I did a little jig and an *oh snap* just reading the title. Do the Hustle!!!
I always wondered where Frye learned the phrase "Oh, snap!". It obviously wasn't around in 2000, and in our present time has already faded to obscurity.
It's almost as atrocious as the guys on "That 70's Show" spouting off their occasional 90's slang.
Genesis doesn't say ANYTHING about Jesus. Not a single drop of ink!
Sure it does. Genesis 3:15 "He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."
Speaks of the wounding of Jesus, but Jesus crushing Satan.
there's no known genetic trait making you immune to shrapnels or lead bullets in the head, so no specific mutation will be favoured often an other except by sheer chance/randomness.
Intelligence is a genetic trait, isn't it? Using your brain to avoid getting into a situation where you will be placed on the front line seems like it would be favorable.
What *is* odd is the media depiction of females as attractive when they are so lacking in necessary body fat as to be reducing their fertility. Being attracted to curves is a *good* thing.
Well, I guess if most guys find slender women attractive, it must be because most guys are not primarily interested in generating offspring. In fact, you might find that many guys will take extra precautions just to avoid having offspring.
Creationists support a static view of the human body and believe it has always retained the same form and structure.
They admire the current form of the human body with all of its prefections and don't want to imagine it in a "lesser" state.
Evolutionists support a dynamic view of the human body, where it has changed over time.
They admire the adaptions that allowed it to adapt to changing environments. They note the deficencies of the human body and work to discover how it can be improved and how/why it came to be.
I believe the universe was created, but I don't fall into either of those two buckets. I believe that the human body was ONCE perfect, but no longer is. I believe that DNA mutations have caused deviations from perfection, and that at the same time, natural selection has occurred such to basically make the best of the mutations.
I guess if you figure that evolution says that all things get better and better, and that creationists say that all things say the same, than I am one crazy whacko that says the exact opposite of evolution. That everything is getting worse and worse, but natural selection just makes the best of it.
Uhm, why assume that the car in front of you is going to instantly accelerate to 0 mph? That's not even physically possible.
Maybe not, but it can slow down ALMOST instantly to zero when it runs into a parked truck or a bridge abutment.
I'm curious, how much did that glass cost for the aquarium and where did you get it from?
I actually bought the tank from a pet supply warehouse. But you can custom order glass in various thicknesses and specific dimensions. Sometimes it is easier to find plexi in the thicknesses needed for a large tank, though plexi scratches more easily and is not as strong. The glass on my 180 was less than 1/2" thick. Plexi 180s can be 3/4" or more.
Lowes cust glass, but they don't have the right thicknesses. I got 48" squares cut in 1/8" glass at a window repair shop. They had thicker glas, but at the time I was just looking for glass to build a large terrarium, not an aquarium.
I have a cheap supercar, too. An '88 Lotus Esprit (about $17k these days). Earlier this year, the transmission input shaft bearing destroyed itself, so I completely disassembled the engine, got a larger bearing, had a machine turn the crankshaft to accept the larger bearing. Got the flywheel polished, got all new gaskets, rings, bearings, new clutch plate, input shaft, and all kinds of other stuff. I cleaned everything up in a parts washer, and got it all back togethr, and it actually ran. I had some help from an SAE, but it felt good to actually be able to learn how the engine works, and how all the parts go together.
When I was about 11 or 12, I helped my dad build a Z80 based computer. As far as what I have done one my own (although the article had three people), all of my early exploits were software based. When I was around 13 I wrote the entire game of Monolopoly on a TRS-80. A few years later, since I couldn't afford Tetris, but I had seen how it worked, I wrote Tetris on my very early PC.
Nowadays, I build more hardware stuff, but it is not as cool because I am an adult and should know how to build it. For example, I built a 180 gallon saltwater reef tank with an oak cabinet, aut water replenisher, Carbon doser, protein filter and all kinds of other accessories, and plumbed the sump down to my basement.
A few years back, I built a 20X40 swimming pool with diving board and slide, and built a 70X40 concrete deck (yes, I mixed and poured it myself) with cedar railing to surround it.
You mean until we can 'convince' Americans that cities are child friendly. American cities are safe and wonderful.
Well, my firsthand experience in American cities contradicts your statement, so I believe in order to convince Americans that the cities are safe and child friendly, you will have to do a lot of pro-city commercials, and you will also have to prevent people from actually going in to the city.
Minivans, on the other hand, may very well be "safer", I don't know what the stats show, but I've at least heard that they're better than SUVs.
They may be less likely to roll over, but they are generally pretty unsafe in a single car accident, head on, or front corner collision, as those type of accidents often result in broken legs due to the proximity of the legs in relation to the engine and front of car.
because of the obviously superior and free competing product Slashdot offers.
Except with slashdot you have to read all (or at least most) of the posts, and using all that data make a detrmination for yourself as to the correct answer.
Or maybe that is not such a bad thing. I usually use that method when trying to learn something new. Get as many opinions as possible from every possible angle, then put them all together and come up with the most likely answer.
The trick is to bypass the no fly list without having to have fake ID, the loophole is that the name on your ID and boarding pass are not both checked at the same time and compared.
You must go to different airports then I do because all of the airports I go to require a boarding pass AND photo ID that matches the name and the photo looks like the bearer.
Other than the asian fellow, all of the Mythbuster lackies are as geeky as a bag of rocks. They don't think for themselves (the idiot with the goatee apparently CAN'T think for himself), they just implement the poorly conceived scientific ideas handed down from the mythbusters themselves.
I see ebay auctions with only a few minutes left closing in on the low 800s now. By the end of next week, ebayers probably won't be able to get retail for one.
Dunno if you missed it, but the guy you're quoting IAL (Is A Lawyer). A Housing lawyer no less. I'm guessing he knows the trues and the falses better then you do.
No, he just knows the law better than I do. The law has nothing to do with true and false. My contention is that by saying "church" or "hispanic neighborhood", I am giving useful information to the potential tenant. The law's contention is that I am discriminating. The law is wrong. It has no clue what my intentions are and should be in no position to judge me.
Did you ever see a toddler about to step in front of an oncoming car that couldn't possibly see him? I can't bear to watch. You are a major lawsuit waiting to happen.
I fail to see how that has any bearing on anyting I said, or even anything remotely to do with the craiglist suit being dismissed. You can limit the number of occupants as long as you allow at least two persons per bedroom and are not using this as a subterfuge to avoid renting to families.
In most of my houses, it would be unsafe to allow more than two persons per bedroom. One of my units has a bedroom that would not comfortably fit an adult sized bed, and I never turned anyone away that had multiple children, but did point out that it would be inconvenient or uncomfortable for their children. Nothing I do is because of a desire to discriminate. I do everything I can to ensure that my potential tenants make informed choices that will make them happy and comfortable. Most importantly, I apply the same rules on number of tenants on every applicant. For example, you can't take the door off a bedroom and call it a den to reduce the number of occupants.
Again, I make the same representation of the property regardless of who is interested. I don't take doors on and off to suit my prejudices. The law is not clear as to how many people must be allowed in a studio. If you do allow two or more people in an apartment, you must rent to an adult with a child on the same terms as two adults. You can't refuse to rent to a family because the apartment is on the second floor, or has a dangerous balcony or poor sound insulation.
You're right, and I wouldn't refuse to rent to a family. But I will point out that the unit has certain disadvantages or possible safety issues for a family. If the unit is dangerous, fix it. If it is noisy, explain that to all tenants, not just those with children.
If my unit can hold four people and they want to bring in five, I am not going to build an addition in order to make it safe and comfortable for five people. If they have a toddler, I am not going to upgrade from a floor furnace heating to central heat and air in order to keep their child from poking his finger in and getting burnt or breaking his finger. I am going to explain to the family that there are certain safety factors which would not normally be an issue for adults, but would be for children, and that the cost of alleviating these issues is an unndue burden on me, and that I will happily rent to them if they sign a waiver holding us harmless. In no circumstance will I rent to more people than can safely live in the unit, regardless of what the law says I have to allow.
It's okay to discriminate against males or whites, but not against females or minorities.
I always thought that it was interesting that we have several award shows that are probably legally bound not to discriminate against minority races, but then you have Ebony Awards and some Latino award show that are allowed to hand out awards only to their respective races. If we had a "white" award show, there would be a huge uproar.
The local news channel here has a "Hispanic high school scholar of the week" award. I wonder how much trouble they would get in if they had a "White high school scholar of the week"?
Hey, if we're not going to discriminate, let's not discriminate. As a white male, I have a hard time finding work in big companies. I have been extremely successful as a contractor and as an employee in small businesses which were not required by law to discriminate against me, but the only large company I ever worked for was Sybase. Even as a contractor, I was unable to get government contracts, and even some large corporate contracts because as a matter of policy, they would first consider any female owned or minority owned bids first. That, my friends, is discrimination, pure and simple.
A landlord cannot advertise that the apartment is near a church or synagogue because this implies an illegal preference based on religion.
False. A Landlord cannot advertise that the apartment is near a church or synagague because because some big city lawyer will sue them for illegal preference based on religion, when in fact, they just may want their potential tenants to know what is nearby, so that they won't be falsely representing the surroundings of the property. The Mexican restaurant isn't a big problem, but saying the neighborhood is Hispanic implies that anyone else is not welcome.
False. It implies that the potential renter should be aware that the neighborhood is hispanic in case the renter would or would not like to live in such a neighborhood.
"Godly, Christian Male" expresses both a religious and a gender preference; but it's fine to require cleanliness.
As a landlord myself, I don't make such distinctions, but I believe that a small mom and pop landlord business should be able to rent or not rent to whomever they want. It's their house, if they want to limit their target audience by insisting on a Godly Christian Male, then they should be allowed to do so. The ad about "2 guys in their mid-twenties who throw parties all the time" is illegal based on a gender preference; but the landlord could ask for people who don't throw parties. The last four ads may sound fine, but they imply that a family with children would not be welcome.
We have houses that we happily market as being a poor choice for families. We also limit the number of people that can live in each of our houses, based on square footage, number of bedrooms, and other factors. Some houses are not well suited to families, and no one should be forced by law to take a tenant that won't be comfortable in the house.
Some of the postings on craigslist seem to be slightly discriminatory. Most of them I find to be just attempting to let the tenant know about the neighborhood. While I am aware that it is illegal to discriminate based on neighborhood racial makeup, I don't believe it should be my job as a landlord to enforce the potential tenant not being a racist, so I am happy to tell them the demographics if they ask and if I know them.
People are responsible for fist fights, riots and robbery. Supply and demand might have something to do with it only if the item in low supply was required for basic human existence. When people fight or rob over a PS3, or a fancy pair of sneakers, or whathaveyou, then it is just plain people attempting to justify their own immoral actions.
Of course the inability to fire based on race, age, religion etc., is easily skirted by either 1) giving no reason for firing them whatsover, or 2) making up some other BS reason. You can even fire some with the reason being that you were unable to fire them based on their race.
I think it is stupid to have an excpetion of not being to fire based on race, religion, sex, etc., in the first place. If the sole reason for firing someone is because, say, they are a female, and not a valid economic reason, then you are not only a bigot, but also an idiot with no business sense, and the chances of your business failing is higher. The system fixes itself.
Despite being a "good geek" as you put it, and despite considering myself to be a critical thinker, I put the affirmations theory to the test. If anything, it worked negatively. I was shooting for prosperity, but instead 9/11 happened, my consulting contract ended prematurely, I couldn't get a job, and I had to sell my house.
Slashdot Mirror
I did a little jig and an *oh snap* just reading the title. Do the Hustle!!!
I always wondered where Frye learned the phrase "Oh, snap!". It obviously wasn't around in 2000, and in our present time has already faded to obscurity.
It's almost as atrocious as the guys on "That 70's Show" spouting off their occasional 90's slang.
Genesis doesn't say ANYTHING about Jesus. Not a single drop of ink! Sure it does. Genesis 3:15 "He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." Speaks of the wounding of Jesus, but Jesus crushing Satan.
The USA are good! Capitalism is good! Being fat is good! Dying of a coronary is good!
I'll take a heart attack over starvation.
there's no known genetic trait making you immune to shrapnels or lead bullets in the head, so no specific mutation will be favoured often an other except by sheer chance/randomness.
Intelligence is a genetic trait, isn't it? Using your brain to avoid getting into a situation where you will be placed on the front line seems like it would be favorable.
What *is* odd is the media depiction of females as attractive when they are so lacking in necessary body fat as to be reducing their fertility. Being attracted to curves is a *good* thing.
Well, I guess if most guys find slender women attractive, it must be because most guys are not primarily interested in generating offspring. In fact, you might find that many guys will take extra precautions just to avoid having offspring.
Creationists support a static view of the human body and believe it has always retained the same form and structure. They admire the current form of the human body with all of its prefections and don't want to imagine it in a "lesser" state. Evolutionists support a dynamic view of the human body, where it has changed over time. They admire the adaptions that allowed it to adapt to changing environments. They note the deficencies of the human body and work to discover how it can be improved and how/why it came to be.
I believe the universe was created, but I don't fall into either of those two buckets. I believe that the human body was ONCE perfect, but no longer is. I believe that DNA mutations have caused deviations from perfection, and that at the same time, natural selection has occurred such to basically make the best of the mutations.
I guess if you figure that evolution says that all things get better and better, and that creationists say that all things say the same, than I am one crazy whacko that says the exact opposite of evolution. That everything is getting worse and worse, but natural selection just makes the best of it.
Uhm, why assume that the car in front of you is going to instantly accelerate to 0 mph? That's not even physically possible.
Maybe not, but it can slow down ALMOST instantly to zero when it runs into a parked truck or a bridge abutment.
I'm curious, how much did that glass cost for the aquarium and where did you get it from?
I actually bought the tank from a pet supply warehouse. But you can custom order glass in various thicknesses and specific dimensions. Sometimes it is easier to find plexi in the thicknesses needed for a large tank, though plexi scratches more easily and is not as strong. The glass on my 180 was less than 1/2" thick. Plexi 180s can be 3/4" or more.
Lowes cust glass, but they don't have the right thicknesses. I got 48" squares cut in 1/8" glass at a window repair shop. They had thicker glas, but at the time I was just looking for glass to build a large terrarium, not an aquarium.
No, haven't had the tank for awhile. Moved across three states. Here's links to some info and pictures, though.www.tomkoinc.com/reef.html
I have a cheap supercar, too. An '88 Lotus Esprit (about $17k these days). Earlier this year, the transmission input shaft bearing destroyed itself, so I completely disassembled the engine, got a larger bearing, had a machine turn the crankshaft to accept the larger bearing. Got the flywheel polished, got all new gaskets, rings, bearings, new clutch plate, input shaft, and all kinds of other stuff. I cleaned everything up in a parts washer, and got it all back togethr, and it actually ran. I had some help from an SAE, but it felt good to actually be able to learn how the engine works, and how all the parts go together.
When I was about 11 or 12, I helped my dad build a Z80 based computer. As far as what I have done one my own (although the article had three people), all of my early exploits were software based. When I was around 13 I wrote the entire game of Monolopoly on a TRS-80. A few years later, since I couldn't afford Tetris, but I had seen how it worked, I wrote Tetris on my very early PC.
Nowadays, I build more hardware stuff, but it is not as cool because I am an adult and should know how to build it. For example, I built a 180 gallon saltwater reef tank with an oak cabinet, aut water replenisher, Carbon doser, protein filter and all kinds of other accessories, and plumbed the sump down to my basement.
A few years back, I built a 20X40 swimming pool with diving board and slide, and built a 70X40 concrete deck (yes, I mixed and poured it myself) with cedar railing to surround it.
You mean until we can 'convince' Americans that cities are child friendly. American cities are safe and wonderful.
Well, my firsthand experience in American cities contradicts your statement, so I believe in order to convince Americans that the cities are safe and child friendly, you will have to do a lot of pro-city commercials, and you will also have to prevent people from actually going in to the city.
Minivans, on the other hand, may very well be "safer", I don't know what the stats show, but I've at least heard that they're better than SUVs.
They may be less likely to roll over, but they are generally pretty unsafe in a single car accident, head on, or front corner collision, as those type of accidents often result in broken legs due to the proximity of the legs in relation to the engine and front of car.
because of the obviously superior and free competing product Slashdot offers.
Except with slashdot you have to read all (or at least most) of the posts, and using all that data make a detrmination for yourself as to the correct answer.
Or maybe that is not such a bad thing. I usually use that method when trying to learn something new. Get as many opinions as possible from every possible angle, then put them all together and come up with the most likely answer.
The trick is to bypass the no fly list without having to have fake ID, the loophole is that the name on your ID and boarding pass are not both checked at the same time and compared.
You must go to different airports then I do because all of the airports I go to require a boarding pass AND photo ID that matches the name and the photo looks like the bearer.
Other than the asian fellow, all of the Mythbuster lackies are as geeky as a bag of rocks. They don't think for themselves (the idiot with the goatee apparently CAN'T think for himself), they just implement the poorly conceived scientific ideas handed down from the mythbusters themselves.
I see ebay auctions with only a few minutes left closing in on the low 800s now. By the end of next week, ebayers probably won't be able to get retail for one.
Dunno if you missed it, but the guy you're quoting IAL (Is A Lawyer). A Housing lawyer no less. I'm guessing he knows the trues and the falses better then you do.
No, he just knows the law better than I do. The law has nothing to do with true and false. My contention is that by saying "church" or "hispanic neighborhood", I am giving useful information to the potential tenant. The law's contention is that I am discriminating. The law is wrong. It has no clue what my intentions are and should be in no position to judge me.
Did you ever see a toddler about to step in front of an oncoming car that couldn't possibly see him? I can't bear to watch. You are a major lawsuit waiting to happen.
I fail to see how that has any bearing on anyting I said, or even anything remotely to do with the craiglist suit being dismissed.
You can limit the number of occupants as long as you allow at least two persons per bedroom and are not using this as a subterfuge to avoid renting to families.
In most of my houses, it would be unsafe to allow more than two persons per bedroom. One of my units has a bedroom that would not comfortably fit an adult sized bed, and I never turned anyone away that had multiple children, but did point out that it would be inconvenient or uncomfortable for their children. Nothing I do is because of a desire to discriminate. I do everything I can to ensure that my potential tenants make informed choices that will make them happy and comfortable. Most importantly, I apply the same rules on number of tenants on every applicant.
For example, you can't take the door off a bedroom and call it a den to reduce the number of occupants.
Again, I make the same representation of the property regardless of who is interested. I don't take doors on and off to suit my prejudices.
The law is not clear as to how many people must be allowed in a studio. If you do allow two or more people in an apartment, you must rent to an adult with a child on the same terms as two adults. You can't refuse to rent to a family because the apartment is on the second floor, or has a dangerous balcony or poor sound insulation.
You're right, and I wouldn't refuse to rent to a family. But I will point out that the unit has certain disadvantages or possible safety issues for a family.
If the unit is dangerous, fix it. If it is noisy, explain that to all tenants, not just those with children.
If my unit can hold four people and they want to bring in five, I am not going to build an addition in order to make it safe and comfortable for five people. If they have a toddler, I am not going to upgrade from a floor furnace heating to central heat and air in order to keep their child from poking his finger in and getting burnt or breaking his finger. I am going to explain to the family that there are certain safety factors which would not normally be an issue for adults, but would be for children, and that the cost of alleviating these issues is an unndue burden on me, and that I will happily rent to them if they sign a waiver holding us harmless. In no circumstance will I rent to more people than can safely live in the unit, regardless of what the law says I have to allow.
It's okay to discriminate against males or whites, but not against females or minorities.
I always thought that it was interesting that we have several award shows that are probably legally bound not to discriminate against minority races, but then you have Ebony Awards and some Latino award show that are allowed to hand out awards only to their respective races. If we had a "white" award show, there would be a huge uproar.
The local news channel here has a "Hispanic high school scholar of the week" award. I wonder how much trouble they would get in if they had a "White high school scholar of the week"?
Hey, if we're not going to discriminate, let's not discriminate. As a white male, I have a hard time finding work in big companies. I have been extremely successful as a contractor and as an employee in small businesses which were not required by law to discriminate against me, but the only large company I ever worked for was Sybase. Even as a contractor, I was unable to get government contracts, and even some large corporate contracts because as a matter of policy, they would first consider any female owned or minority owned bids first. That, my friends, is discrimination, pure and simple.
A landlord cannot advertise that the apartment is near a church or synagogue because this implies an illegal preference based on religion.
False. A Landlord cannot advertise that the apartment is near a church or synagague because because some big city lawyer will sue them for illegal preference based on religion, when in fact, they just may want their potential tenants to know what is nearby, so that they won't be falsely representing the surroundings of the property.
The Mexican restaurant isn't a big problem, but saying the neighborhood is Hispanic implies that anyone else is not welcome.
False. It implies that the potential renter should be aware that the neighborhood is hispanic in case the renter would or would not like to live in such a neighborhood.
"Godly, Christian Male" expresses both a religious and a gender preference; but it's fine to require cleanliness.
As a landlord myself, I don't make such distinctions, but I believe that a small mom and pop landlord business should be able to rent or not rent to whomever they want. It's their house, if they want to limit their target audience by insisting on a Godly Christian Male, then they should be allowed to do so.
The ad about "2 guys in their mid-twenties who throw parties all the time" is illegal based on a gender preference; but the landlord could ask for people who don't throw parties. The last four ads may sound fine, but they imply that a family with children would not be welcome.
We have houses that we happily market as being a poor choice for families. We also limit the number of people that can live in each of our houses, based on square footage, number of bedrooms, and other factors. Some houses are not well suited to families, and no one should be forced by law to take a tenant that won't be comfortable in the house.
Some of the postings on craigslist seem to be slightly discriminatory. Most of them I find to be just attempting to let the tenant know about the neighborhood. While I am aware that it is illegal to discriminate based on neighborhood racial makeup, I don't believe it should be my job as a landlord to enforce the potential tenant not being a racist, so I am happy to tell them the demographics if they ask and if I know them.
People are responsible for fist fights, riots and robbery. Supply and demand might have something to do with it only if the item in low supply was required for basic human existence. When people fight or rob over a PS3, or a fancy pair of sneakers, or whathaveyou, then it is just plain people attempting to justify their own immoral actions.
Of course the inability to fire based on race, age, religion etc., is easily skirted by either 1) giving no reason for firing them whatsover, or 2) making up some other BS reason. You can even fire some with the reason being that you were unable to fire them based on their race.
I think it is stupid to have an excpetion of not being to fire based on race, religion, sex, etc., in the first place. If the sole reason for firing someone is because, say, they are a female, and not a valid economic reason, then you are not only a bigot, but also an idiot with no business sense, and the chances of your business failing is higher. The system fixes itself.
In my old company, it was one of the members of the (very snooty and self-righteous) IT staff that propogated the "I Love You" virus.
Despite being a "good geek" as you put it, and despite considering myself to be a critical thinker, I put the affirmations theory to the test. If anything, it worked negatively. I was shooting for prosperity, but instead 9/11 happened, my consulting contract ended prematurely, I couldn't get a job, and I had to sell my house.