"I'm banging a fat chick at the moment and I love it."
Everybody get the picture??? Fat girlfriend in bed, laptop next to her head (otherwise it would hurt the fertility:) on the second pillow. And this guy is "at the moment banging" her and typing on the keyboard his Slashdot post..... Wow, that's the most impressive multi-tasking I've ever heard about.:-)
When you've got a horny girlfriend and a Slashdot addiction you've gotta improvise a bit.
AIM users are like giant squid (but with fewer arms). You hear about them, occassionally a giant tentacle washes up on shore, but nobody's ever actually seen one.
Seriously though who the hell uses AIM? Nobody has ever asked me for my MSN address. For two years now, since ICQ died, it's always been MSN this MSN that. If AIM has even 10% of the MSN userbase, surely someone would have asked me for my AIM info by now? Am I missing something here?
I dunno.. Everyone I know has accounts for 3 or 4 of the IM networks: Yahoo, AIM, MSN, and maybe ICQ. And they all run Trillian or maybe Gaim (these are non-techies, too). It seems strange that there are groups of people who only stick to one network.
Didn't say that there was (other than health concerns). I'm banging a fat chick at the moment and I love it. She's a great girl.
That being said, there is nothing wrong with abstinence when you can't get what you want.
Totally agree. Don't stick your dick in it unless you really want it. And for god sakes, be diligent in using contraception. Using a laptop is not enough. Birth control (ie "the pill") is only 98% effective. Use a condom no matter what other contraceptive measures have been taken (except for vasectomy of course). There's enough babies on this planet as it is.
as for the compiling joke, it's pretty old, and partially untrue if you use binaries during emerge
For how many packages are binaries available? Last time I asked this question, it was only for a few select packages such as the kernel. If there were binaries for everything (like Debian) Gentoo would be much more attractive (providing the choice between binaries or source).
I would disagree and say avoid testing. Go with either unstable or stable. Testing is just that -- an area to test for the next stable release. Sometimes it is broken for weeks. It is not meant for people to use unless they are helping test for the next stable release. I learned this the hard way by switching to testing from unstable. It may work for the moment, but at some point you will run into many problems after an upgrade.
For all the other slashdot readers: This guy deosn't live in India, he has just visited it, so he doesn't know more than any other foreigner who has visited India. If fact he "knows" even less than others because his type of people already have a bad image of India in their minds.
Yes, I have only visited India for periods of 3 months at a time. But that's the point. Some American IT worker is going to experience the same thing I did when he moves over there to only stay a year or two. It's a harsh environment, and I commend you for being able to live through it. I don't recommend it to my fellow Americans who are used to a much easier environment.
Someone who actually lives in India is going to have another perspective because you are used to it.
If you want to experience something different, go ahead and visit / move to India. But don't expect it to be a pleasant trip.
I've met a lot of people who moved to the U.S. from India that no longer want to go back even to visit India.
BTW, I am not ashamed. I am telling it like it is. If it offends a ton of people, I'm not sorry.
Gandhi suffered to do what he did. He was a saint.
However, I am not speaking to people who are saints. I am speaking to the typical American IT worker, warning them that India is not some wonderous place. It's a hostile environment. It's amazing that people can live in that hostile environment, and I commend you for that.
Well, yeah. Being a middle-class Indian IT worker in India for a year or two is only a fun, exciting adventure if you're not a middle-class Indian IT worker.
I'm not an Indian IT worker in India. I was born in the U.S. and having visited family there several times. I've always found visits to India to be pretty unpleasant. Its cool for about a week, then I want to get the hell out of there. Maybe it's just my perspective, being born in the U.S., but I think that's the point I was making. Even Indian people who have moved to the U.S. don't want to go back.
Um, no one is *making* you go. 'Sides, hit up Taco Bell and get all the diarrhea you in the comfort of your homeland.
Well, no shit.. The point I was making was that the parent poster had a serious misconception that India was a fun place. Interesting place, maybe, but certainly not the fun he seemed to think it is.
BTW Taco Bell's ability to produce diarrhea doesn't even compare to shit that will be spewing out of your ass if you eat or drink the wrong thing in India.
Sorry, but having constant diarrhea and eating shitty food is not my idea of fun. Also, Indian chicks don't put out (unless you marry them), which makes matters worse. Then there's the rampant polution and health hazards. India is not a fun place to live no matter how you slice it. Trust me, I am an Indian, and I've visited India enough times to know this.
BTW, in India, diarrhea is so common, it is normal for you to respond to "how are you doing?" with "I have diarrhea"
How insane. Abortion is so far from protecting an innocent unborn child as to be laughable. How do you expect to be taken seriously by making such ludicrous claims?
For example: Bringing a child into a life where it is unwanted, the mother does not have time or money to provide for the child, the child has no father, the parent is addicted to drugs, the parent is irresponsible and will neglect/abuse the child, etc.. There are countless possibilities. Why do you think these things are laughable?
You still have not explained why society has decided that murder is wrong (unless I missed it).
As for assisted suicide, I'm fine with it. That's the person making their own decision about their life. I think it serves as a great parallel to abortion (where someone is murdered and never given a choice to live or die).
An unborn baby is still partially part of another human being (the mother). So in effect, the mother is killing a part of herself by having an abortion.
If you truly feel that way about life, why are you still living?
I am a spiritual person, and am worried that my next life won't be as easy as my current one. So I might as well live this one out and learn what I can from it.
Is it for the sole cause of "rewarding" more "LUCKY" babies?
I don't have sex. I NEVER want to have a child. That doesn't mean everyone else has the will power to make that choice. If I do choose to have sex, I will have a vasectomy.
And yet oddly we have a large group of people in our society who don't mind all those other laws on the books, but are hell-bent against laws to protect an innocent unborn child from a raving mother
Abortion IS protecting an innocent unborn child from a raving mother. An unborn child is not hurt by being aborted, it is protected from life.
Murder is killing a living human being. An unborn child has not lived yet. Therefore abortion is not murder.
I think we are arguing here about why society does not allow murder. My point is that it is when someone has existed in society, outside of the womb, then it has value to society, and therefore should not be removed from society. You are saying that once a human is organically alive, it should not be removed. But taking that view, it is either a religious/spiritual argument, or you are arguing that it is not just the mother than is affected by the loss of an unborn child, but society as a whole.
So which argument is it? Or are you arguing none of the above? Or are you just saying "killing human organisms is bad" without an explanation as to why society does not allow it? Is it some basic argument that organic life is valuable? What is the reason for that argument?
You people are bizarre.
You can keep saying we are bizarre, or you can try to understand. I think at the core of these arguments, there is always some difference in opinion of either the role of society or a spritual/religious argument.
While we are at it, I think assisted suicide should be legalized.
Of why people like me (and most of slashdot) HATE to rush out and buy new equipment. I just spent a little over 400 on a 19" LCD Pannel
Well, LCD's still have certain advantages. For example, the pixels on an LCD are always on or always off. Whereas with a CRT they are constantly refreshing. Due to this, supposedly LCD's cause less eye-strain. I've found this mostly to be true, since I find reading e-books on my laptop's LCD screen easier to be easier on the eyes.
That said, I'm personally still waiting before I buy an LCD monitor. Though I think they will still have advantages over any kind of CRT, including these thin CRT's.
Of course, for TV/movies, LCD's still have a disadvantage, because actual pixel changes are still slower. On the LCD TV's I've looked at, I always notice this when there is a lot of motion.
It's bullshit trying to tie this to religion when it's really about right and wrong. If it's wrong to kill an adult, why is it right to kill an innocent unborn child that hasn't even had nearly the chances at life that the mother/father have had?
Why is it wrong? The child has not experienced life outside of the womb, nor has anyone come to know the child since its never been born. Just because its grown inside someone's body doesn't mean its wrong to remove it. By aborting it, you are not depriving anyone of its existance except for the mother who may have a physical and emotional attachment to it, but that is her choice and her choice alone if she wants to sever that attachment.
I am a spiritual person, and here is my opinion: just because a soul has entered an organism, doesn't mean it has to be forced into this life. Let the soul be reborn into a better life. So now we see where religion may factor in. One religion may say this is the soul's only chance at experiencing life, while another religion may say that the soul will just be born into a different life, and yet another religion may say the soul will be born into an insect or plant or some other kind of being instead. Then there is the athiest who will say its just a physical organism so what does it matter?
Who is right? We can't know. And government should not be the one to make that judgement either.
We treat animals in an inhumane manner and then kill them for food. We kill children as well as adults in wars. We execute criminals. Why oh why is abortion such a terrible thing? My argument is that the value of an unborn life is not the same as a child that has been born. Society protects life because of the attachments to that life, not for the actual individual to experience life. You can't feel sorry for the dead, you can only feel sorry for the people who miss and have lost those that are dead. And the mother is the only person who is truly attached to an unborn baby. It's her choice.
Slashdot Mirror
"I'm banging a fat chick at the moment and I love it."
:) on the second pillow. And this guy is "at the moment banging" her and typing on the keyboard his Slashdot post ..... Wow, that's the most impressive multi-tasking I've ever heard about. :-)
Everybody get the picture??? Fat girlfriend in bed, laptop next to her head (otherwise it would hurt the fertility
When you've got a horny girlfriend and a Slashdot addiction you've gotta improvise a bit.
AIM users are like giant squid (but with fewer arms). You hear about them, occassionally a giant tentacle washes up on shore, but nobody's ever actually seen one.
Seriously though who the hell uses AIM? Nobody has ever asked me for my MSN address. For two years now, since ICQ died, it's always been MSN this MSN that. If AIM has even 10% of the MSN userbase, surely someone would have asked me for my AIM info by now? Am I missing something here?
I dunno.. Everyone I know has accounts for 3 or 4 of the IM networks: Yahoo, AIM, MSN, and maybe ICQ. And they all run Trillian or maybe Gaim (these are non-techies, too). It seems strange that there are groups of people who only stick to one network.
wow, you created an account just to send me a message? Thanks!
Now get back to sucking my dick, woman.
There is nothing wrong with being fat.
Didn't say that there was (other than health concerns). I'm banging a fat chick at the moment and I love it. She's a great girl.
That being said, there is nothing wrong with abstinence when you can't get what you want.
Totally agree. Don't stick your dick in it unless you really want it. And for god sakes, be diligent in using contraception. Using a laptop is not enough. Birth control (ie "the pill") is only 98% effective. Use a condom no matter what other contraceptive measures have been taken (except for vasectomy of course). There's enough babies on this planet as it is.
Laptop == contraceptive
Most of us here are banging fat chicks (if having sex at all) and it would really suck if we got them pregnant.
as for the compiling joke, it's pretty old, and partially untrue if you use binaries during emerge
For how many packages are binaries available? Last time I asked this question, it was only for a few select packages such as the kernel. If there were binaries for everything (like Debian) Gentoo would be much more attractive (providing the choice between binaries or source).
No, some of us just control-click on a link. That opens the link in a new tab without having to navigate a context menu.
Control-click? That is so 2001. Most of us middle click to open a new tab.
I would disagree and say avoid testing. Go with either unstable or stable. Testing is just that -- an area to test for the next stable release. Sometimes it is broken for weeks. It is not meant for people to use unless they are helping test for the next stable release. I learned this the hard way by switching to testing from unstable. It may work for the moment, but at some point you will run into many problems after an upgrade.
I commend you for being able to live in such a harsh environment. You are an inspiration to humanity. Good luck.
'Padded Cell technology' intended to enable the company's proprietary real-time OS to take advantage of the wealth of Linux application software."
Compliment? I think not. What they are saying here is that Linux application software is so insane, that it needs a "Padded Cell" just to be safe.
For all the other slashdot readers: This guy deosn't live in India, he has just visited it, so he doesn't know more than any other foreigner who has visited India. If fact he "knows" even less than others because his type of people already have a bad image of India in their minds.
Yes, I have only visited India for periods of 3 months at a time. But that's the point. Some American IT worker is going to experience the same thing I did when he moves over there to only stay a year or two. It's a harsh environment, and I commend you for being able to live through it. I don't recommend it to my fellow Americans who are used to a much easier environment.
Someone who actually lives in India is going to have another perspective because you are used to it.
If you want to experience something different, go ahead and visit / move to India. But don't expect it to be a pleasant trip.
I've met a lot of people who moved to the U.S. from India that no longer want to go back even to visit India.
BTW, I am not ashamed. I am telling it like it is. If it offends a ton of people, I'm not sorry.
Gandhi suffered to do what he did. He was a saint.
However, I am not speaking to people who are saints. I am speaking to the typical American IT worker, warning them that India is not some wonderous place. It's a hostile environment. It's amazing that people can live in that hostile environment, and I commend you for that.
Sorry, but you didn't make India sound any better (the comment about HIV/AIDS cases pretty much sums it up).
Well, yeah. Being a middle-class Indian IT worker in India for a year or two is only a fun, exciting adventure if you're not a middle-class Indian IT worker.
I'm not an Indian IT worker in India. I was born in the U.S. and having visited family there several times. I've always found visits to India to be pretty unpleasant. Its cool for about a week, then I want to get the hell out of there. Maybe it's just my perspective, being born in the U.S., but I think that's the point I was making. Even Indian people who have moved to the U.S. don't want to go back.
Um, no one is *making* you go. 'Sides, hit up Taco Bell and get all the diarrhea you in the comfort of your homeland.
Well, no shit.. The point I was making was that the parent poster had a serious misconception that India was a fun place. Interesting place, maybe, but certainly not the fun he seemed to think it is.
BTW Taco Bell's ability to produce diarrhea doesn't even compare to shit that will be spewing out of your ass if you eat or drink the wrong thing in India.
Sorry, but having constant diarrhea and eating shitty food is not my idea of fun. Also, Indian chicks don't put out (unless you marry them), which makes matters worse. Then there's the rampant polution and health hazards. India is not a fun place to live no matter how you slice it. Trust me, I am an Indian, and I've visited India enough times to know this.
BTW, in India, diarrhea is so common, it is normal for you to respond to "how are you doing?" with "I have diarrhea"
How insane. Abortion is so far from protecting an innocent unborn child as to be laughable. How do you expect to be taken seriously by making such ludicrous claims?
For example: Bringing a child into a life where it is unwanted, the mother does not have time or money to provide for the child, the child has no father, the parent is addicted to drugs, the parent is irresponsible and will neglect/abuse the child, etc.. There are countless possibilities. Why do you think these things are laughable?
You still have not explained why society has decided that murder is wrong (unless I missed it).
As for assisted suicide, I'm fine with it. That's the person making their own decision about their life. I think it serves as a great parallel to abortion (where someone is murdered and never given a choice to live or die).
An unborn baby is still partially part of another human being (the mother). So in effect, the mother is killing a part of herself by having an abortion.
The good news: Apache Geronimon. Free, documented. 'nuff said.
More good news: Spring framework, Hibernate, iBatis..
Not sayin' it is so... but HAD the election been accidentally given to Bush, now that Kerry has conceded, what would the legal recourse be??
The electors don't vote until December 13th. That's why they are doing a recount in Ohio.
If you truly feel that way about life, why are you still living?
I am a spiritual person, and am worried that my next life won't be as easy as my current one. So I might as well live this one out and learn what I can from it.
Is it for the sole cause of "rewarding" more "LUCKY" babies?
I don't have sex. I NEVER want to have a child. That doesn't mean everyone else has the will power to make that choice. If I do choose to have sex, I will have a vasectomy.
And yet oddly we have a large group of people in our society who don't mind all those other laws on the books, but are hell-bent against laws to protect an innocent unborn child from a raving mother
Abortion IS protecting an innocent unborn child from a raving mother. An unborn child is not hurt by being aborted, it is protected from life.
Murder is killing a living human being. An unborn child has not lived yet. Therefore abortion is not murder.
I think we are arguing here about why society does not allow murder. My point is that it is when someone has existed in society, outside of the womb, then it has value to society, and therefore should not be removed from society. You are saying that once a human is organically alive, it should not be removed. But taking that view, it is either a religious/spiritual argument, or you are arguing that it is not just the mother than is affected by the loss of an unborn child, but society as a whole.
So which argument is it? Or are you arguing none of the above? Or are you just saying "killing human organisms is bad" without an explanation as to why society does not allow it? Is it some basic argument that organic life is valuable? What is the reason for that argument?
You people are bizarre.
You can keep saying we are bizarre, or you can try to understand. I think at the core of these arguments, there is always some difference in opinion of either the role of society or a spritual/religious argument.
While we are at it, I think assisted suicide should be legalized.
Of why people like me (and most of slashdot) HATE to rush out and buy new equipment. I just spent a little over 400 on a 19" LCD Pannel
Well, LCD's still have certain advantages. For example, the pixels on an LCD are always on or always off. Whereas with a CRT they are constantly refreshing. Due to this, supposedly LCD's cause less eye-strain. I've found this mostly to be true, since I find reading e-books on my laptop's LCD screen easier to be easier on the eyes.
That said, I'm personally still waiting before I buy an LCD monitor. Though I think they will still have advantages over any kind of CRT, including these thin CRT's.
Of course, for TV/movies, LCD's still have a disadvantage, because actual pixel changes are still slower. On the LCD TV's I've looked at, I always notice this when there is a lot of motion.
I'm waiting for the next Debian stable to get released, then I think the updating portion of this will be covered nicely.
I'm running Debian you insensitive clod!
It's bullshit trying to tie this to religion when it's really about right and wrong. If it's wrong to kill an adult, why is it right to kill an innocent unborn child that hasn't even had nearly the chances at life that the mother/father have had?
Why is it wrong? The child has not experienced life outside of the womb, nor has anyone come to know the child since its never been born. Just because its grown inside someone's body doesn't mean its wrong to remove it. By aborting it, you are not depriving anyone of its existance except for the mother who may have a physical and emotional attachment to it, but that is her choice and her choice alone if she wants to sever that attachment.
I am a spiritual person, and here is my opinion: just because a soul has entered an organism, doesn't mean it has to be forced into this life. Let the soul be reborn into a better life. So now we see where religion may factor in. One religion may say this is the soul's only chance at experiencing life, while another religion may say that the soul will just be born into a different life, and yet another religion may say the soul will be born into an insect or plant or some other kind of being instead. Then there is the athiest who will say its just a physical organism so what does it matter?
Who is right? We can't know. And government should not be the one to make that judgement either.
We treat animals in an inhumane manner and then kill them for food. We kill children as well as adults in wars. We execute criminals. Why oh why is abortion such a terrible thing? My argument is that the value of an unborn life is not the same as a child that has been born. Society protects life because of the attachments to that life, not for the actual individual to experience life. You can't feel sorry for the dead, you can only feel sorry for the people who miss and have lost those that are dead. And the mother is the only person who is truly attached to an unborn baby. It's her choice.