the Amalekites, man woman and child, that he means for people TODAY to kill the Amelekites, man woman and child. The violence is presented as a historical occurrence, not a guide for how to live.
But the instructions int he Koran are filled with demands to wage war. Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." Those are not contextual. Those specific verses are used to defend the killing of non-believers all over the world.
The "pedo" claims actually come from the Hadith, which some Muslims accept as "canon" and some do not. Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad supposedly consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was nine. (See also Bukhari 58:234 and other places). There is much debate on this, with some claiming that there was no true consummation. This specific situation is the really touchy area of debate.
By Muslim expansions to India, are you referring to Tamerlane's assaults in the late 12th century, where enslaved hundreds of thousands, and he made pyramids of 70,000 Indian heads when he failed to convert them? That bastard slaughtered just as many Muslims as he did non-Muslims. He's probably not a good example.
I note you did not answer his claim, you just insulted his arrogance. Fair enough, but his original claim still stands. While I am not Jewish, I do find it odd that an inordinate amount of Nobel prizes have been won by a very small ethnic group. Maybe it's cultural, or maybe not, but maybe you can provide something other than insults?
As I go through the day and occasionally read comments like the above, I find myself wondering the exact nature of the mental illness that would cause someone to write such a post. The post has no relevance to the OP, and neither the title or the text is funny...just strange. So is this writer on something? Stoned? On another specific drug or a combination? Perhaps they are drunk.
Or perhaps the person is mentally ill, or is perhaps autistic. What is the exact nature of the mental illness?
Perhaps the person is both mentally ill and on drugs and drunk. Their spelling is acceptable, so they aren't completely out of it, and the sentence makes sense, but bears no relation to anything relevant in this thread.
Yes but in the second instance, the correct follow up would be, "Do you think birds are dinosaurs", and if a majority answered no, than the original implication of ignorance on a large part of America would be correct.
But it's not stealing. Your argument doesn't change that fact.
The OP posted that posting info about the Pirate Bay is promoting IP THEFT, which involves stealing. And my point, still to be rebutted is that they are not the same. If you want to call it cheating, that's fine, if you want to call it copyright infringement, that's fine too.
But there is an active movement by powerful people to conflate copyright infringement with theft, and I'm pointing out, in as clear a way as possible, that they are NOT the same thing.
As others have pointed out, there is a benefit to powerful people by conflating these ideas, because if they can then they believe most Americans will shy away from downloading a copy, because they also know that most Amercians will not walk into a store and run out with a candy bar without paying for it. The thinking is, "If Joe Schmuckatelli believes that it is wrong to steal, and if we can convince him that copying a CD is theft, then Joe Schmuckatelli will be less likely to copy the song."
The problem with your cheating argument is, who are people cheating? The artist? Or the studios? Good luck trying to convince people that copying a CD is cheating from an artist...
Apparently some 60-70% of Americans need to grow up as well, because that is the number which has admitted to copying music. Are they small children as well, because they understand this distinction? Perhaps you should reevaluate your idea of ethics.
We are talking about the difference between theft and copyright infringement. Your definition above refers to the latter, and yes, a case can be made that it is wrong. But "Licensees don't have the right to distribute without a distribution license" has nothing to do with theft; it's copyright infringement. They are not the same, as I have been at pains to point out.
It's not theft if the person still has the item that they made and did not get paid for. If they still have it, and I copy it, they have "lost" nothing. In the case of an Orange, the limited supply is a supply of exactly one (the one in my hand). The small child does understand that if someone could copy a cd or tape, then the person who originally had the cd or tape would still have the cd or tape. They are fundamentally different.
I'm not advocating copyright infringement by any means. I'm pointing out the difference between the two. I have a real issue with a movement by politicians, IP Lawyers and others to equate the two for exactly te reason you mention. Calling the copying of a song the equivalent to theft suddenly makes millions, literally millions and millions of people THIEVES.
I have an issue with that. The vast majority of those people would never walk into a supermarket and take a product there without paying for it. Most people know that the two actions are simply not the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no it wouldn't. this sort of stuff happens all the time. Freedom of Speech actually does mean something here.
To make Brown Jesus, you'd need to mix Red Jesus, Yellow Jesus, and Blue Jesus.
If you are making a watercolor Jesus, you'd need something like veridian Jesus and alizarin crimson Jesus mixed together. I'm not sure what the easiest RGB Jesus values would give you a Brown Jesus, but it shouldn't be too hard to find.
This is simply false, and a sign of incredible ignorance. America has the best beer, hands down. By far. The Germans, for example, have laws determining how your beer is produced and it can only be made a certain way. While their beers are good, this LIMITS the types of beers and variety they can produce.
On this alone the US is better than any country in the world; we have huge varieties of beet that are produced, and many of them truly are the best in the world. You can't brush of the US just because we win competitions others don't attend; that's what the French did with regards to wine in the 70's and 80's until we came over there and kicked their ass.
You have a brewpub in Little Rock that is very good. I went there last year. One of the best I've been to, actually, on the Arkansas River. They had quite a few good microbrews available. Nothing to be ashamed of in Arkansas on the beer front.
Whoosh whoosh. No one here cares what # of oz the glass holds. The question is whether or not I'm getting enough beer for my purchase. I don't care if they lie to me; the amount of beer int he glass does not lie. If I am charged 7$ for something that is in a half-pint glass and isn't a Belgian beer, I will complain. The # of oz advertised or pored is irrelevant.
And were will you get Bud Light in Munich? Is it even sold there? If so, why?
in the refrigerator. Searching for beer!
So, I don't understand this anger. Can't you just go to maps.google.com on Safari on your phone and access the functions there?
This entire post is based on the idea that massive amounts of people are going to be "upset" that they will "lose" functionality.
Instead of clicking a maps app, you open safari, type in maps.google.com, and there you go. How is this a big problem? Why is there even an article about this?
Christ in a chicken basket.
stop. just...stop.
2. You think Mohammed was NOT REAL? What do you think of the huge number of historians and writers who say he is real?
The same thing I think about the huge number of historians and writers who say Jesus/Buddha/other fictional deity was real - good for you, please don't murder me because I disagree.
No one will murder you. We will just think you an idiot. There are few historical records of jesus existing, but it is generally accepted by real historians, .e., those that make a living doing hsitory and reading Greek, Latin and Aramaic that a man named Jesus, who eventually was called King of the Jews, did exist. There's some debate, but not much.
As for Mohammed, there are TONS of historical documents that this person existed and led multiple warlike raids upon the Wahabis in the Saudi deserts.
No one will murder you. You are just an idiot.
No, not literal men in Scotsland. TRUE men in Scotland. There's a difference.
The instrurctions in the Bible to kill folks are contextual. This is the main difference between the violence in the Bible (which apologists of Islam always like to point out is much worse) and the violence in the Quran.
No one today seriously thinks that when God told Saul to Kill all the Amalekites, man woman and child, that he means for people TODAY to kill the Amelekites, man woman and child. The violence is presented as a historical occurrence, not a guide for how to live.
But the instructions int he Koran are filled with demands to wage war.
Quran (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah."
Those are not contextual. Those specific verses are used to defend the killing of non-believers all over the world.
The "pedo" claims actually come from the Hadith, which some Muslims accept as "canon" and some do not.
Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad supposedly consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was nine. (See also Bukhari 58:234 and other places). There is much debate on this, with some claiming that there was no true consummation. This specific situation is the really touchy area of debate.
By Muslim expansions to India, are you referring to Tamerlane's assaults in the late 12th century, where enslaved hundreds of thousands, and he made pyramids of 70,000 Indian heads when he failed to convert them? That bastard slaughtered just as many Muslims as he did non-Muslims. He's probably not a good example.
I note you did not answer his claim, you just insulted his arrogance. Fair enough, but his original claim still stands. While I am not Jewish, I do find it odd that an inordinate amount of Nobel prizes have been won by a very small ethnic group. Maybe it's cultural, or maybe not, but maybe you can provide something other than insults?
As I go through the day and occasionally read comments like the above, I find myself wondering the exact nature of the mental illness that would cause someone to write such a post. The post has no relevance to the OP, and neither the title or the text is funny...just strange. So is this writer on something? Stoned? On another specific drug or a combination? Perhaps they are drunk.
Or perhaps the person is mentally ill, or is perhaps autistic. What is the exact nature of the mental illness?
Perhaps the person is both mentally ill and on drugs and drunk. Their spelling is acceptable, so they aren't completely out of it, and the sentence makes sense, but bears no relation to anything relevant in this thread.
Let us ponder these things.
Why are you feeding the troll?
Statistics show otherwise.
Yes but in the second instance, the correct follow up would be, "Do you think birds are dinosaurs", and if a majority answered no, than the original implication of ignorance on a large part of America would be correct.
That is a great Magic card, btw. Exile a creature for 1 mana, at instant speed? Wow. Classic card.
Ah. Ancient puns.
Behold, a haiku:
Rabbi's sermon much
Too long, congregants sleep and
Thus he can Babylon
But it's not stealing. Your argument doesn't change that fact.
The OP posted that posting info about the Pirate Bay is promoting IP THEFT, which involves stealing. And my point, still to be rebutted is that they are not the same.
If you want to call it cheating, that's fine, if you want to call it copyright infringement, that's fine too.
But there is an active movement by powerful people to conflate copyright infringement with theft, and I'm pointing out, in as clear a way as possible, that they are NOT the same thing.
As others have pointed out, there is a benefit to powerful people by conflating these ideas, because if they can then they believe most Americans will shy away from downloading a copy, because they also know that most Amercians will not walk into a store and run out with a candy bar without paying for it. The thinking is, "If Joe Schmuckatelli believes that it is wrong to steal, and if we can convince him that copying a CD is theft, then Joe Schmuckatelli will be less likely to copy the song."
The problem with your cheating argument is, who are people cheating? The artist? Or the studios? Good luck trying to convince people that copying a CD is cheating from an artist...
That may be true, but it has no bearing on whether or not B stole from the app developer. What if he copies the app, and then purchases the app?
The correct answer is "He committed copyright infringement, then purchased the app."
Apparently some 60-70% of Americans need to grow up as well, because that is the number which has admitted to copying music. Are they small children as well, because they understand this distinction? Perhaps you should reevaluate your idea of ethics.
We are talking about the difference between theft and copyright infringement. Your definition above refers to the latter, and yes, a case can be made that it is wrong. But "Licensees don't have the right to distribute without a distribution license" has nothing to do with theft; it's copyright infringement. They are not the same, as I have been at pains to point out.
Try to keep up.
It's not theft if the person still has the item that they made and did not get paid for. If they still have it, and I copy it, they have "lost" nothing. In the case of an Orange, the limited supply is a supply of exactly one (the one in my hand). The small child does understand that if someone could copy a cd or tape, then the person who originally had the cd or tape would still have the cd or tape. They are fundamentally different.
This. Exactly.
I'm not advocating copyright infringement by any means. I'm pointing out the difference between the two. I have a real issue with a movement by politicians, IP Lawyers and others to equate the two for exactly te reason you mention. Calling the copying of a song the equivalent to theft suddenly makes millions, literally millions and millions of people THIEVES.
I have an issue with that. The vast majority of those people would never walk into a supermarket and take a product there without paying for it. Most people know that the two actions are simply not the same.