Nice phrase, I like it! I've suspected such things in the past, as I'm sure many others have. I'm trying to remember the name of the group that first made me say, "WTF is going on, here?!" but it escapes me at the moment. Anyhow, has anybody ever been able to tie them together? Proof of this "corporate-sponsored feminism?"
Somehow, putting a giant picture of blonde twins in that particular pose contributes to taking them seriously? The name is wrong, too. PMS clan? Really. And they want to be taken seriously as gamers and not have men objectify them as women sex objects or point and stare mumbling "wuh-man"? I'm all for women gamers getting into the mix, but for a particular group to jump up and down yelling "I am woman, hear me roar!" makes me take them less seriously.
A clan of women makes sense. They are a significant minority in online games, and with the way males online tend to act with women, I can see how this kind of supportive group can work. This clan is giving a conflicting image, though. "We're women, we game, don't objectify us" gets a little fuzzy when you're posting Gen13-style art and Charlie's Angels silhouettes as representations of who you are.
It's always sad when a better, more robust technology gets overridden by something less capable due to marketing and back-door corporate alliances. Granted, USB2.0 is good, and for most people it's enough. It's just not as good as the same generation firewire.
At the risk of turning this into a Hulk love-fest, I enjoyed that movie, too! So, that makes 3 people. Can't say anything about FF as I didn't see it. I'm waiting for the public library to get that one. I hear such things I'd rather get on the list and watch it for free than pay anyone anything to see it. Of course, if I like it, I'll buy it, but I'm not holding my breath.
Not true. Men pick up on those things. We just act like we don't because we're hoping we won't have to deal with the drama that ensues upon recognizing them. Unfortunately for us, not recognizing those cues creates more drama than recognizing them, so maybe we really are stupid.
Looks like there's a mod who's very much against "cunnilingus on a hardwood floor" gaining any kind of popularity. I got modded down for it, too. Oh, well.
I propose your post become a cliche for any new clever and/or useless hacks. Like that Death Star subwoofer from a while back. Neat, but can it perform cunnilingus on a hardwood floor?
Incidentally, I don't know if I should be proud or scared that I instantly recognized what you were referencing with you comment.
Good! I've found that in the last few years, the music I find most interesting is composed for games. Hollywood soundtracks still provide some good stuff, but the more imaginative things are coming from games. The downfall has been the instrumentations, being mostly relegated to various qualities of synth. That's fine for the songs that use synth the way it was meant to be used, not when it's used because they didn't have the budget to use the instruments they really wanted. It's annoying to hear what should clearly be a great piece, but have it sound so bad. Now, with them getting more money, maybe we'll get more and more real instruments where they're needed.
Re:I can't see any reason to complain about the pr
on
Xbox 360 for $300
·
· Score: 1
Bingo. I typically buy 2 or 3 games a year at full price; only things I've been really looking forward to. Everything else, I wait for the price to hit $30 or less. I'm patient, and it keeps my bank account a little happier than it would otherwise be.
Holy crap, I'm not the only one who thinks Mark Warner should be the next president?! That's awesome! Now, if we could just convince 51% of the voting population, we'd be set!
Mark Warner is the best thing to happen to Virginia in a loooong time. He inherited a mess of a state from his predecessor and managed to clean it up nicely in relatively short order. He's probably the only politician I can think of off the top of my head that makes me think there's hope for our system of government, if only people like him were in charge.
Right-wing nutjobs is right, but I don't think Jesus told anybody to vote for W. Speaking as a Christian, I think it's pretty easy to see W for who he is. Unfortunately, the right-wing-nutjob-sect hear all the talk about W's "faith-based initiatives" or whatever BS, and automatically go for him. They don't actually think about it like they're supposed to, they just blindly follow the person that says "God" the most.
No, morality doesn't require religion. However, if you describe your morality as "just because" or "it feels good" or some other vague notion, it's no better than religion. If morality is just what "seems right" to you, how can there be good or bad? Who's to say what is right or wrong? Religion answers that with an authority figure. Without the authority figure, morality really is just relative, and nobody has any right to enforce their view of morality on any other. Thus, our jails shouldn't exist. Everyone in there did what they thought was right at the time, and who are we to judge?
My thoughts exactly. I did a little freelance consulting for a small startup office (heathcare) here in town, and I got them a cheap, stable, small-scale solution. It didn't make sense to include any kind of scalability for a 4-person office that wasn't planning to grow beyond their 4 walls. It was more important to get them working, cheaply and effectively, than include built-in growth for their network. The cheap solution cost them around $2000, including my time. A scalable solution would have cost easily 4-5 times that, and they just didn't have that kind of cash laying about.
I have encountered similar problems, but I came up with the following that fixed all of my game play problems. Some other software is another story, but here:
Create a directory off the root of C: and give all users full rights to it. I named it "Game Files." Do all of your game installs into this directory. You'll still need to run the install as admin, but from then on, all unpriveledged users can run the games in there without any problems.
Sounds like Old Testament, to me. There's a lot of that in there. When I look at the grand scope of the Bible, I see the relationship between humans and God in a similar light to parents and children. In their infancy and younger years, you cannot reason with a child. Children start out understanding one thing: "I WANT." Until they have developed to a point that you can discuss complex ideas and help them understand, physical punishment is most effective. I'm not talking about beating, I'm talking about a spanking or a slap on the wrist. It doesn't take much force to get the point across. Between the sound and the brief sting, a child will get the point on a level words can't approach yet on their level of understanding. It is more important that the child learn and endure a little pain than grow into bad people.
Take that, and apply it to an entire species. Bigger in scale, more powerful and apparently cruel when looked at the individual level. I'm sure if skin cells could talk they'd say similar things about the spankings they endure. Over the course of the Old Testament, however, the "spankings" decrease in frequency and power as people grow.
There is an important demarcation point, however. The crucifixion of Jesus is a turning point in the history of the human-God relationship. Sealed with the blood of His own Son, humans are promoted beyond their childhood. Spankings are no longer necessary at all. At that point, we have all we need to mature as a species, and the reigns are handed over to us to make of the world what we will.
But there's the surface area factor. The bullet does more damage because it packs that energy into a tiny package that goes through you. It isn't the energy of the bullet that does damage, it's the hole it makes.
Actually, I just paged down to John, and those two struck me as absurdly obvious examples of the debunker's preconception. If he was really looking for truth, he wouldn't have mentioned those two.
Granted, I have an agenda in the matter, as well. Doesn't everyone who gets involved in a cause they believe in? The difference, I suppose, is that I'm willing to see errors where there are errors. The debunker appears to have no problem with manufacturing errors that don't exist.
After thousands of years of copying, retelling, and translating, it's inevitable that mistakes will be made. We're human, after all. A message can't make it around a room without some changes, let alone across time and different languages. I can't think of it off the top of my head, but I've seen a couple of passages where words and numbers were transposed, drastically changing the descriptions of some things.
Fortunately, given the archeological finds of ancient copies of Biblical texts, it appears that the content has remained mostly on track, and the message is intact. "Love your neighbor as yourself" started out that way and remains that way in the moderm Bible.
I've done some cursory looking over of those "contradictions," and find that there is a lot of "stretching of the facts" going on to make them look like contradictions. For instance, number 143, where certain scriptures are quoted about the breaking of bones. The references point to instructions to not break the bones of the sacrificial lamb, and about righteous people not ever having broken a bone, both of which are appropriate references to Jesus. While not prophecies in the sense that they say "the Messiah will not have any bone broken," both of the referenced passages would be common knowledge to a Jew who studied the Scriptures and, given the path Jesus's ministry took, should be expected to be adhered to by the Messiah.
Also, item 144, where Jesus supposedly implies he will return during John's life. No, he does no such thing. He merely tells Peter to mind his own business. I find it hard to trust a source that pulls such tricks of semantics for the express purpose of refuting another source.
In reference to the name Immanuel, Jesus is referred to as Immanuel and Emmanuel by people even up to this day, so that prophecy turns out to be true. Determining whether it was self-fulfilling or not is left as an exercise to the reader.
No, I'm not going to sit here and go through every one of those line by line. It's quite obvious what the writer's agenda is and that they are willing to compromise their own integrity for the sake of refuting a source they have a personal stake in refuting. Seeing it, though, makes me wonder if I shouldn't make a rebuttal page and make this a long-term project. I wouldn't be surprised to find that this has already been done, though, which would save me a lot of work.
I agree with that, as I've had some experience with that, too. Heck, I'm sure everyone has. Some days you're on your game, other days you're not. I've aced tests, and done horribly on similar tests at other times.
Perhaps an average of some quantifiable test taken over time would be more accurate? I have scored as high as 163, and as low as 135, on IQ tests, with a spattering of results between those numbers. Perhaps IQ should be quantified as the range, rather than the average? That way, you get a broad sense of what a person can do without boiling it down to some number that may or may not accurately depict a person's intelligence.
Re:They're called homographs with good reason
on
IE7 Details Emerge
·
· Score: 1
So, if we have Greek Omicron, Latin O, and Cyrillic O, all of which look exactly the same, could we not create a master character set, containing one instance of every character, and just have the specific character sets be pointers to the relevant entries in the master list? Yeah, I know, that's a big project to change everybody's character sets, but wouldn't it fix this problem?
Slashdot Mirror
Nice phrase, I like it! I've suspected such things in the past, as I'm sure many others have. I'm trying to remember the name of the group that first made me say, "WTF is going on, here?!" but it escapes me at the moment. Anyhow, has anybody ever been able to tie them together? Proof of this "corporate-sponsored feminism?"
A clan of women makes sense. They are a significant minority in online games, and with the way males online tend to act with women, I can see how this kind of supportive group can work. This clan is giving a conflicting image, though. "We're women, we game, don't objectify us" gets a little fuzzy when you're posting Gen13-style art and Charlie's Angels silhouettes as representations of who you are.
It's always sad when a better, more robust technology gets overridden by something less capable due to marketing and back-door corporate alliances. Granted, USB2.0 is good, and for most people it's enough. It's just not as good as the same generation firewire.
At the risk of turning this into a Hulk love-fest, I enjoyed that movie, too! So, that makes 3 people. Can't say anything about FF as I didn't see it. I'm waiting for the public library to get that one. I hear such things I'd rather get on the list and watch it for free than pay anyone anything to see it. Of course, if I like it, I'll buy it, but I'm not holding my breath.
Not true. Men pick up on those things. We just act like we don't because we're hoping we won't have to deal with the drama that ensues upon recognizing them. Unfortunately for us, not recognizing those cues creates more drama than recognizing them, so maybe we really are stupid.
Looks like there's a mod who's very much against "cunnilingus on a hardwood floor" gaining any kind of popularity. I got modded down for it, too. Oh, well.
...can it perform cunnilingus on a hard wood floor?
Some jerk modded you down for it once, too! How rude. I had some points, so I slipped them your way.
Incidentally, I don't know if I should be proud or scared that I instantly recognized what you were referencing with you comment.
Nevermind. I'm scared.
OK, you got me wondering: How many comets of what size would it take to put enough water on the surface of Mars to make it similar enough to Earth?
Good! I've found that in the last few years, the music I find most interesting is composed for games. Hollywood soundtracks still provide some good stuff, but the more imaginative things are coming from games. The downfall has been the instrumentations, being mostly relegated to various qualities of synth. That's fine for the songs that use synth the way it was meant to be used, not when it's used because they didn't have the budget to use the instruments they really wanted. It's annoying to hear what should clearly be a great piece, but have it sound so bad. Now, with them getting more money, maybe we'll get more and more real instruments where they're needed.
Bingo. I typically buy 2 or 3 games a year at full price; only things I've been really looking forward to. Everything else, I wait for the price to hit $30 or less. I'm patient, and it keeps my bank account a little happier than it would otherwise be.
Mark Warner is the best thing to happen to Virginia in a loooong time. He inherited a mess of a state from his predecessor and managed to clean it up nicely in relatively short order. He's probably the only politician I can think of off the top of my head that makes me think there's hope for our system of government, if only people like him were in charge.
Right-wing nutjobs is right, but I don't think Jesus told anybody to vote for W. Speaking as a Christian, I think it's pretty easy to see W for who he is. Unfortunately, the right-wing-nutjob-sect hear all the talk about W's "faith-based initiatives" or whatever BS, and automatically go for him. They don't actually think about it like they're supposed to, they just blindly follow the person that says "God" the most.
No, morality doesn't require religion. However, if you describe your morality as "just because" or "it feels good" or some other vague notion, it's no better than religion. If morality is just what "seems right" to you, how can there be good or bad? Who's to say what is right or wrong? Religion answers that with an authority figure. Without the authority figure, morality really is just relative, and nobody has any right to enforce their view of morality on any other. Thus, our jails shouldn't exist. Everyone in there did what they thought was right at the time, and who are we to judge?
Or he's a network admin. Only open the ports you need, deny everything else.
You don't happen to have a list of distros and which of those categories they each fall into, do you? That'd make for an interesting website...
My thoughts exactly. I did a little freelance consulting for a small startup office (heathcare) here in town, and I got them a cheap, stable, small-scale solution. It didn't make sense to include any kind of scalability for a 4-person office that wasn't planning to grow beyond their 4 walls. It was more important to get them working, cheaply and effectively, than include built-in growth for their network. The cheap solution cost them around $2000, including my time. A scalable solution would have cost easily 4-5 times that, and they just didn't have that kind of cash laying about.
Create a directory off the root of C: and give all users full rights to it. I named it "Game Files." Do all of your game installs into this directory. You'll still need to run the install as admin, but from then on, all unpriveledged users can run the games in there without any problems.
Take that, and apply it to an entire species. Bigger in scale, more powerful and apparently cruel when looked at the individual level. I'm sure if skin cells could talk they'd say similar things about the spankings they endure. Over the course of the Old Testament, however, the "spankings" decrease in frequency and power as people grow.
There is an important demarcation point, however. The crucifixion of Jesus is a turning point in the history of the human-God relationship. Sealed with the blood of His own Son, humans are promoted beyond their childhood. Spankings are no longer necessary at all. At that point, we have all we need to mature as a species, and the reigns are handed over to us to make of the world what we will.
But there's the surface area factor. The bullet does more damage because it packs that energy into a tiny package that goes through you. It isn't the energy of the bullet that does damage, it's the hole it makes.
Granted, I have an agenda in the matter, as well. Doesn't everyone who gets involved in a cause they believe in? The difference, I suppose, is that I'm willing to see errors where there are errors. The debunker appears to have no problem with manufacturing errors that don't exist.
After thousands of years of copying, retelling, and translating, it's inevitable that mistakes will be made. We're human, after all. A message can't make it around a room without some changes, let alone across time and different languages. I can't think of it off the top of my head, but I've seen a couple of passages where words and numbers were transposed, drastically changing the descriptions of some things.
Fortunately, given the archeological finds of ancient copies of Biblical texts, it appears that the content has remained mostly on track, and the message is intact. "Love your neighbor as yourself" started out that way and remains that way in the moderm Bible.
Also, item 144, where Jesus supposedly implies he will return during John's life. No, he does no such thing. He merely tells Peter to mind his own business. I find it hard to trust a source that pulls such tricks of semantics for the express purpose of refuting another source.
In reference to the name Immanuel, Jesus is referred to as Immanuel and Emmanuel by people even up to this day, so that prophecy turns out to be true. Determining whether it was self-fulfilling or not is left as an exercise to the reader.
No, I'm not going to sit here and go through every one of those line by line. It's quite obvious what the writer's agenda is and that they are willing to compromise their own integrity for the sake of refuting a source they have a personal stake in refuting. Seeing it, though, makes me wonder if I shouldn't make a rebuttal page and make this a long-term project. I wouldn't be surprised to find that this has already been done, though, which would save me a lot of work.
Perhaps an average of some quantifiable test taken over time would be more accurate? I have scored as high as 163, and as low as 135, on IQ tests, with a spattering of results between those numbers. Perhaps IQ should be quantified as the range, rather than the average? That way, you get a broad sense of what a person can do without boiling it down to some number that may or may not accurately depict a person's intelligence.
So, if we have Greek Omicron, Latin O, and Cyrillic O, all of which look exactly the same, could we not create a master character set, containing one instance of every character, and just have the specific character sets be pointers to the relevant entries in the master list? Yeah, I know, that's a big project to change everybody's character sets, but wouldn't it fix this problem?