no.. it's like buying a sports car to drive down your 200ft driveway and get your mail. if you're going to use car analogies, at least have them make sense.
Why is it called a driveway if you are using it as a parking lot?
I'm so tired of this particular "observational" humor, that I will explain.
There are two ways to your house: the WALKWAY (you walk to your house) and the DRIVEWAY (you drive to your house) Simple enough for you?
And while I'm at it, the PARKWAY is typically called that because it goes through a PARK (or once did), not because you park your car there.
Why would a "God" need to perform an experiment, when He already knows the outcome? It is all irrational nonsense, fabricated stories no more substantial than children's fairy tales.
Why do people have children, when they know they will one day die? Because humans are worth creating, for their own sake. The end of the "experiment" is irrelevant: some things are done simply because they are worth doing.
No, people have children because people like to fuck. You should try it some time.
Consider the two possibilities: The first is that you're right (there's no God, no heaven, no hell, no eternal life), and there's no need to worry about Christians' beliefs because they're wrong anyway. Disagree with them. Vote against them. Ignore them. Politely tell them "no." The second possibility is that you're wrong and there is God. I suspect that God would be disappointed.
You forgot at least one other possibility - there is a God, but not a "Christian" one, and He is mad as hell that you guys are worshiping the wrong one, and takes it out on all of us, including those of us he would have spared for no worship at all. Also, there is the possibility of many Gods. See, it's not just two cases.
Be real, who watches ads? Even when watching the few shows I watch religiously every week, where my eyes are glued to the screen during the show, I hardly notice the ads, let alone could tell you which ads I just saw or even come up with some kind of detail, or what product they tried to cram down my throat.
And I'm hardly special in this way. Try it. Go watch TV with your pals, don't tell them before and then, after the show, ask them to come up with five commercial they just saw and offer them 10 bucks if they succeed.
I betcha you won't spend a dime on this experiment.
You may not remember the adds, but you saw them. Sometimes, that's all that matters. My gripe is that even if I skip past the ads, I still have to see all the giant ads they plaster over the active video of the show you're watching. It all started with channels putting their logo in the corner; now they put animated ads that are hard to ignore all over the bottom quarter of the screen. Fuckwads! When will someone come up with a system that gets rid of those nuisances?
The word "hate", just like "racist", has lost all meaning in today's discourse. Being diametrically opposed to someone's viewpoint is not hate. This overuse of the "hate" label is evidence of one party's inability to form a coherent argument in response the opponent. "I don't like what you said about my guy, and I'm too lazy or unable to counter your argument, so... that's hate speech."
Weak.
My point was not hate as in "hate speech," but hate as in "spewing unsubstantiated claims just to put down a particular person or idea" - such as Apple Haters, Android Haters, or Microsoft Haters. The OP's post qualified as it was just an unsubstantiated spout of sarcasm with no point except to bad-mouth the president (note it was quickly down-modded to troll).
I wish people would make fun of your "religion" like they do mine.
One more "religion" to add to the list, AGW, anti-AGW, Anti-Nukes, and Obama.
The OP didn't say anything that people didn't say against Bush, hell he even said something bad about Bush.
WTF are you talking about? I didn't make fun of any "religion" - unless your "religion" is one of spouting hate - the only thing I put down. If you think there aren't Obama haters out there - who will say anything no matter how ridiculous - then you must have your fingers in your ears and your your eyes closed. I don't think that this tiny detail is worth ranting against ANY president.
Oh, quit your hate rant. He's trying to drag the government into the 21st century. He knows that mobile phones are everywhere and wants to make the government more accessible.
Of course it does, but you clearly don't what a monopoly is.
And you clearly don't know what "proves" means.
Well given that you don't even know what a monopoly is i wouldn't expect you to have the capacity to understand what constitutes proof that your statement is wrong.
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
Aptitude has this neat feature, "-s" (simulate), where it goes through the motions of what it's going to do, reporting them all but not actually doing anything. Not that difficult.
I'm talking about verification.
Explain? If after running the app your data's not there,...
Still, it might be a lot simpler to just image your phone when you first get it, then panic mode slaps that image over the current image and reboots. You're now back to a vanilla, never used, phone with no "incriminating" data. May be better to add a few innocuous entries before taking the image to make it look less like it was just re-imaged.
My point is that if you have an app that can wipe your data, you sure don't want a bug in that app that might do the wipe when you don't want it to. The app needs to have some pretty global-thermonuclear-war-level permissions that I'm not sure I'd trust any developer to have.
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
Aptitude has this neat feature, "-s" (simulate), where it goes through the motions of what it's going to do, reporting them all but not actually doing anything. Not that difficult.
We need a kill gesture. Some way to immediately block access to the phone's info while the phone corrupts its information beyond readability. No signing in with a login code, just do *this* sequence of key presses or gestures, and the phone initiates its info-apoptosis. Why isn't there an app for this?
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
I installed MyCleanPC and it converted all my great porn to gay porn! When she saw this, my wife left me. Now I have no wife and only gay porn to wank to. Don't install MyCleanPC!
I installed MyCleanPC and it cleaned out my bank account! It also converted my great porn collection to all gay porn. My wife left me when she saw that, even though you can clearly tell all the dicks are photoshopped onto the chicks!
Like I said, I was not commenting on the Microsoft case, only the claim that there should be an Apple case.
And what im saying to you is that the Microsoft case proves that this assertion: "Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly." is wrong, that's not how a monopoly is defined at all.
Monopoly is not about choice. It's about the ability for others to compete. Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly.
And Microsoft never stopped anyone from selling (or running) a competing browser...no monopoly?
I was never arguing the Microsoft issue. However, it's my understanding that the problem was Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing agreements with OEM's. Also, their falsifying of videotape evidence during the trial does not help their case.
That was their anti-trust case, that's an issue with abusing a monopolistic position. Your original suggestion ("Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly.") would hold that Microsoft would not have even had a monopoly to abuse because Netscape was able to sell a competing browser.
Like I said, I was not commenting on the Microsoft case, only the claim that there should be an Apple case.
I love it when you guys invent cute little epithets like that. I also wonder if you even remember what word that tard bit comes from. Was it bastard, or retard? I don't think anyone's ever told me.
Let me clear it up for you:
libretardian - retarded libertarian
libastardian - libertarian born out of wedlock
liberturdian - libertarian so young (or old) that he needs diaper-changing
Slashdot Mirror
Outlook/Exchange will keep track of branches in a chain of e-mails and present them in a tree format. I don't think gmail's stack does that as well.
Not if your dumb-ass employer is still making you run Outlook 2003.
no.. it's like buying a sports car to drive down your 200ft driveway and get your mail. if you're going to use car analogies, at least have them make sense.
Why is it called a driveway if you are using it as a parking lot?
I'm so tired of this particular "observational" humor, that I will explain.
There are two ways to your house: the WALKWAY (you walk to your house) and the DRIVEWAY (you drive to your house) Simple enough for you?
And while I'm at it, the PARKWAY is typically called that because it goes through a PARK (or once did), not because you park your car there.
Wouldn't the ultimate expression of free will not only to break from God's purpose, but when he shows up kill him and thus ending His purpose?
Been there, done that, about 2000 years ago.
The voices in your head told you that?
Why would a "God" need to perform an experiment, when He already knows the outcome? It is all irrational nonsense, fabricated stories no more substantial than children's fairy tales.
Why do people have children, when they know they will one day die? Because humans are worth creating, for their own sake. The end of the "experiment" is irrelevant: some things are done simply because they are worth doing.
No, people have children because people like to fuck. You should try it some time.
Consider the two possibilities: The first is that you're right (there's no God, no heaven, no hell, no eternal life), and there's no need to worry about Christians' beliefs because they're wrong anyway. Disagree with them. Vote against them. Ignore them. Politely tell them "no." The second possibility is that you're wrong and there is God. I suspect that God would be disappointed.
You forgot at least one other possibility - there is a God, but not a "Christian" one, and He is mad as hell that you guys are worshiping the wrong one, and takes it out on all of us, including those of us he would have spared for no worship at all. Also, there is the possibility of many Gods. See, it's not just two cases.
Be real, who watches ads? Even when watching the few shows I watch religiously every week, where my eyes are glued to the screen during the show, I hardly notice the ads, let alone could tell you which ads I just saw or even come up with some kind of detail, or what product they tried to cram down my throat.
And I'm hardly special in this way. Try it. Go watch TV with your pals, don't tell them before and then, after the show, ask them to come up with five commercial they just saw and offer them 10 bucks if they succeed.
I betcha you won't spend a dime on this experiment.
You may not remember the adds, but you saw them. Sometimes, that's all that matters. My gripe is that even if I skip past the ads, I still have to see all the giant ads they plaster over the active video of the show you're watching. It all started with channels putting their logo in the corner; now they put animated ads that are hard to ignore all over the bottom quarter of the screen. Fuckwads! When will someone come up with a system that gets rid of those nuisances?
The word "hate", just like "racist", has lost all meaning in today's discourse. Being diametrically opposed to someone's viewpoint is not hate. This overuse of the "hate" label is evidence of one party's inability to form a coherent argument in response the opponent. "I don't like what you said about my guy, and I'm too lazy or unable to counter your argument, so... that's hate speech." Weak.
My point was not hate as in "hate speech," but hate as in "spewing unsubstantiated claims just to put down a particular person or idea" - such as Apple Haters, Android Haters, or Microsoft Haters. The OP's post qualified as it was just an unsubstantiated spout of sarcasm with no point except to bad-mouth the president (note it was quickly down-modded to troll).
And you missed the point.
Which was?
I wish people would make fun of your "religion" like they do mine.
One more "religion" to add to the list, AGW, anti-AGW, Anti-Nukes, and Obama.
The OP didn't say anything that people didn't say against Bush, hell he even said something bad about Bush.
WTF are you talking about? I didn't make fun of any "religion" - unless your "religion" is one of spouting hate - the only thing I put down. If you think there aren't Obama haters out there - who will say anything no matter how ridiculous - then you must have your fingers in your ears and your your eyes closed. I don't think that this tiny detail is worth ranting against ANY president.
Oh, quit your hate rant. He's trying to drag the government into the 21st century. He knows that mobile phones are everywhere and wants to make the government more accessible.
The only thing worse than a search engine knowing everything you've searched for is your social network knowing everything you've searched for.
Get a job and quit using just the absolute minimum energy to subsist. Damn teenagers.
The thigh bone's connected to the leg bone; the leg bone's connected to the ankle bone...
Of course it does, but you clearly don't what a monopoly is.
And you clearly don't know what "proves" means.
Well given that you don't even know what a monopoly is i wouldn't expect you to have the capacity to understand what constitutes proof that your statement is wrong.
I know both and you know neither.
Mods have no sense of humor.
Of course it does, but you clearly don't what a monopoly is.
And you clearly don't know what "proves" means.
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
Aptitude has this neat feature, "-s" (simulate), where it goes through the motions of what it's going to do, reporting them all but not actually doing anything. Not that difficult.
I'm talking about verification.
Explain? If after running the app your data's not there, ...
Still, it might be a lot simpler to just image your phone when you first get it, then panic mode slaps that image over the current image and reboots. You're now back to a vanilla, never used, phone with no "incriminating" data. May be better to add a few innocuous entries before taking the image to make it look less like it was just re-imaged.
My point is that if you have an app that can wipe your data, you sure don't want a bug in that app that might do the wipe when you don't want it to. The app needs to have some pretty global-thermonuclear-war-level permissions that I'm not sure I'd trust any developer to have.
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
Aptitude has this neat feature, "-s" (simulate), where it goes through the motions of what it's going to do, reporting them all but not actually doing anything. Not that difficult.
I'm talking about verification.
Whoosh!
We need a kill gesture. Some way to immediately block access to the phone's info while the phone corrupts its information beyond readability. No signing in with a login code, just do *this* sequence of key presses or gestures, and the phone initiates its info-apoptosis. Why isn't there an app for this?
Do you really want an app that can wipe your phone? I'd hate to be a beta-tester.
I installed MyCleanPC and it converted all my great porn to gay porn! When she saw this, my wife left me. Now I have no wife and only gay porn to wank to. Don't install MyCleanPC!
I installed MyCleanPC and it cleaned out my bank account! It also converted my great porn collection to all gay porn. My wife left me when she saw that, even though you can clearly tell all the dicks are photoshopped onto the chicks!
Like I said, I was not commenting on the Microsoft case, only the claim that there should be an Apple case.
And what im saying to you is that the Microsoft case proves that this assertion: "Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly." is wrong, that's not how a monopoly is defined at all.
It proves no such thing.
Monopoly is not about choice. It's about the ability for others to compete. Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly.
And Microsoft never stopped anyone from selling (or running) a competing browser...no monopoly?
I was never arguing the Microsoft issue. However, it's my understanding that the problem was Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing agreements with OEM's. Also, their falsifying of videotape evidence during the trial does not help their case.
That was their anti-trust case, that's an issue with abusing a monopolistic position. Your original suggestion ("Since you can sell a competing browser, no monopoly.") would hold that Microsoft would not have even had a monopoly to abuse because Netscape was able to sell a competing browser.
Like I said, I was not commenting on the Microsoft case, only the claim that there should be an Apple case.
Libertardianism ...
I love it when you guys invent cute little epithets like that. I also wonder if you even remember what word that tard bit comes from. Was it bastard, or retard? I don't think anyone's ever told me.
Let me clear it up for you:
libretardian - retarded libertarian
libastardian - libertarian born out of wedlock
liberturdian - libertarian so young (or old) that he needs diaper-changing