You know, I've found it's pointless to argue with you people who argue that "everything is equivalent to everything else", and just silently let you suffer inside your boring little undifferentiated world.
I never said the detailed laws were a bad thing. I think it's good advice to take a bath after sex too, but Jesus (at least according to what's preserved in the Gospels) cared more about showing you life after death than telling you how to live your life before death.
Christianity was originally founded on the principle of doing away with Judaism's rigid laws about how to live your life. While it's true that Christians held political power, the Christian faith itself does not prescribe as many detailed rules to its followers as Islam or even Judaism--there are no prohibitions on what to eat, few rules beyond the most simple, so on and so forth. Did you know that under some interpretations of Islam, it is necessary to take a bath after having sexual intercourse? Or that the status of male masturbation is disputed, but according to some scholars is condoned if it is the only way to prevent yourself from committing adultery? That's a level of detail that, by and large, you don't see in Christianity.
No, dumbass. Americans "are irrational and frequently attempt to change the subject when [America's] shortcomings are mentioned. It is pointless to argue with them." And I am American, so consider this as sincere criticism.
PowerBooks haven't been on sale from Apple for months now.
Ever since 2003, the metal PowerBooks and MacBook Pro's had the wireless antennas underneath rubber patches on the side of the lid--i.e. no metal interference.
You're not supposed to rest your wrists along the edge of the notebook. That's bad ergonomics.
What's the practical use of a fingerprint scanner, anyway? Do you work for the NSA?
Yes, maybe, yes, yes, maybe, already dead, yes, probably not, yes, no, not yet, already dead, no, maybe, maybe, no, no, no, yes, no, no, no, no, probably, no, no, no, eventually, already did, already did, already did, already did, no, if they don't turn around, eventually, no, maybe, probably not.
That bit was a bit off topic, but if you and your assigning ME homework instead of just elucidating for the audience what I alluded would have helped.
I honestly did not know what you were talking about. Being coy doesn't win you any points--being specific, and providing sources (even Wikipedia links) lends you at least enough credibility for the rest of us to know what you're talking about. In any case, you have completely failed to explain how this excuses the PLA's actions.
Your first assignment is to name these two countries and provide sources for your assertion. Your second assignment is to explain whether this excuses the PLA's actions, and why.
Congratulations. Now you've disproportionately favored primitive countries that overbreed men over technologically advanced countries that need this kind of advantage.
The same way you move or swap values in a one or two dimensional array. Checkers is an abstract game distinct from its representation in physical 4D spacetime (i.e. on a physical board).
Just one long can't store pointers, although I bet if you had an array of them, that array could store pointers as long as they didn't mind being typecast.
How is this any different than you or me buying a PS3 and selling it on eBay? Only difference I can see is, homeless people need the money worse than we do.
The impact of global warming will most likely affect us within not too many decades if not stopped. That much is a certainty. Thermonuclear war is a remote possibility--there's only two or three countries with enough thermonuclear weapons to have an effect on anything, and none of them are going to launch their entire arsenals. Now, the possibility that some nut is going to use a small number of atom bombs (which are not thermonuclear weapons--thermonuclear weapons are H-bombs, i.e. fusion weapons, which North Korea, Iran, etc. are not developing) should be addressed, but the fact is, very little of our defense budget is dedicated to addressing the nutjob-with-atom-bomb threat anyway.
The lack of consensus isn't from scientists--it's from Republicans and oil companies. The scientific consensus is that global warming is happening and that it has human causes.
Funny how bin Laden has been quoted as saying these things for years, and yet he has yet to kill as many people as, for instance, drunk drivers in California alone. I don't doubt he's serious--I do doubt that he represents much of a threat. Just because neo-Nazis live in Idaho and Montana doesn't mean Jews in New York are at threat of facing another Holocaust. Bin Laden is more of a threat than neo-Nazis, but only because we've been meddling in the Middle East for decades proving him right. In fact, bin Laden himself wouldn't bother himself with us if we didn't prop up the same MIddle Eastern regimes he's trying to overthrow. For years he was no more than just another Saudi dissident.
I don't know about it not being true, but it certainly can't convince someone who can think for himself. If you have a rational argument for your point, than lay it out for me without trying to exploit my emotional memories of 9/11 or any lingering fear and hatred I have for Muslims.
I would also like to add that we also train a large group of armed and dangerous men to use suicidal tactics in combat--the group is the Secret Service, the combat would be any armed attempt on the President's life, and yet we train and indoctrinate these men to take a bullet for the President. We train them as human shields to protect our great leader--clearly we are fanatics who cannot be reasoned with.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, I've played lots of chess, and while you can win plenty of prizes, none of them are a king's ransom.
You know, I've found it's pointless to argue with you people who argue that "everything is equivalent to everything else", and just silently let you suffer inside your boring little undifferentiated world.
I never said the detailed laws were a bad thing. I think it's good advice to take a bath after sex too, but Jesus (at least according to what's preserved in the Gospels) cared more about showing you life after death than telling you how to live your life before death.
Christianity was originally founded on the principle of doing away with Judaism's rigid laws about how to live your life. While it's true that Christians held political power, the Christian faith itself does not prescribe as many detailed rules to its followers as Islam or even Judaism--there are no prohibitions on what to eat, few rules beyond the most simple, so on and so forth. Did you know that under some interpretations of Islam, it is necessary to take a bath after having sexual intercourse? Or that the status of male masturbation is disputed, but according to some scholars is condoned if it is the only way to prevent yourself from committing adultery? That's a level of detail that, by and large, you don't see in Christianity.
I never said anything about moral equivalence, only that Americans have the same problems, even if it isn't to the same degree.
No, dumbass. Americans "are irrational and frequently attempt to change the subject when [America's] shortcomings are mentioned. It is pointless to argue with them." And I am American, so consider this as sincere criticism.
Yes, they remind me of Americans.
Yes, maybe, yes, yes, maybe, already dead, yes, probably not, yes, no, not yet, already dead, no, maybe, maybe, no, no, no, yes, no, no, no, no, probably, no, no, no, eventually, already did, already did, already did, already did, no, if they don't turn around, eventually, no, maybe, probably not.
I honestly did not know what you were talking about. Being coy doesn't win you any points--being specific, and providing sources (even Wikipedia links) lends you at least enough credibility for the rest of us to know what you're talking about. In any case, you have completely failed to explain how this excuses the PLA's actions.
Your first assignment is to name these two countries and provide sources for your assertion. Your second assignment is to explain whether this excuses the PLA's actions, and why.
They semi-protected three articles. This happens all the time, why the fuck is it on Slashdot?
Yeah, it's the sex. And the amusement of how many people assume you're female just because you have a female avatar.
Congratulations. Now you've disproportionately favored primitive countries that overbreed men over technologically advanced countries that need this kind of advantage.
The same way you move or swap values in a one or two dimensional array. Checkers is an abstract game distinct from its representation in physical 4D spacetime (i.e. on a physical board).
Just one long can't store pointers, although I bet if you had an array of them, that array could store pointers as long as they didn't mind being typecast.
How is this any different than you or me buying a PS3 and selling it on eBay? Only difference I can see is, homeless people need the money worse than we do.
We slashdotted Slashdot!
The New American Century was only half as long as the Thousand Year Reich.
We've had that for over 60 years now. It doesn't need to be "worked on" so much as implemented.
The impact of global warming will most likely affect us within not too many decades if not stopped. That much is a certainty. Thermonuclear war is a remote possibility--there's only two or three countries with enough thermonuclear weapons to have an effect on anything, and none of them are going to launch their entire arsenals. Now, the possibility that some nut is going to use a small number of atom bombs (which are not thermonuclear weapons--thermonuclear weapons are H-bombs, i.e. fusion weapons, which North Korea, Iran, etc. are not developing) should be addressed, but the fact is, very little of our defense budget is dedicated to addressing the nutjob-with-atom-bomb threat anyway.
The lack of consensus isn't from scientists--it's from Republicans and oil companies. The scientific consensus is that global warming is happening and that it has human causes.
Funny how bin Laden has been quoted as saying these things for years, and yet he has yet to kill as many people as, for instance, drunk drivers in California alone. I don't doubt he's serious--I do doubt that he represents much of a threat. Just because neo-Nazis live in Idaho and Montana doesn't mean Jews in New York are at threat of facing another Holocaust. Bin Laden is more of a threat than neo-Nazis, but only because we've been meddling in the Middle East for decades proving him right. In fact, bin Laden himself wouldn't bother himself with us if we didn't prop up the same MIddle Eastern regimes he's trying to overthrow. For years he was no more than just another Saudi dissident.
I don't know about it not being true, but it certainly can't convince someone who can think for himself. If you have a rational argument for your point, than lay it out for me without trying to exploit my emotional memories of 9/11 or any lingering fear and hatred I have for Muslims.
I would also like to add that we also train a large group of armed and dangerous men to use suicidal tactics in combat--the group is the Secret Service, the combat would be any armed attempt on the President's life, and yet we train and indoctrinate these men to take a bullet for the President. We train them as human shields to protect our great leader--clearly we are fanatics who cannot be reasoned with.