Tip #5: Be Weary of Totally Free Personals Services
Your choice of pronoun and Tip #5 make me wonder whether you, perhaps, run an on-line personals service which is not "Totally Free." If not, I apologize, but if so, I feel that you should have made a disclosure before dispensing Tip #5, as some might perceive a a conflict of interest or a hidden agenda.
Nvidia was the underdog. They developed all of their own chipsets in-house, and only bought 3Dfx after 3Dfx had already been dethroned.
I've been in the PC industry for many years, so I am quite aware of the market. I bought my first Nvidia card quite cautiously (the Riva TNT), and installed it in a machine which sat right beside a machine with a Voodoo 3 2000 inside. The differences in graphic performance was minor, but the Riva TNT had drivers which were updated more frequently, seemed more stable, and the card was cheaper. This process has been repeated with the Riva TNT 2, Voodoo 3 3000, the Voodoo 3500 TV, Voodoo 5500, and various incarnations of the Nvidia GeForce/GeForce 2, both in my personal computers and in the machines assembled for customers. Starting towards the middle of last year, most of our more knowledgeable customers weren't buying the Voodoo series, but were asking for cards in the Nvidia series.
Plain and simple: Nvidia conquered 3Dfx by better pricing, equal or better technology, and a more rapid development cycle. No one expected it, any more than anyone expected AMD to ever better Intel.
This happens in software as well:
Wordstar, WordPerfect, Word.
VisiCalc, Lotus 1-2-3, Excel.
Dbase, FoxPro, Clipper, Access.
Christ, it was amazing when CP/M was dethroned by MS-DOS, or when CD's bested LP's or tapes.
The technology doesn't have to be better (Motorola versus Intel, VHS versus Beta), but Nvidia was at least the equal, and arguably better than, 3Dfx. It wasn't a matter of buying "the little guy, re-lable the IP and sell[ing] it as their own."
Now, after that rant, let me say it again: if this is just a joke, they have every right to offend me with it. I don't have to look. But it is not at all obvious to me that this is entirely a joke, and for that reason it warrants investigation.
I assume, MrGrendel, that you haven't looked, otherwise the satire would be obvious. I don't find the site humorous, but I do find it hilarious that adults who do not appear to be otherwise mentally defective are unable to recognize satire. No, I am not referring to you, as I don't think that you have actually examined the site. Still, I do wonder, seriously, whether adults who lack the ability to recognize satire are missing a chromosome or something. In my household, myself and my eldest daughter (she is 16) both have well developed senses of humor. My youngest daughter and my wife seem genetically incapable of recognizing sarcasm, satire, parody, etc., and are also the type of people who are constantly tricked into forwarding hoax e-mail.
Explain the fundamental difference between transfer of a resource and duplication of a resource.
To tranfer a resource is to physically convey it from one location to another. To duplicate a resource is to make a copy of that resource, so that we have resource #1 and resource #2, identical but existing in separate locations. Rather like MOVING versus COPYING a file.
In a world where it is physically possible to copy anything, what is wrong with copying anything?
Nothing, unless by your copying you deprive me of deserved profit. If I invested time, and possibly money, in creating a otherwise unique resource, then I have the right to profit from my efforts.
Assume, either by law or by technological operation, copyrights never expire.
No thank you. We need to ensure that such idiocy never occurs. Copyrights should be curtailed to last X number of years maximum, where X is some number not to exceed, say, 5 years.
In a world where a creator's artifacts can be duplicated by anyone anywhere, what intangible property or concept will still be crucial to reward jobs well done?
In such a world, if such a world ever exists, pride of possession and greed will (probably) still be a part of human nature. However, transitory experiences might come to be perceived as possessions, and the more transitory and unique the more coveted.
A dozen or so entities tried to provide input to the drafting of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, but only two actually had any meaningful effect. Name them.
No idea. McDonald's and Disney? Microsoft? The MPAA? The RIAA?
Describe the steps... to determine with 100% certainty if the failure is due to a flaw in the drive... or due to properly operating copy control measures.
I doubt that this is doable.
Anyway, my answers might not be the same as yours, but that's what makes slashfot interesting.
Your analogy is wrong. This is theft, clear and simple. Not that I am climbing onto my moral high horse. However, to argue that it isn't theft is ludicrous.
Here's why:
DirecTV transmit their signal to paid subscribers. PizzaMax deliver their pizza to paying customers. DirecTV loses money when you intercept their signal. PizzaMax loses money when you ambush their driver and "intercept" their pizza. The product, whether a signal or a pizza, isn't important. The medium - the method of delivery - isn't important. However, the loss of profit _is_. DirecTV spent time and money for the sole purpose of making money by delivering a product to a paying customer. PizzaMax did the same thing, but decided to sell a different product. Neither operate out of benevolence. Without a profit, their services and products would not exist.
This, in effect, means that you are also stealing from me. If I must pay more to watch my chosen programming because, out of 2 million viewers, only 1 million are honest, then you have taken money out of my pocket.
If you are too stupid to understand this, I pity you. If you are too immoral too care, fuck you.
This is simply Verant and/or Sony feeling that they should be the ever powerful Gods ruling over an idealistic fantasy world...
No, it isn't. It is about Verant trying to save themselves the frustration of losers who buy EQ items or accounts on eBay and then bitch and moan to Verant when the purchased wasn't as described. Further, it is about Verant's responsibilty to ALL players to maintain balance and fair gameplay, which is much harder to accomplish if they allow the lazy and self-indulgent to buy the power and status for which others have worked very hard.
...right down to the name you may give your character.
Is Slashdot more or enjoyable or less because of the juvenile actions of a few who think that trolling is fun? Imagine the how the tone of an RPG would deteriorate if Verant allowed players to have names like Lars WangSniffer and Gonad JizzSpew? I know, people should have the liberty to be cretins, but the non-cretins should equally have the right to pay for havens from them. It is in the Terms Of Service; if people really don't like it, fuck 'em. They can go play games where the TOS doesn't have such restrictions, and the adults (and I am not speaking with a chronological bias here) can enjoy the company of their peers.
And for those who will reply that I am elitist, or have a stick up my ass, fuck YOU.
There is absolutely nothing about the "to my knowledge" disclaimer that qualifies it as a troll.
It is the same as saying, "I _think_ this is correct, but I may be wrong," which is a perfectly reasonable statement if one is slightly insecure as to the varacity of the details he or she is imparting. Liability is moot, as the gentleman/woman in question was only volunteering his/her understanding of a situation, without obligation for 100% accuracy to you, me, or anyone else on Slashdot. At least he/she was polite enough to indicate that his/her facts may have been in error.
There is something about these two statements which seem contradictory:
Believe me, that is NOT a lot of free time.
And:
Enjoy it while you can.
The second statement implies "Wow! You have FOUR HOURS of free time EVERY DAY? Enjoy it while you can!"
If that is the implication, I disagree 100%. Four hours spent fucking off every day is four hours that could have been spent doing something useful. Four hours is an obscene amount of free time to have daily. Most WEEKS I don't have four complete hours of fuck-off time.
If you were writing a 125,000 word novel (approximately 250 pages), and only managed 500 words an hour, it would take you less than three months to finish, with your amount of free time.
One day, I am going to die and rot. My possessions won't mean shit, then. Whether I enjoyed Blade Runner played off my personal copy on DVD, or off a licensed copy, or streaming off a broadband network, my corpse won't care. I don't care now. Ownership doesn't make my dick hard. The experience does.
In rich societies, we worry about shit like this because we have the leisure time to indulge our own selfishness and neurosis. Tell a Hindi who makes $25 monthly that you are pissed because you can't copy your DVD and he will punch you in the face (at least, he should).
Manufactured crisis and problems shouldn't get this much attention on Slashdot, or anywhere else, for that matter. I'm not anti-materialist, or a communist, but it makes me sad to see so many spoiled little wankers wetting themselves over what is, ultimately, inconsequential bullshit. Maybe it fills some deep need in their lives. Maybe we all need to feel victimized occasionally. I don't know; but it sure is fucking pathetic.
Is translating verbal commands in real time to another language really the killer app we've all been waiting for?
Truthfully? You betcha. If there really were such a thing as three wishes, selfish wish number one would be for me to effortlessly and fluently speak all languages.
Second? For me to be able to create spontaneous multiple orgasms, remotely or up close, in any person, just by willing it.
Third? Empathy for all of the humans whom you suddenly understood from wish #1, or induced orgasm in from wish #2.
Seriously, I can't think of many greater gifts to the world than the elimination of all language barriers.
I live in an area of the country where $7 an hour is still a good wage. I make slightly more than that, as does my wife, but, even between us, we barely gross 25K a year.
We have two cars, but didn't spend $3,000 for BOTH of them. We pay $355 monthly for rent. We can afford a broadband connection because I work for an ISP.
I have worked in the IT industry for nearly 20 years. I got married young -and I am still married to the same wonderful woman - and we produced two lovely daughters. I have no regrets.
However, statements such as:
In almost all of North America, staying with your employer is *optional.* With the exception of some of the more impoverished rural areas, you can get a job within *days* if you get off your ass and get serious about pounding pavement.
make me angry. They are hurtful, uninformed, and completely wrong.
I spent a decade in the U.S. Air Force, performing highly technical work, but the skills that I learned were worthless when I re-entered the civilian workforce. I am not stupid, uneducated, or lazy. However, I can't afford to live, or work, anyplace else.
I'm not asking for pity: I like my job and where I live. There isn't any amount of money that would make living in L.A. worthwhile, and, yes, I spent many years there, so I know of what I write.
I spent months securing my present job, and I pounded the pavement every day. I don't live in a particularly rural area. There are many jobs here, but very few of them pay well, if "well" translates into more than 25K a year.
To be honest, my.m3.com has always been a silly proposition. I'm sittng at home, and, assuming I have a broadband connection, I have the choice of listening to mp3 versions of my own CD collection, or I can just pop those same CD's into the player and listen to the real thing? Or, because I have a broadband connection (and listening to mp3's on a 56K connection is certainly not viable to any but the desperate or the terminally fixated with technology), I can listen to HUGE mp3 collections over Shoutcast or similar (Internet radio) systems, and for FREE. Further, it isn't difficult to create mp3's - I know a 12 year old girl who manages it quite easily - and, for the mp3 audioholic, creating them is part of the pleasure. Or trading them on CD compilations, or downloading them off Napster/IRC.
To be fair, I might be sitting at a workplace lucky enough to have a broadband connection, and a very tolerant boss, and listen to my mp3 collection, and that would be nice. But then I would have to have my entire fucking CD collection at work, which would cancel that convenience. I might be at a friend's house (who happens to have a broadband connection), but the inconvenience of carting my CD collection to that friend's house eliminates the "cool" factor of listening to them off of my.m3.com.
Storage space isn't an issue any more, either. CDR-W's are cheap, as are second HD's (I just bought a 40GB Maxtor for $174). If you can afford an expensive PC and a broadband connection, then you can generally afford the CDR-W or the extra HD.
Who does that leave to consist of the my.mp3.com consumer legions?
Language - in this case, arbitrarily selected words from a given vocabulary - cannot offend me. "Fart" is another word for "flatulence," and I can choose to be offended by the latter as easily as the former. I choose to be offended by neither.
If you call me a "stupid fucker," I am no more offended than I might be if you called me an "ignorant pretender." The words cause no damage: it is intention that causes hurt.
The words "poop," "booger," shit," "fuck" or "cunt" long ago lost the power to titillate, as should happen when a child matures into an adult. For some, this is obviously not the case. Those adults still delight in the mere enunciation of strings of simple syllables, which seems, to me, just as silly as being offended by those same syllables.
If a person, with real animosity, called me a "wiffly dribblehead," and this was a person whose esteem I valued, I would be offended. If an anonymous/.'er called me an "arrogant asshole," I would be amused that they thought I cared.
Almost all behavior - except for shitting, urinating, fucking, masturbating, eating, drinking, and breathing - is learned. So what? Is all learned behavior bad? If so, then you had better stop responding to messages on Slashdot, because you are using at least two learned behaviors to perform the aggregate task of "responding" - those behaviors being reading and typing.
I like to read, and I have not been deluded into thinking that I enjoy doing so. In particular, I enjoy reading books in the genre of Science Fiction, so advertisements which targeted my particular learned behavior of reading and enjoying Science Fiction novels would be extremely welcome, even if it was a conspiracy by THE MAN to sell me more books.
As for some learned behaviors being addictive, so what? Addictions are not inherently evil. I have friends who are addicted to reading mystery novels, or addicted to watching anime or Red Dwarf/Doctor Who/Star Trek episodes, and these addictions give them nothing but pleasure. They spend money on things that you or I might consider wasteful - but paying for anything other than food, drink and shelter can be considered by someone, somewhere, an indulgence.
My parents happened to live, at the time of my conception, in the prosperous West, and I am grateful. I promote neither gross excess nor asceticism; moderation seems to me a noble ideal. However, I can, and do, control most of my spendthrift impulses, and I don't think my behavior would be any different if advertising was targeted at me specifically (or to a market segment which happened to contain my purchasing profile).
Really? You'd rather be rich than stupid? Why, fancy that! Imagine giving up marvellous, wonderful stupidity for something as boring as wealth. I assure you, you'll regret it. Never again will you be able to watch Baywatch or the A-Team without puking, but you _will_ feel compelled to spend gross sums of money on personal computing hardware and pleasure cruises, where big-breasted bimbos will felate you constantly. Oh, the sacrifice!
Are you _sure_ that you would rather have millions of dollars instead of a few dozen brain cells?
Oh, wait, you already _are_ stupid, which is why you were willing to make the trade. Wait, no, if you already are stupid, willing to trade your stupidity for wealth, that would make you clever, which causes a terrible paradox!
I watched television on a 14" set until last year, when I bought a 25" Sony. Further, I quite happily watch DVD's on my 17" monitor. Sure, a big screen is nice, but not essential. If it requires a big screen to enjoy it, go to the cinema.
Yes, I am among the minority who only infrequently watch a film a second time, and then only the smaller, more intimate foreign/subbed titles. In other words, I'd never watch TPM at home, anyway, so a 17" screen is ample.
You will find that my assertions are backed by reams and reams of facts. I don't need to clog up bandwidth by repeating what everyone else has already posted.
The common rebuttal of those who have few, if any, facts to present.
I have read hundreds of assertions, dozens of forceful and aggressive declarations which purport that X or Y is true of Scientologists. What is lacking is proof.
You state that "these people are dangerous." This is a blanket statement inferring some vast conspiracy on the part of the CoS. Of course, in any large institution, there will be those whom you can define as "evil." The Catholic church has an alarming number of priests who are pederasts; it is a Catholic plan to bugger all young boys?
Simply because some Scientologists are evil bastards does not qualify you to insist that all of Scientology is evil. Internal documents mean nothing; does all of Christiandom believe or follow absolutely everything that the bible advocates?
Your willing suspension of the rules of logic and evidence is amazing - and appalling.
Their BELIEFS aren't at issue here. (well, except for the 'it's okay to destroy any person that is an impediment to our progress' one.) Their BEHAVIORS are what people are frightened of.
This isn't religious intolerance, this is simple practicality. I, for one, take issue with people trying to destroy my life in a highly organized and systematic way because I don't agree with their goals.
Before you spout again, go do some research.
You make a number of assertions, but no arguments. If their evil has been documented "hundreds of times in as many places," then you ought easily to be able to cite at least a dozen URL's which substantiate at least several dozen examples.
I don't spout unless I have done research. And I am never an anonymous chickenshit.
When I was still serving in the U.S. military, I published a letter in a U.S. military newspaper which supported the burning of the flag. Bricks were hurled through my windows by anonymous patriots for over a week. I do practice what I preach. I am openly bisexual, and an atheist (not popular lifestyles in the land of the free and the home of the brave), and I would shit on L. Ron's Dianetics within view of a Scientologist if I thought that Scientology was an evil bent on "literally taking over the world."
When you can provide at least a dozen substantiated incidents of Scientology evil, I will bow before your greater knowledge. Meanwhile, don't spout without providing the hard evidence.
CoS is no more evil than many other religions. It is just the currently acceptable (almost PC, especially on Slashdot) whipping-boy.
That something is de rigueur doesn't make it right. Anecdotal evidence isn't sufficient to condemn an entire belief system. Yes, you would have to be pretty fucking stupid to believe what the average Scientologist apparently believes, but I will extend that scorn to anyone to believes anything out of willful ignorance.
I know people who believe that dinosaurs never walked the earth - that the fossil evidence is the snare of some mythological being called "Satan." I know people who believe who that we will burn in a lake of fire forever if we aren't immersed in H20, if we don't accept the sacrifice of a long decayed (if ever historically existent) savior, if we don't eat of this savior's flesh and drink of his blood in ghoulish cannibalistic ritual.
I know others who would die from dehydration rather than quench their thirst from a vessel previously used by an "untouchable." I know adults who believe that they have been abducted and anally probed by aliens. I know other adults who live in fear of a children's plaything named a "ouija board."
No brainwashing was required to separate these people from their sanity, so why badger the Scientologists?
If they have performed criminal acts, let the courts punish them. Otherwise, let us remember that the Spanish Inquistion was no less a crime because it happened a long time ago. Anti-Catholic diatribes and half-truths aren't acceptable on Slashdot, so why should obvious trolls hiding under the shield of the "Anonymous Coward?"
Re:Scientology Intelligence Operations
on
FRG on W2K: No CoS
·
· Score: 1
The CoS bothered to harrass this funtionally-illiterate imbecile?
I am not surprised. If this sort of obvious troll can be moderated to a 4, then anything is possible. Still, I am amazed that the CoS would have "infilitrated" someone unable to spell "sceintology."
... and found most of the pr0n wouldn't play either.
And:
But it's also a testament to how much work people are willing to go through to get their pr0n.
I notice this spelling of porn a lot... why? You don't appear to be a person cursed with the sheeple-like need to phrase everything in "l33t-speak," so I am guessing that this spelling serves some purpose.
Would you please fill in this poor un-initiated Slashdotter?
Slashdot Mirror
Our advice applies to...
And:
Tip #5: Be Weary of Totally Free Personals Services
Your choice of pronoun and Tip #5 make me wonder whether you, perhaps, run an on-line personals service which is not "Totally Free." If not, I apologize, but if so, I feel that you should have made a disclosure before dispensing Tip #5, as some might perceive a a conflict of interest or a hidden agenda.
Nvidia was the underdog. They developed all of their own chipsets in-house, and only bought 3Dfx after 3Dfx had already been dethroned.
I've been in the PC industry for many years, so I am quite aware of the market. I bought my first Nvidia card quite cautiously (the Riva TNT), and installed it in a machine which sat right beside a machine with a Voodoo 3 2000 inside. The differences in graphic performance was minor, but the Riva TNT had drivers which were updated more frequently, seemed more stable, and the card was cheaper. This process has been repeated with the Riva TNT 2, Voodoo 3 3000, the Voodoo 3500 TV, Voodoo 5500, and various incarnations of the Nvidia GeForce/GeForce 2, both in my personal computers and in the machines assembled for customers. Starting towards the middle of last year, most of our more knowledgeable customers weren't buying the Voodoo series, but were asking for cards in the Nvidia series.
Plain and simple: Nvidia conquered 3Dfx by better pricing, equal or better technology, and a more rapid development cycle. No one expected it, any more than anyone expected AMD to ever better Intel.
This happens in software as well:
Wordstar, WordPerfect, Word.
VisiCalc, Lotus 1-2-3, Excel.
Dbase, FoxPro, Clipper, Access.
Christ, it was amazing when CP/M was dethroned by MS-DOS, or when CD's bested LP's or tapes.
The technology doesn't have to be better (Motorola versus Intel, VHS versus Beta), but Nvidia was at least the equal, and arguably better than, 3Dfx. It wasn't a matter of buying "the little guy, re-lable the IP and sell[ing] it as their own."
Now, after that rant, let me say it again: if this is just a joke, they have every right to offend me with it. I don't have to look. But it is not at all obvious to me that this is entirely a joke, and for that reason it warrants investigation.
I assume, MrGrendel, that you haven't looked, otherwise the satire would be obvious. I don't find the site humorous, but I do find it hilarious that adults who do not appear to be otherwise mentally defective are unable to recognize satire. No, I am not referring to you, as I don't think that you have actually examined the site. Still, I do wonder, seriously, whether adults who lack the ability to recognize satire are missing a chromosome or something. In my household, myself and my eldest daughter (she is 16) both have well developed senses of humor. My youngest daughter and my wife seem genetically incapable of recognizing sarcasm, satire, parody, etc., and are also the type of people who are constantly tricked into forwarding hoax e-mail.
This might be more useful if you at least once defined what UCE is...
Explain the fundamental difference between transfer of a resource and duplication of a resource.
To tranfer a resource is to physically convey it from one location to another. To duplicate a resource is to make a copy of that resource, so that we have resource #1 and resource #2, identical but existing in separate locations. Rather like MOVING versus COPYING a file.
In a world where it is physically possible to copy anything, what is wrong with copying anything?
Nothing, unless by your copying you deprive me of deserved profit. If I invested time, and possibly money, in creating a otherwise unique resource, then I have the right to profit from my efforts.
Assume, either by law or by technological operation, copyrights never expire.
No thank you. We need to ensure that such idiocy never occurs. Copyrights should be curtailed to last X number of years maximum, where X is some number not to exceed, say, 5 years.
In a world where a creator's artifacts can be duplicated by anyone anywhere, what intangible property or concept will still be crucial to reward jobs well done?
In such a world, if such a world ever exists, pride of possession and greed will (probably) still be a part of human nature. However, transitory experiences might come to be perceived as possessions, and the more transitory and unique the more coveted.
A dozen or so entities tried to provide input to the drafting of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, but only two actually had any meaningful effect. Name them.
No idea. McDonald's and Disney? Microsoft? The MPAA? The RIAA?
Describe the steps... to determine with 100% certainty if the failure is due to a flaw in the drive... or due to properly operating copy control measures.
I doubt that this is doable.
Anyway, my answers might not be the same as yours, but that's what makes slashfot interesting.
Your analogy is wrong. This is theft, clear and simple. Not that I am climbing onto my moral high horse. However, to argue that it isn't theft is ludicrous.
Here's why:
DirecTV transmit their signal to paid subscribers. PizzaMax deliver their pizza to paying customers. DirecTV loses money when you intercept their signal. PizzaMax loses money when you ambush their driver and "intercept" their pizza. The product, whether a signal or a pizza, isn't important. The medium - the method of delivery - isn't important. However, the loss of profit _is_. DirecTV spent time and money for the sole purpose of making money by delivering a product to a paying customer. PizzaMax did the same thing, but decided to sell a different product. Neither operate out of benevolence. Without a profit, their services and products would not exist.
This, in effect, means that you are also stealing from me. If I must pay more to watch my chosen programming because, out of 2 million viewers, only 1 million are honest, then you have taken money out of my pocket.
If you are too stupid to understand this, I pity you. If you are too immoral too care, fuck you.
I said:
There is absolutely nothing about the "to my knowledge" disclaimer that qualifies it as a troll.
You quote another issue entirely, which, yes, might be perceived as "trollish."
:-)
This is simply Verant and/or Sony feeling that they should be the ever powerful Gods ruling over an idealistic fantasy world...
...right down to the name you may give your character.
No, it isn't. It is about Verant trying to save themselves the frustration of losers who buy EQ items or accounts on eBay and then bitch and moan to Verant when the purchased wasn't as described. Further, it is about Verant's responsibilty to ALL players to maintain balance and fair gameplay, which is much harder to accomplish if they allow the lazy and self-indulgent to buy the power and status for which others have worked very hard.
Is Slashdot more or enjoyable or less because of the juvenile actions of a few who think that trolling is fun? Imagine the how the tone of an RPG would deteriorate if Verant allowed players to have names like Lars WangSniffer and Gonad JizzSpew? I know, people should have the liberty to be cretins, but the non-cretins should equally have the right to pay for havens from them. It is in the Terms Of Service; if people really don't like it, fuck 'em. They can go play games where the TOS doesn't have such restrictions, and the adults (and I am not speaking with a chronological bias here) can enjoy the company of their peers.
And for those who will reply that I am elitist, or have a stick up my ass, fuck YOU.
:-)
There is absolutely nothing about the "to my knowledge" disclaimer that qualifies it as a troll.
It is the same as saying, "I _think_ this is correct, but I may be wrong," which is a perfectly reasonable statement if one is slightly insecure as to the varacity of the details he or she is imparting. Liability is moot, as the gentleman/woman in question was only volunteering his/her understanding of a situation, without obligation for 100% accuracy to you, me, or anyone else on Slashdot. At least he/she was polite enough to indicate that his/her facts may have been in error.
There is something about these two statements which seem contradictory:
Believe me, that is NOT a lot of free time.
And:
Enjoy it while you can.
The second statement implies "Wow! You have FOUR HOURS of free time EVERY DAY? Enjoy it while you can!"
If that is the implication, I disagree 100%. Four hours spent fucking off every day is four hours that could have been spent doing something useful. Four hours is an obscene amount of free time to have daily. Most WEEKS I don't have four complete hours of fuck-off time.
If you were writing a 125,000 word novel (approximately 250 pages), and only managed 500 words an hour, it would take you less than three months to finish, with your amount of free time.
Flash isn't a format. It is an application. The format is *.swf, which Macromedia opened quite some time ago.
One day, I am going to die and rot. My possessions won't mean shit, then. Whether I enjoyed Blade Runner played off my personal copy on DVD, or off a licensed copy, or streaming off a broadband network, my corpse won't care. I don't care now. Ownership doesn't make my dick hard. The experience does.
In rich societies, we worry about shit like this because we have the leisure time to indulge our own selfishness and neurosis. Tell a Hindi who makes $25 monthly that you are pissed because you can't copy your DVD and he will punch you in the face (at least, he should).
Manufactured crisis and problems shouldn't get this much attention on Slashdot, or anywhere else, for that matter. I'm not anti-materialist, or a communist, but it makes me sad to see so many spoiled little wankers wetting themselves over what is, ultimately, inconsequential bullshit. Maybe it fills some deep need in their lives. Maybe we all need to feel victimized occasionally. I don't know; but it sure is fucking pathetic.
Is translating verbal commands in real time to another language really the killer app we've all been waiting for?
Truthfully? You betcha. If there really were such a thing as three wishes, selfish wish number one would be for me to effortlessly and fluently speak all languages.
Second? For me to be able to create spontaneous multiple orgasms, remotely or up close, in any person, just by willing it.
Third? Empathy for all of the humans whom you suddenly understood from wish #1, or induced orgasm in from wish #2.
Seriously, I can't think of many greater gifts to the world than the elimination of all language barriers.
I live in an area of the country where $7 an hour is still a good wage. I make slightly more than that, as does my wife, but, even between us, we barely gross 25K a year.
We have two cars, but didn't spend $3,000 for BOTH of them. We pay $355 monthly for rent. We can afford a broadband connection because I work for an ISP.
I have worked in the IT industry for nearly 20 years. I got married young -and I am still married to the same wonderful woman - and we produced two lovely daughters. I have no regrets.
However, statements such as:
In almost all of North America, staying with your employer is *optional.* With the exception of some of the more impoverished rural areas, you can get a job within *days* if you get off your ass and get serious about pounding pavement.
make me angry. They are hurtful, uninformed, and completely wrong.
I spent a decade in the U.S. Air Force, performing highly technical work, but the skills that I learned were worthless when I re-entered the civilian workforce. I am not stupid, uneducated, or lazy. However, I can't afford to live, or work, anyplace else.
I'm not asking for pity: I like my job and where I live. There isn't any amount of money that would make living in L.A. worthwhile, and, yes, I spent many years there, so I know of what I write.
I spent months securing my present job, and I pounded the pavement every day. I don't live in a particularly rural area. There are many jobs here, but very few of them pay well, if "well" translates into more than 25K a year.
Don't be so arrogant and sure of yourself.
These double-standard, back-stabbing, money-grubbing assholes make Hitler, Satan and Jerry Falwell look like swell guys.
I do understand hyperbole, but isn't this comparison ridiculous?
RIAA Officer: "I have come to confiscate and incinerate your DVD collection."
Nazi Officer: "I have come to arrest, torture, and incinerate your parents and children."
Are they really comparable?
To be honest, my.m3.com has always been a silly proposition. I'm sittng at home, and, assuming I have a broadband connection, I have the choice of listening to mp3 versions of my own CD collection, or I can just pop those same CD's into the player and listen to the real thing? Or, because I have a broadband connection (and listening to mp3's on a 56K connection is certainly not viable to any but the desperate or the terminally fixated with technology), I can listen to HUGE mp3 collections over Shoutcast or similar (Internet radio) systems, and for FREE. Further, it isn't difficult to create mp3's - I know a 12 year old girl who manages it quite easily - and, for the mp3 audioholic, creating them is part of the pleasure. Or trading them on CD compilations, or downloading them off Napster/IRC.
To be fair, I might be sitting at a workplace lucky enough to have a broadband connection, and a very tolerant boss, and listen to my mp3 collection, and that would be nice. But then I would have to have my entire fucking CD collection at work, which would cancel that convenience. I might be at a friend's house (who happens to have a broadband connection), but the inconvenience of carting my CD collection to that friend's house eliminates the "cool" factor of listening to them off of my.m3.com.
Storage space isn't an issue any more, either. CDR-W's are cheap, as are second HD's (I just bought a 40GB Maxtor for $174). If you can afford an expensive PC and a broadband connection, then you can generally afford the CDR-W or the extra HD.
Who does that leave to consist of the my.mp3.com consumer legions?
Language - in this case, arbitrarily selected words from a given vocabulary - cannot offend me. "Fart" is another word for "flatulence," and I can choose to be offended by the latter as easily as the former. I choose to be offended by neither.
/.'er called me an "arrogant asshole," I would be amused that they thought I cared.
.02 cents worth.
If you call me a "stupid fucker," I am no more offended than I might be if you called me an "ignorant pretender." The words cause no damage: it is intention that causes hurt.
The words "poop," "booger," shit," "fuck" or "cunt" long ago lost the power to titillate, as should happen when a child matures into an adult. For some, this is obviously not the case. Those adults still delight in the mere enunciation of strings of simple syllables, which seems, to me, just as silly as being offended by those same syllables.
If a person, with real animosity, called me a "wiffly dribblehead," and this was a person whose esteem I valued, I would be offended. If an anonymous
Just my
Almost all behavior - except for shitting, urinating, fucking, masturbating, eating, drinking, and breathing - is learned. So what? Is all learned behavior bad? If so, then you had better stop responding to messages on Slashdot, because you are using at least two learned behaviors to perform the aggregate task of "responding" - those behaviors being reading and typing.
.02 cents worth.
I like to read, and I have not been deluded into thinking that I enjoy doing so. In particular, I enjoy reading books in the genre of Science Fiction, so advertisements which targeted my particular learned behavior of reading and enjoying Science Fiction novels would be extremely welcome, even if it was a conspiracy by THE MAN to sell me more books.
As for some learned behaviors being addictive, so what? Addictions are not inherently evil. I have friends who are addicted to reading mystery novels, or addicted to watching anime or Red Dwarf/Doctor Who/Star Trek episodes, and these addictions give them nothing but pleasure. They spend money on things that you or I might consider wasteful - but paying for anything other than food, drink and shelter can be considered by someone, somewhere, an indulgence.
My parents happened to live, at the time of my conception, in the prosperous West, and I am grateful. I promote neither gross excess nor asceticism; moderation seems to me a noble ideal. However, I can, and do, control most of my spendthrift impulses, and I don't think my behavior would be any different if advertising was targeted at me specifically (or to a market segment which happened to contain my purchasing profile).
Just my
Yeah, well, I'd rather be rich than stupid.
Really? You'd rather be rich than stupid? Why, fancy that! Imagine giving up marvellous, wonderful stupidity for something as boring as wealth. I assure you, you'll regret it. Never again will you be able to watch Baywatch or the A-Team without puking, but you _will_ feel compelled to spend gross sums of money on personal computing hardware and pleasure cruises, where big-breasted bimbos will felate you constantly. Oh, the sacrifice!
Are you _sure_ that you would rather have millions of dollars instead of a few dozen brain cells?
Oh, wait, you already _are_ stupid, which is why you were willing to make the trade. Wait, no, if you already are stupid, willing to trade your stupidity for wealth, that would make you clever, which causes a terrible paradox!
I feel the universe imploding! Ah-hh!
I watched television on a 14" set until last year, when I bought a 25" Sony. Further, I quite happily watch DVD's on my 17" monitor. Sure, a big screen is nice, but not essential. If it requires a big screen to enjoy it, go to the cinema.
Yes, I am among the minority who only infrequently watch a film a second time, and then only the smaller, more intimate foreign/subbed titles. In other words, I'd never watch TPM at home, anyway, so a 17" screen is ample.
You will find that my assertions are backed by reams and reams of facts. I don't need to clog up bandwidth by repeating what everyone else has already posted.
The common rebuttal of those who have few, if any, facts to present.
I have read hundreds of assertions, dozens of forceful and aggressive declarations which purport that X or Y is true of Scientologists. What is lacking is proof.
You state that "these people are dangerous." This is a blanket statement inferring some vast conspiracy on the part of the CoS. Of course, in any large institution, there will be those whom you can define as "evil." The Catholic church has an alarming number of priests who are pederasts; it is a Catholic plan to bugger all young boys?
Simply because some Scientologists are evil bastards does not qualify you to insist that all of Scientology is evil. Internal documents mean nothing; does all of Christiandom believe or follow absolutely everything that the bible advocates?
Your willing suspension of the rules of logic and evidence is amazing - and appalling.
Their BELIEFS aren't at issue here. (well, except for the 'it's okay to destroy any person that is an impediment to our progress' one.) Their BEHAVIORS are what people are frightened of.
This isn't religious intolerance, this is simple practicality. I, for one, take issue with people trying to destroy my life in a highly organized and systematic way because I don't agree with their goals.
Before you spout again, go do some research.
You make a number of assertions, but no arguments. If their evil has been documented "hundreds of times in as many places," then you ought easily to be able to cite at least a dozen URL's which substantiate at least several dozen examples.
I don't spout unless I have done research. And I am never an anonymous chickenshit.
When I was still serving in the U.S. military, I published a letter in a U.S. military newspaper which supported the burning of the flag. Bricks were hurled through my windows by anonymous patriots for over a week. I do practice what I preach. I am openly bisexual, and an atheist (not popular lifestyles in the land of the free and the home of the brave), and I would shit on L. Ron's Dianetics within view of a Scientologist if I thought that Scientology was an evil bent on "literally taking over the world."
When you can provide at least a dozen substantiated incidents of Scientology evil, I will bow before your greater knowledge. Meanwhile, don't spout without providing the hard evidence.
CoS is no more evil than many other religions. It is just the currently acceptable (almost PC, especially on Slashdot) whipping-boy.
That something is de rigueur doesn't make it right. Anecdotal evidence isn't sufficient to condemn an entire belief system. Yes, you would have to be pretty fucking stupid to believe what the average Scientologist apparently believes, but I will extend that scorn to anyone to believes anything out of willful ignorance.
I know people who believe that dinosaurs never walked the earth - that the fossil evidence is the snare of some mythological being called "Satan." I know people who believe who that we will burn in a lake of fire forever if we aren't immersed in H20, if we don't accept the sacrifice of a long decayed (if ever historically existent) savior, if we don't eat of this savior's flesh and drink of his blood in ghoulish cannibalistic ritual.
I know others who would die from dehydration rather than quench their thirst from a vessel previously used by an "untouchable." I know adults who believe that they have been abducted and anally probed by aliens. I know other adults who live in fear of a children's plaything named a "ouija board."
No brainwashing was required to separate these people from their sanity, so why badger the Scientologists?
If they have performed criminal acts, let the courts punish them. Otherwise, let us remember that the Spanish Inquistion was no less a crime because it happened a long time ago. Anti-Catholic diatribes and half-truths aren't acceptable on Slashdot, so why should obvious trolls hiding under the shield of the "Anonymous Coward?"
The CoS bothered to harrass this funtionally-illiterate imbecile?
I am not surprised. If this sort of obvious troll can be moderated to a 4, then anything is possible. Still, I am amazed that the CoS would have "infilitrated" someone unable to spell "sceintology."
... and found most of the pr0n wouldn't play either.
And:
But it's also a testament to how much work people are willing to go through to get their pr0n.
I notice this spelling of porn a lot... why? You don't appear to be a person cursed with the sheeple-like need to phrase everything in "l33t-speak," so I am guessing that this spelling serves some purpose.
Would you please fill in this poor un-initiated Slashdotter?
:-)