I'm internally consistent because in French the verb "Aimer" means both "to love" and "to like". Nitpicker
Um, last time I checked, French had adorer, which means "to love" as in "I love chocolate" (J'adore chocolat). The only time you use Aimer for love is when you're saying I love you (Je t'aime), or generally referring to the love a person has for another person.
Anyway, if her name meant "loves deep", it'd have to be Adore Deep, not Aimee Deep.
Kind of makes you wonder... will there ever be a group of folks as deranged as ourselves? We were there at the dawn of the computing age, before people had it all figured out.
I hate to break it to you, but yes. Just like there have been generations before us at the dawn of each age that were a mix of old and new, there will be many more after us. I realize I'm a bit jaded in general, but I suspect that at the dawn of automotion (which had a huge impact on society) there was a group of individuals such as us. Same with the dawn of Industrialization. In fact, considering the time frame, those two groups may have been the same group, or immediately succeeding generations. Go back, and you'll find similar kids at the bronze and iron ages, respectively, as well as the renaissance. Other times as well, I'm sure, I'm not exactly trying to categorize all possibilities.
The point is, whenever there's a huge technological change or breakthrough that has a huge impact on society, there will be a generation of kids that grow up with a mix of old and new. That's us. Not only do we remember 8-track cassettes (and spent a lot of time listening to them), but we pioneered mp3 digital audio, and had our hand in every technology in the interim. We remember when all cars had carburateurs, now they're all fuel-injected. Hell, we remember when AC was an option, now it's almost a standard feature in most places. What about the ones before us that can remember when refrigeration meant some dude dropping a chunk of ice at your door?
I also tend to think that every generation feels much like we do, for various reasons. This is, in fact, preferred, since it means that the generation will advance society in general, hopefully to a better state. Without this feeling, I suspect there would be stagnation.
I specifically wanted to avoid talking about the mechanisms of the defense/attack I had proposed there because it's a convoluted thing. For one thing, as far as I know, SCO never distributed Linux on its own. Caldera did. They have only been SCO for a very short while (less than a year). They bought the remnants of SCO awhile back and changed their name to Caldera/SCO, and then dropped the Caldera completely.
This is fucked up because the guys who founded Caldera came from Novel. Worse yet, they came from Novel when Novel owned SCO, I believe. So, the company that is *now* SCO could also be the very same company that put the infringing code into Linux, as Caldera! (Assuming that SCO is not now full of shit, don't get me wrong, I think they're full of shit as much as the next guy)
Anyway, I think that IBM will take them out. IBM has decided to stake their future on Linux, and its in their best interests to fight this one rather than buy their way out of it. IBM = HUGE. SCO = small potatoes. It's like Andre the Giant getting into a fight with Marilyn Manson (you know, that dude from the Wonder Years, Paul?). Who d'ya think will win? Obviously, it's Andre.:)
You are one such poster. I can't remember what we got on opposite ends over at some point, but nearly every time I see your posts, I agree with them. This is one such case.
Heh, he's just a freak. He's on my freaks list too, and I don't know why. Although I usually don't enjoy reading his posts, I have no bitch against him.:)
Reasonable. You keep using that word. I donna think it means what you think it means.
Thus, it's reasonable to conclude that almost anyone who actually does respond to this request will either be A> volunteering the wrong information or B> breaking an NDA. The only remaining option is the one you alluded to: finding a person who saw the source code but never had to agree to an NDA, and has no compunction about discussing the matter. But do you seriously believe that someone like that would read slashdot? I'd bet not.
Let's apply some logic to this, shall we?
1. We do not know what secrets SCO is claiming have been put into Linux.
2. We do know that SCO is claiming that IBM put them there.
So, we have several procedures we can follow.
1. We can look at all of the code that IBM has put into Linux (should be accessible if BitKeeper really is the shit that Linus says it is). Then we track down all the authors of that code and ask them "Have you ever worked with SCO Unix code? Have you ever seen it?" Then we track each of these individuals' job history, see where they've worked, and what they've seen. This is the precise way, and it may win the case against SCO. It's a sure bet that IBM is already doing this.
2. This is what ESR is doing. Gather together a critical mass of people who have seen SCO Unix code (relevant versions) either without an NDA or under an unenforced NDA. The "critical mass" should approach people who have seen the entire source tree for SCO's stuff, with as much redundancy as possible (ie if there's enough people that it's equivalent to one person reading the source tree 20 times as opposed to 19 times, then the case is stronger). This elite group of people should be able to easily demonstrate (if it's actually possible) that there are no secrets left of SCO's that can be protected under trade secret laws because they've been public knowledge for yeeeeeeeeaaaaaarrrrrrrrsssss (years).
In the case of #2, I have these comments to answer your concerns:
If a person responds who was under an NDA that was broken and not enforced, then it's entirely possible that he will be able to testify without in turn being harmed by SCO.
If a person responds who was under an NDA that was broken and not enforced, then it's entirely possible that he will need assistance to defend himself against SCO at some point or other. I'm sure ESR intends to provide some sort of assistance in this case. (He'll give the poor sap a shotgun)
The base assumption you seem to be making is that SCO is telling the truth and making a viable claim. This is contrary to the base assumption everyone else is making, and might be causing you some difficulty understanding what's going on. Let's make the base assumption that SCO is full of shit, at least for the moment. In that case, anyone who does respond to this request will not be A> volunteering the wrong information, because they have the right information, or B> will not be breaking an NDA that wasn't already broken and therefore may be unenforcable.
To address your last question, yes, someone who had seen the source code without having an NDA might well be reading slashdot. Even if they're not, do you really think that ESR is only pushing this project of his through slashdot? If *I* were gonna market this project, I would make sure to hit slashdot among all the other places I would hit. ANd yes, I am a marketing professional.:)
Now let's make the base assumption that SCO is not full of shit and has a real claim.
In this case, the legal defense will likely be to show how SCO (now that they're owned by CALDERA LINUX) nullified their own trade secrets by distributing the linux kernel under the GPL. I'm not interested in discussing the mechanisms involved, because I don't know anything about them. I only know that that is an option that has been presented. It will also become necessary to round up everyone who might be in dang
There's a good reason for that, actually, but irrelevant. I know that none of them are there because I deleted them off the server they were on, they were taking up too much space. My personal website won't take them, because I can only have 10MB on it, so I haven't yet found a home. I also haven't had time to remove the links.
Hey dude, the script didn't work! I suppose this isn't the place for me to send bugs, is it?:) Um, where should I send bugs? I don't know any python (or anything about programming blender), but I'll see if I can find something with it...
I checked out your page, but didn't find anything particularly helpful.:( I've been working with blender for awhile and already got past the basic stuff.
That said, considering that tutorials and crap are pretty hard to come by, and it's great that you're doing this. But I'll tell you what, 4 months ago that page would've been a godsend to me.:) (the stock blender tutorial was broke when I was working through it)
I realize you're doing stuff on animations right now, but is there a chance you might know something you could write about the animation effects? (you know, build, particle, and wave) I've had some luck with particle systems, but it'd be really nice if there was something to tell me exactly how to use them.:)
All of the following are taken from previous posts of yours, to me. I have not added anything, but some may be out of context. YOu will have to browse the other posts if you want to read them in context. Also, I will temper this by pointing out that not once have I actually been offended. It's pretty damn hard to offend me, and I've been thinking it might not actually be possible.:) Besides, I've gotten used to being treated poorly by religionists of all shapes, sizes, and nationalities.
do you live in a hole?
have you just been mentally ill?
Well, since I limited it to just posts from you to me, I had to leave out a lot of stuff.:( I realize that weakens my case, but I don't give a shit.:) Also, both of those comments are in this thread, so you can just hit "parent' repeatedly to find the whole comments, as well as to see my own on the matter.
All churches are nothing but lies? ok, suit yourself. You must be pretty full of yourself to assume that you know everything about everything
In fact, it's just the opposite, and your fingers are pointing back at yourself. I don't know how the world came to be, and I'm happy not knowing. I don't need a religion to explain it. I don't know what happens when we die, and I'm happy not knowing. I can live with my ignorance without having to believe in some make-believe primitive religion that lacks objective observation.
Your church is a lie" - that's not judging me?
In fact, no, it's not judging you, it's judging your church.
I'd be perfectly fine if everybody just didn't comment on my church at all; but since you do, i'll defend it to the death.
No problems, just don't sink to the same level as your accusers. You'll find in another post of mine a fairly thorough description of how you've done that.
the only reason they were able to bounce back is because they went to freaking Utah, yet there weren't as many of them as native americans, and they didn't have any problems with being in the United States. It sucks what happened to the Indians, but you can't compare that to Mormons. It was not that they were mostly white. Your opinion, even though it's "just" an opinion, is wrong.
You're absolutely right. There's no comparison. Mass slaughter of the indians comparable to hitler and the jews doesn't compare to a few rocks thrown at mormons. At least the indians didn't have to resort to cannibalism on their own respective trails of tears.
You people aren't the only ones that have suffered, what the fuck makes you special? You have the only true church? That's a lie. All churches are nothing but lies. Jesus said "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself." If you truly follow his word, why do you judge me? Anton LaVey, on the other hand, pointed out the corollary to the Golden Rule, which is "after you have treated someone the way you wish to be treated, and they do not do so, you are obligated to treat them the way they have treated you."
so you've never heard of any religion that bases their beliefs on Christ? do you live in a hole
Based on your abuse, I'm not surprised either about the abuse or your unwillingness to read what I actually said. Everybody else says their religion is based on some fantastic god or other. You came right out and said yours is based on a human. That's what I commented on.
I will point out that your abuse is consistent with treatment I receive at the hands of other mormons, and you've done nothing to prove that you're any better or different. But in many of your other posts, you have tried to do just that. You failed, bub.
But it's the entire social hierarchy that makes it so that women are the one who take time off for raising children, rather than men
Yes, and no. The reason it evolved into the social hierarchy in the first place is because men don't have mammary glands.
There's no sexism in my house, but my wife doesn't work. She's working on our third kid right now, and until recently, she had been breastfeeding for about 4 years straight. Now she's going to start up again.
I think that in a general sense, due to the breastfeeding thing, women are in fact more suited to staying home with a newborn than men. But I can also say from personal experience that if a husband can't take time off (or doesn't) to help his wife out with the newborn, there's gonna be trouble. But I also don't think that that makes women inferior. It's just a job they're better suited for. There isn't anything a man can do that a woman can't do, but there is something a woman can do that a man can't do.
research the subject yourself buddy. Yes, "slaughtered" is the right word.
Another demonstration that the majority ruling party in the US in the 1800s wasn't such a wonderful thing. There are a lot of nasty things that have been done in this country that people like to shove under the rug. We have mormons to remind us of their ordeal (and if they weren't so damn self-righteous about everything they'd probably make more progress with the rest of the world). We have native americans around that remind us that the price of our own freedom was the death of their cultures. (yeah, yeah, so they're alive and well, right? Better go driving on a reservation and look around. Don't speed.) Too bad we have only history books to tell us of the Salem Witch Trials.
It's my opinion that the only reason Mormons were able to bounce back and become what they are is because they're mostly white.
Mormons get married young because, like everyone else at that age, we're horny masses of hormones, and marriage is the only sin-free way to get some.
Marriage for sex results in divorce. However, i will temper that by pointing out that I have observed a great deal of devout religionists who refuse to get divorced no matter how much they hate their spouse.
It's a finally because in your post you admitted that the religion was based on a human. Never before have I heard a mormon, or any other christian for that matter, admit their religion was based on a human. So I had to comment on it. Naturally, I expect the prejudice in you to accuse me of shit, but if you objectively re-read the post to which I responded, you'll see that I was, in fact, responding to the post as it was written. And I did not, in fact, ask for clarification.
Its been a few days since i read the article, but i thought they had performace evaluations to back up thier statements. At least, thats the impression i was left with.
It's been a few days for me as well, but that was definitely not the impression I was left with. However, considering what their words seem to indicate about what kind of workers they are (regardless of whatever proof they have, in my opinion), and the fact that they snooped on a customer, I have to side with the employer on this one.
The Jesus Christ is important because that's who we base our religion on.
I'm giving up mod points for this, but what the hell? The whole topic went to shit when 50 posts arguing about LDS appeared. Why don't you guys take it to a journal or something?
Anyway, it's good to finally see a mormon admitting that their religion is based on a human. Refreshing, in fact.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm internally consistent because in French the verb "Aimer" means both "to love" and "to like". Nitpicker
Um, last time I checked, French had adorer, which means "to love" as in "I love chocolate" (J'adore chocolat). The only time you use Aimer for love is when you're saying I love you (Je t'aime), or generally referring to the love a person has for another person.
Anyway, if her name meant "loves deep", it'd have to be Adore Deep, not Aimee Deep.
Kind of makes you wonder... will there ever be a group of folks as deranged as ourselves? We were there at the dawn of the computing age, before people had it all figured out.
I hate to break it to you, but yes. Just like there have been generations before us at the dawn of each age that were a mix of old and new, there will be many more after us. I realize I'm a bit jaded in general, but I suspect that at the dawn of automotion (which had a huge impact on society) there was a group of individuals such as us. Same with the dawn of Industrialization. In fact, considering the time frame, those two groups may have been the same group, or immediately succeeding generations. Go back, and you'll find similar kids at the bronze and iron ages, respectively, as well as the renaissance. Other times as well, I'm sure, I'm not exactly trying to categorize all possibilities.
The point is, whenever there's a huge technological change or breakthrough that has a huge impact on society, there will be a generation of kids that grow up with a mix of old and new. That's us. Not only do we remember 8-track cassettes (and spent a lot of time listening to them), but we pioneered mp3 digital audio, and had our hand in every technology in the interim. We remember when all cars had carburateurs, now they're all fuel-injected. Hell, we remember when AC was an option, now it's almost a standard feature in most places. What about the ones before us that can remember when refrigeration meant some dude dropping a chunk of ice at your door?
I also tend to think that every generation feels much like we do, for various reasons. This is, in fact, preferred, since it means that the generation will advance society in general, hopefully to a better state. Without this feeling, I suspect there would be stagnation.
Hmm, no copyNpaste reply for me this time. :)
I specifically wanted to avoid talking about the mechanisms of the defense/attack I had proposed there because it's a convoluted thing. For one thing, as far as I know, SCO never distributed Linux on its own. Caldera did. They have only been SCO for a very short while (less than a year). They bought the remnants of SCO awhile back and changed their name to Caldera/SCO, and then dropped the Caldera completely.
This is fucked up because the guys who founded Caldera came from Novel. Worse yet, they came from Novel when Novel owned SCO, I believe. So, the company that is *now* SCO could also be the very same company that put the infringing code into Linux, as Caldera! (Assuming that SCO is not now full of shit, don't get me wrong, I think they're full of shit as much as the next guy)
Anyway, I think that IBM will take them out. IBM has decided to stake their future on Linux, and its in their best interests to fight this one rather than buy their way out of it. IBM = HUGE. SCO = small potatoes. It's like Andre the Giant getting into a fight with Marilyn Manson (you know, that dude from the Wonder Years, Paul?). Who d'ya think will win? Obviously, it's Andre. :)
You are one such poster. I can't remember what we got on opposite ends over at some point, but nearly every time I see your posts, I agree with them. This is one such case.
Heh, he's just a freak. He's on my freaks list too, and I don't know why. Although I usually don't enjoy reading his posts, I have no bitch against him. :)
Reasonable. You keep using that word. I donna think it means what you think it means.
Thus, it's reasonable to conclude that almost anyone who actually does respond to this request will either be A> volunteering the wrong information or B> breaking an NDA. The only remaining option is the one you alluded to: finding a person who saw the source code but never had to agree to an NDA, and has no compunction about discussing the matter. But do you seriously believe that someone like that would read slashdot? I'd bet not.
Let's apply some logic to this, shall we?
1. We do not know what secrets SCO is claiming have been put into Linux.
2. We do know that SCO is claiming that IBM put them there.
So, we have several procedures we can follow.
1. We can look at all of the code that IBM has put into Linux (should be accessible if BitKeeper really is the shit that Linus says it is). Then we track down all the authors of that code and ask them "Have you ever worked with SCO Unix code? Have you ever seen it?" Then we track each of these individuals' job history, see where they've worked, and what they've seen. This is the precise way, and it may win the case against SCO. It's a sure bet that IBM is already doing this.
2. This is what ESR is doing. Gather together a critical mass of people who have seen SCO Unix code (relevant versions) either without an NDA or under an unenforced NDA. The "critical mass" should approach people who have seen the entire source tree for SCO's stuff, with as much redundancy as possible (ie if there's enough people that it's equivalent to one person reading the source tree 20 times as opposed to 19 times, then the case is stronger). This elite group of people should be able to easily demonstrate (if it's actually possible) that there are no secrets left of SCO's that can be protected under trade secret laws because they've been public knowledge for yeeeeeeeeaaaaaarrrrrrrrsssss (years).
In the case of #2, I have these comments to answer your concerns:
If a person responds who was under an NDA that was broken and not enforced, then it's entirely possible that he will be able to testify without in turn being harmed by SCO.
If a person responds who was under an NDA that was broken and not enforced, then it's entirely possible that he will need assistance to defend himself against SCO at some point or other. I'm sure ESR intends to provide some sort of assistance in this case. (He'll give the poor sap a shotgun)
The base assumption you seem to be making is that SCO is telling the truth and making a viable claim. This is contrary to the base assumption everyone else is making, and might be causing you some difficulty understanding what's going on. Let's make the base assumption that SCO is full of shit, at least for the moment. In that case, anyone who does respond to this request will not be A> volunteering the wrong information, because they have the right information, or B> will not be breaking an NDA that wasn't already broken and therefore may be unenforcable.
To address your last question, yes, someone who had seen the source code without having an NDA might well be reading slashdot. Even if they're not, do you really think that ESR is only pushing this project of his through slashdot? If *I* were gonna market this project, I would make sure to hit slashdot among all the other places I would hit. ANd yes, I am a marketing professional. :)
Now let's make the base assumption that SCO is not full of shit and has a real claim.
In this case, the legal defense will likely be to show how SCO (now that they're owned by CALDERA LINUX) nullified their own trade secrets by distributing the linux kernel under the GPL. I'm not interested in discussing the mechanisms involved, because I don't know anything about them. I only know that that is an option that has been presented. It will also become necessary to round up everyone who might be in dang
None of your songs are there (404)
There's a good reason for that, actually, but irrelevant. I know that none of them are there because I deleted them off the server they were on, they were taking up too much space. My personal website won't take them, because I can only have 10MB on it, so I haven't yet found a home. I also haven't had time to remove the links.
Man, I wish I had mod points for this. Of ocurse, I have one of those projects on sourceforge that doesn't do anything... hmm..........
Name one artist who says "Oh man, I could never give up my linux box for audio."
fucksl4shd0t
:)
But then again, I found the audio world of Linux to be a rich and colorful world.
Hey dude, the script didn't work! I suppose this isn't the place for me to send bugs, is it? :) Um, where should I send bugs? I don't know any python (or anything about programming blender), but I'll see if I can find something with it...
I checked out your page, but didn't find anything particularly helpful. :( I've been working with blender for awhile and already got past the basic stuff.
That said, considering that tutorials and crap are pretty hard to come by, and it's great that you're doing this. But I'll tell you what, 4 months ago that page would've been a godsend to me. :) (the stock blender tutorial was broke when I was working through it)
I realize you're doing stuff on animations right now, but is there a chance you might know something you could write about the animation effects? (you know, build, particle, and wave) I've had some luck with particle systems, but it'd be really nice if there was something to tell me exactly how to use them. :)
abuse? what are you talking about, buddy?
All of the following are taken from previous posts of yours, to me. I have not added anything, but some may be out of context. YOu will have to browse the other posts if you want to read them in context. Also, I will temper this by pointing out that not once have I actually been offended. It's pretty damn hard to offend me, and I've been thinking it might not actually be possible. :) Besides, I've gotten used to being treated poorly by religionists of all shapes, sizes, and nationalities.
do you live in a hole?
have you just been mentally ill?
Well, since I limited it to just posts from you to me, I had to leave out a lot of stuff. :( I realize that weakens my case, but I don't give a shit. :) Also, both of those comments are in this thread, so you can just hit "parent' repeatedly to find the whole comments, as well as to see my own on the matter.
All churches are nothing but lies? ok, suit yourself. You must be pretty full of yourself to assume that you know everything about everything
In fact, it's just the opposite, and your fingers are pointing back at yourself. I don't know how the world came to be, and I'm happy not knowing. I don't need a religion to explain it. I don't know what happens when we die, and I'm happy not knowing. I can live with my ignorance without having to believe in some make-believe primitive religion that lacks objective observation.
Your church is a lie" - that's not judging me?
In fact, no, it's not judging you, it's judging your church.
I'd be perfectly fine if everybody just didn't comment on my church at all; but since you do, i'll defend it to the death.
No problems, just don't sink to the same level as your accusers. You'll find in another post of mine a fairly thorough description of how you've done that.
the only reason they were able to bounce back is because they went to freaking Utah, yet there weren't as many of them as native americans, and they didn't have any problems with being in the United States. It sucks what happened to the Indians, but you can't compare that to Mormons. It was not that they were mostly white. Your opinion, even though it's "just" an opinion, is wrong.
You're absolutely right. There's no comparison. Mass slaughter of the indians comparable to hitler and the jews doesn't compare to a few rocks thrown at mormons. At least the indians didn't have to resort to cannibalism on their own respective trails of tears.
You people aren't the only ones that have suffered, what the fuck makes you special? You have the only true church? That's a lie. All churches are nothing but lies. Jesus said "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself." If you truly follow his word, why do you judge me? Anton LaVey, on the other hand, pointed out the corollary to the Golden Rule, which is "after you have treated someone the way you wish to be treated, and they do not do so, you are obligated to treat them the way they have treated you."
so you've never heard of any religion that bases their beliefs on Christ? do you live in a hole
Based on your abuse, I'm not surprised either about the abuse or your unwillingness to read what I actually said. Everybody else says their religion is based on some fantastic god or other. You came right out and said yours is based on a human. That's what I commented on.
I will point out that your abuse is consistent with treatment I receive at the hands of other mormons, and you've done nothing to prove that you're any better or different. But in many of your other posts, you have tried to do just that. You failed, bub.
Only size 2 women are worth attacking :) ::ducks::
You fucking moron. What about size 1 and size 0 women? Of all the dipshit things I"ve ever read...
Okokok, the flame went broad. I'm sleepy, give me a break.
But it's the entire social hierarchy that makes it so that women are the one who take time off for raising children, rather than men
Yes, and no. The reason it evolved into the social hierarchy in the first place is because men don't have mammary glands.
There's no sexism in my house, but my wife doesn't work. She's working on our third kid right now, and until recently, she had been breastfeeding for about 4 years straight. Now she's going to start up again.
I think that in a general sense, due to the breastfeeding thing, women are in fact more suited to staying home with a newborn than men. But I can also say from personal experience that if a husband can't take time off (or doesn't) to help his wife out with the newborn, there's gonna be trouble. But I also don't think that that makes women inferior. It's just a job they're better suited for. There isn't anything a man can do that a woman can't do, but there is something a woman can do that a man can't do.
Consume. Marry and reproduce.
Why don't you eat shit and fuck off, asshole. :)
research the subject yourself buddy. Yes, "slaughtered" is the right word.
Another demonstration that the majority ruling party in the US in the 1800s wasn't such a wonderful thing. There are a lot of nasty things that have been done in this country that people like to shove under the rug. We have mormons to remind us of their ordeal (and if they weren't so damn self-righteous about everything they'd probably make more progress with the rest of the world). We have native americans around that remind us that the price of our own freedom was the death of their cultures. (yeah, yeah, so they're alive and well, right? Better go driving on a reservation and look around. Don't speed.) Too bad we have only history books to tell us of the Salem Witch Trials.
It's my opinion that the only reason Mormons were able to bounce back and become what they are is because they're mostly white.
Mormons get married young because, like everyone else at that age, we're horny masses of hormones, and marriage is the only sin-free way to get some.
Marriage for sex results in divorce. However, i will temper that by pointing out that I have observed a great deal of devout religionists who refuse to get divorced no matter how much they hate their spouse.
It's a finally because in your post you admitted that the religion was based on a human. Never before have I heard a mormon, or any other christian for that matter, admit their religion was based on a human. So I had to comment on it. Naturally, I expect the prejudice in you to accuse me of shit, but if you objectively re-read the post to which I responded, you'll see that I was, in fact, responding to the post as it was written. And I did not, in fact, ask for clarification.
Its been a few days since i read the article, but i thought they had performace evaluations to back up thier statements. At least, thats the impression i was left with.
It's been a few days for me as well, but that was definitely not the impression I was left with. However, considering what their words seem to indicate about what kind of workers they are (regardless of whatever proof they have, in my opinion), and the fact that they snooped on a customer, I have to side with the employer on this one.
Did I mention that Norway lies 6 hours ahead of US EST
Hmmm, that begs the question, "Then why were you criticizing?"
The Jesus Christ is important because that's who we base our religion on.
I'm giving up mod points for this, but what the hell? The whole topic went to shit when 50 posts arguing about LDS appeared. Why don't you guys take it to a journal or something?
Anyway, it's good to finally see a mormon admitting that their religion is based on a human. Refreshing, in fact.
The machine was neat because back in 1981 it had 3 channel sound! I was born in late 1974, you do the math.
No problem, you fuckin' kid. YOu're the same age I am.
You had transistors?? What a spoiled brat. I had only three vaccuum tubes, an abacus, and a photo of ENIAC. And I was grateful!!
You had vacuum tubes? Shit you had it easy. All's I had was a couple of rubber bands, a rock, and a few sticks. And I was grateful!