Actually, you are exactly correct. I do hate the automobile for it's inefficiencies. Of course I also despise the human failing that results in these inefficiencies. If people weren't greedy or selfish, a public transport system using automobile like vehicles that we didn't own would work. But that's too much for simple apes to work with. So instead we have morons driving around with SUVs instead. It's a damn shame.
Will you also pay for my relocation, get me a good job doing the equivalent of what I do now? Because I'd sure love to move to Australia right about now. Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, any of those would be fine with me. Sorry, but it costs more than a plane ticket to make a move from one country to another. It's not as simple as that. Of course, you're just trolling. I can tell.:P
Hey Darl! I like this part of the Usenix open letter:
"Inventors who find they can't compete against lower-cot or free substitutes are compelled to find other things to sell".
I have a few suggestions for you:
1. You could always sell your sharky legal dept. and probably make loads more money than this whole fiasco will provide you with 2. Since you seem to know so much about where to get a good tan, you could get with the Queer Eye guys and open a chain. Of course, they might not want to have anything to do with you. 3. After you get out of prison, you could peddle your body to the highest bidder.
Just a few suggestions anyway you twerp.
(Oh my. What's Poor widdle Darl gonna do now? Sned his gang of wolves after me now?)
Unfortunately, I can't afford to leave this damned country. If I could... I would. But, I have a duty to others of my kind who also feel trapped here. That duty is to try an get people who are on the fence to see the light and join our side in changing the direction that things have gone in. Trust me people, I'm willing to fight to get my country back if need be.
But fat clients are a waste of resources. All that power could be put in the data center where it belongs, not on a desktop where it sits there doing nothing all day. Even if it was just a way of clustering all that CPU power into one nebulous cloud, it would be better than the horribly inefficient and wasteful system we have now. I have a laptop here at home that sits on all day doing nothing until I come home. It's a 2.4 GhZ Athlon. What a freaking waste. Fortunatley, I've been changing things here and have put my old pentium 90 laptop back into use as an x terminal with my dual P II 450 running Linux as a terminal server. Quite nice to finally have things centralized here. It's cheaper and more efficient.
Thanks for the clarification. Most of my interactions with Java are apps that are used to remote admin Cisco equipment or SunOne shit (I hate Sun BTW... they make my life a living hell with such poor documentation (ie TOO MUCH)). It's all horribly slow when you are talking about applications even with the latest JRE.
BSD is dying.;P Just kidding. I am multiplatform, but the original was talking about Linux vs. Windows. Either Linux or BSD, you still don't have to pay for the upgrade other than a little time, and if you're really on the ball you can automate the procedure enough that you really don't have to do much more than type one command when you want to upgrade anything. Can't do that with Windows...
As much as Java sucks in terms of performance when compared to languages like C, it's still apparent that there is a real need for a cross-platform interpretted language. If we are ever going to get people to realize that having all the power at the desktop is a stupid idea and centralized application servers are a much better concept, we NEED something like Java. Admit it... there is nothing dumber than having a P4 sitting on a secretary's desktop when her most system taxing app is the media player she uses to listen to lite rock. The power needs to be in the data center/application service center with just a simple client for remote access. And NO http is NOT the answer. http is slow and clunky for apps like word processing. Instead, centralize apps with all processing taking place on the server and the remote client is just a remote display. For this we still need something like Java. Since Java is already there... why not just open it?
Ummm... assuming we're talking about the kernel here, it's not that hard to "upgrade" Linux when an exploit is found. Personally, I just go the source code route and compile the latest version and install. All of a few minutes at most on a system with decent RAM and CPU. If the exploit is in an app or server software, I still follow the same route. I just isn't that hard guys:
1. tar zxvf newkernel.tar.gz 2. make menuconfig 3. make bzImage && make modules && moake modules_install && cd arch/i386/boot && cp bzImage/boot/newkernel 4. Edit grub.conf and reboot
Anyone who finds that to be "hard" should take their hands off the keyboard now and walk away.
I played Llamatron incessantly for a good part of my late teens and twenties. Even today's bi tech FPS games can't compete for playability with a classic like Llamatron. I even got it running in DOSBox on Linux. Woohoo!:)
I agree with you on both points. But... there is no point in debating with morons and that is largley what American society has become. We're a society who is proud of our stupidity and we LOVE to emphasize it every chance we get.
And this post is where it ends. The troll above doesn't want to discuss why he feels that homosexuality should not be legitimized. I imagine it's because he'd have to start delving into the reasons why it's "unwanted". He'd have to come to terms with the fact that he is bothered by the concept of two men or two women doing things that he feels are repulsive. (If he's truly the jackass I suspect he is, he has no problems with women "doing it" with each other as long as he's allowed to watch and join in) I'll be surprised if he responds in a way that doesn't make him look like a total ass. Thanks to all the others in this thread who put some of the ideas I was trying to write about in better terms.:)
We do not want to legitimize something we do not want.
Why do you feel this way? You obviously have some hangups. I'm not gay, but I advocate for homosexuals because the feelings they experience are no different from the feelings that men and women experience in a romantic context:
1. There is physical attraction 2. This leads to sexual interaction 3. Following this, there may eventually be a deeper feeling known by many of us as love
That's all that matters. Procreation, orifices and other sexual predelictions that happen later are not related and cannot be used to invalidate either kind of relationship. For instance if my wife wants me to stick and elephant trunk in her every night, that doesn't invalidate our love. So, bowling balls in someone's ass shouldn't have any bearing either.
Their lifestyle SHOULD be legitimized. Since there is so much resistance by a vocal minority, it's an uphill battle. If we just had a national election (unrigged thank you), that actually counted up every vote, I'll bet a resolution to legitimize homosexuality would pass easily. There are plenty of people from all walks of life who follow the live and let live approach, as long as they aren't being manipulated by the media and special interests like the Bush administration, they will make the right choice.
Marriage has nothing to do with procreation. While procreation is certainly important to the survival of humanity, it has no bearing on the validitiy of the love between two people.
Hehehe... if only I were a troll. As I've noted many times in my JEs and other postings, I'm not a troll. My name is a targeted joke ad the idiots who consider themselves necons in this country (USA).
And under your argument, aren't those outside a "unity" arrangement second class citizens?
No. They are simply "single and looking".
but your post is riddled with inconsistent logic, as well as ad hominim attacks ("fucking religious looney birds"?!?) hence I award to you no troll points today.
It's more likely that you disagree with me, so you label me a troll in the hopes that I will get modded down as such. But again, you are completely incorrect. Personally, I like mixing logic (inconsistent or not) with ad hominems and just general profanity. It seems to be the only tool that works on some people. It's not my fault that people will only give you some "spect" these days if you throw the profanity around.
The problem with the whole "legal union" thing is that there would still be a separation in everyone's mind about "legal union" vs. "marriage". The goal here is to take away any distinction at all levels between homosexual and heterosexual commited relationships. There is no difference and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply a stick in the mud. If you were to completely remove gender from the human race and just talk about our minds, this would not be an issue.
If we want to stick to dictionary definitions, then perhaps the word marriage itself is outdated since it no longer applies to any unions be they hetero or homo? Some facts:
1. There is nothing wrong with homosexuality in today's society. Anyone who says otherwise is a dinosaur and will soon perish. 2. Sexual preference has no bearing on committment as evidenced by the dismal failure that heterosexual marriage is. 3. Humans are not naturally monogamous, and monogamy has little to do with committment and responsibility.
With those facts in mind, then I will suggest that marriage (based on relgious morals) is a completely outdated concept and should be aboloished. Marriage (as a social construct) is more relevant today, but since there is so much stigma attached to the word, it should also be aboloshed and all marriages anulled. Instead we can replace the outdated notion of marriage with a superior concept that validates both homosexual and heterosexual relationships in every legal way as long as we no longer recognize tradtitional marriage. The main reason for this is that then no one is given second class status and we finally state officially that, regardless of sexual preference, the unity of two people is valid. At that point, religions are free to recognize this new status, but are forbidden from using the divisive concept of marriage. Anyone caught performing a traditional "marriage" ceremony or recognizing illegal documents will be guilty of hate crime.
A little too complicated huh? Why on't we just accept that fact that there is no difference between homosexual and heterosexual union and stop letting the fucking religious looney birds pull our chains? Hmmm???
You're absolutely right. HUmans need some kind of outlet for the animal behavior that we're keeping hidden under the surface. We are all hypocrites if we react against something that we do in our own back yards. For instance, how many women out there let their husbands or boyfriends perform anal sex on them, but then at a party when the subject comes up they react with "Ewww! Gross! I'd never do that!" Or how many guys here had that *one* homosexual encounter in college that they've never told anyone about and then say, "Ewwww! Fuckin' faggots! I don't get how guys would want to do that!! I could never do that!" If this facade is going to continue to exist, then there needs to be some other anonymous outlet for it and the Web is the perfect place. Otherwise you'll see more of this kind of thing happening in real life if people can't get their jollies other ways.
Oh yeah... like we chumps in the US have it any better. What with all the arguments over the definition of Marriage in the Gay Marriage debate. Yeah... nice "consistent interpretation highly resistant to the whims and prejudices of whoever happens to be making decisions" approach there. The current admin is using the outdated religious code that says homosexuality is wrong just to manipulate people who like to hold to outdated religious codes. Sounds like whims and predjudices to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you are exactly correct. I do hate the automobile for it's inefficiencies. Of course I also despise the human failing that results in these inefficiencies. If people weren't greedy or selfish, a public transport system using automobile like vehicles that we didn't own would work. But that's too much for simple apes to work with. So instead we have morons driving around with SUVs instead. It's a damn shame.
Will you also pay for my relocation, get me a good job doing the equivalent of what I do now? Because I'd sure love to move to Australia right about now. Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, any of those would be fine with me. Sorry, but it costs more than a plane ticket to make a move from one country to another. It's not as simple as that. Of course, you're just trolling. I can tell. :P
Hey Darl! I like this part of the Usenix open letter:
"Inventors who find they can't compete against lower-cot or free substitutes are compelled to find other things to sell".
I have a few suggestions for you:
1. You could always sell your sharky legal dept. and probably make loads more money than this whole fiasco will provide you with
2. Since you seem to know so much about where to get a good tan, you could get with the Queer Eye guys and open a chain. Of course, they might not want to have anything to do with you.
3. After you get out of prison, you could peddle your body to the highest bidder.
Just a few suggestions anyway you twerp.
(Oh my. What's Poor widdle Darl gonna do now? Sned his gang of wolves after me now?)
...in a lot of crappy things.
Unfortunately, I can't afford to leave this damned country. If I could... I would. But, I have a duty to others of my kind who also feel trapped here. That duty is to try an get people who are on the fence to see the light and join our side in changing the direction that things have gone in. Trust me people, I'm willing to fight to get my country back if need be.
Oh man... that closing was just TOO GOOD. :) Style man, pure style.
But fat clients are a waste of resources. All that power could be put in the data center where it belongs, not on a desktop where it sits there doing nothing all day. Even if it was just a way of clustering all that CPU power into one nebulous cloud, it would be better than the horribly inefficient and wasteful system we have now. I have a laptop here at home that sits on all day doing nothing until I come home. It's a 2.4 GhZ Athlon. What a freaking waste. Fortunatley, I've been changing things here and have put my old pentium 90 laptop back into use as an x terminal with my dual P II 450 running Linux as a terminal server. Quite nice to finally have things centralized here. It's cheaper and more efficient.
Thanks for the clarification. Most of my interactions with Java are apps that are used to remote admin Cisco equipment or SunOne shit (I hate Sun BTW... they make my life a living hell with such poor documentation (ie TOO MUCH)). It's all horribly slow when you are talking about applications even with the latest JRE.
BSD is dying. ;P Just kidding. I am multiplatform, but the original was talking about Linux vs. Windows. Either Linux or BSD, you still don't have to pay for the upgrade other than a little time, and if you're really on the ball you can automate the procedure enough that you really don't have to do much more than type one command when you want to upgrade anything. Can't do that with Windows...
I agree. I still have my ST 1040. I loved the 68000 family.
As much as Java sucks in terms of performance when compared to languages like C, it's still apparent that there is a real need for a cross-platform interpretted language. If we are ever going to get people to realize that having all the power at the desktop is a stupid idea and centralized application servers are a much better concept, we NEED something like Java. Admit it... there is nothing dumber than having a P4 sitting on a secretary's desktop when her most system taxing app is the media player she uses to listen to lite rock. The power needs to be in the data center/application service center with just a simple client for remote access. And NO http is NOT the answer. http is slow and clunky for apps like word processing. Instead, centralize apps with all processing taking place on the server and the remote client is just a remote display. For this we still need something like Java. Since Java is already there... why not just open it?
Ummm... assuming we're talking about the kernel here, it's not that hard to "upgrade" Linux when an exploit is found. Personally, I just go the source code route and compile the latest version and install. All of a few minutes at most on a system with decent RAM and CPU. If the exploit is in an app or server software, I still follow the same route. I just isn't that hard guys:
/boot/newkernel
1. tar zxvf newkernel.tar.gz
2. make menuconfig
3. make bzImage && make modules && moake modules_install && cd arch/i386/boot && cp bzImage
4. Edit grub.conf and reboot
Anyone who finds that to be "hard" should take their hands off the keyboard now and walk away.
I played Llamatron incessantly for a good part of my late teens and twenties. Even today's bi tech FPS games can't compete for playability with a classic like Llamatron. I even got it running in DOSBox on Linux. Woohoo! :)
Hmmm... That's funny, I've been a Democrat since 1988 and it's still counting. So far I haven't become conservative and have no plans to.
Enlighten us please. A list of all the differences and how they would cause society to crumble into nothing would be nice for a start.
I agree with you on both points. But... there is no point in debating with morons and that is largley what American society has become. We're a society who is proud of our stupidity and we LOVE to emphasize it every chance we get.
That's Ok. My lunch break ended hours ago.
And this post is where it ends. The troll above doesn't want to discuss why he feels that homosexuality should not be legitimized. I imagine it's because he'd have to start delving into the reasons why it's "unwanted". He'd have to come to terms with the fact that he is bothered by the concept of two men or two women doing things that he feels are repulsive. (If he's truly the jackass I suspect he is, he has no problems with women "doing it" with each other as long as he's allowed to watch and join in) I'll be surprised if he responds in a way that doesn't make him look like a total ass. Thanks to all the others in this thread who put some of the ideas I was trying to write about in better terms. :)
Why do you feel this way? You obviously have some hangups. I'm not gay, but I advocate for homosexuals because the feelings they experience are no different from the feelings that men and women experience in a romantic context:
1. There is physical attraction
2. This leads to sexual interaction
3. Following this, there may eventually be a deeper feeling known by many of us as love
That's all that matters. Procreation, orifices and other sexual predelictions that happen later are not related and cannot be used to invalidate either kind of relationship. For instance if my wife wants me to stick and elephant trunk in her every night, that doesn't invalidate our love. So, bowling balls in someone's ass shouldn't have any bearing either.
Their lifestyle SHOULD be legitimized. Since there is so much resistance by a vocal minority, it's an uphill battle. If we just had a national election (unrigged thank you), that actually counted up every vote, I'll bet a resolution to legitimize homosexuality would pass easily. There are plenty of people from all walks of life who follow the live and let live approach, as long as they aren't being manipulated by the media and special interests like the Bush administration, they will make the right choice.
Marriage has nothing to do with procreation. While procreation is certainly important to the survival of humanity, it has no bearing on the validitiy of the love between two people.
And under your argument, aren't those outside a "unity" arrangement second class citizens?
No. They are simply "single and looking".
but your post is riddled with inconsistent logic, as well as ad hominim attacks ("fucking religious looney birds"?!?) hence I award to you no troll points today.
It's more likely that you disagree with me, so you label me a troll in the hopes that I will get modded down as such. But again, you are completely incorrect. Personally, I like mixing logic (inconsistent or not) with ad hominems and just general profanity. It seems to be the only tool that works on some people. It's not my fault that people will only give you some "spect" these days if you throw the profanity around.
The problem with the whole "legal union" thing is that there would still be a separation in everyone's mind about "legal union" vs. "marriage". The goal here is to take away any distinction at all levels between homosexual and heterosexual commited relationships. There is no difference and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply a stick in the mud. If you were to completely remove gender from the human race and just talk about our minds, this would not be an issue.
If we want to stick to dictionary definitions, then perhaps the word marriage itself is outdated since it no longer applies to any unions be they hetero or homo? Some facts:
1. There is nothing wrong with homosexuality in today's society. Anyone who says otherwise is a dinosaur and will soon perish.
2. Sexual preference has no bearing on committment as evidenced by the dismal failure that heterosexual marriage is.
3. Humans are not naturally monogamous, and monogamy has little to do with committment and responsibility.
With those facts in mind, then I will suggest that marriage (based on relgious morals) is a completely outdated concept and should be aboloished. Marriage (as a social construct) is more relevant today, but since there is so much stigma attached to the word, it should also be aboloshed and all marriages anulled. Instead we can replace the outdated notion of marriage with a superior concept that validates both homosexual and heterosexual relationships in every legal way as long as we no longer recognize tradtitional marriage. The main reason for this is that then no one is given second class status and we finally state officially that, regardless of sexual preference, the unity of two people is valid. At that point, religions are free to recognize this new status, but are forbidden from using the divisive concept of marriage. Anyone caught performing a traditional "marriage" ceremony or recognizing illegal documents will be guilty of hate crime.
A little too complicated huh? Why on't we just accept that fact that there is no difference between homosexual and heterosexual union and stop letting the fucking religious looney birds pull our chains? Hmmm???
You're absolutely right. HUmans need some kind of outlet for the animal behavior that we're keeping hidden under the surface. We are all hypocrites if we react against something that we do in our own back yards. For instance, how many women out there let their husbands or boyfriends perform anal sex on them, but then at a party when the subject comes up they react with "Ewww! Gross! I'd never do that!" Or how many guys here had that *one* homosexual encounter in college that they've never told anyone about and then say, "Ewwww! Fuckin' faggots! I don't get how guys would want to do that!! I could never do that!" If this facade is going to continue to exist, then there needs to be some other anonymous outlet for it and the Web is the perfect place. Otherwise you'll see more of this kind of thing happening in real life if people can't get their jollies other ways.
Oh yeah... like we chumps in the US have it any better. What with all the arguments over the definition of Marriage in the Gay Marriage debate. Yeah... nice "consistent interpretation highly resistant to the whims and prejudices of whoever happens to be making decisions" approach there. The current admin is using the outdated religious code that says homosexuality is wrong just to manipulate people who like to hold to outdated religious codes. Sounds like whims and predjudices to me.