I am not a Christian (because it is silly to believe in things that do not exist), but according to what I've read, the original Jewish word in that commandment actually meant "murder", not "kill". But after a few translations the original meaning transformed, which actually suited modernised Christianity better.
And, however many NVA my ship killed, I'll bet we saved more American lives, and that's all that matters to me. Do you think it is all that matters to God? "There is no Jew, no Hellene", like St.Paul the Apostle said. You are an excellent example of the hypocrisy and perversion of the modern American Christianity. As for carrying the shells, blood is still on your hands, remember the Pilate.
P.S. There is no god, obviously. But you are still a murderer. And a retard to boot.
When Darth Vader killed the Emperor, he betrayed him. But still his betrayal was ethical. When USA attacked Vietnam, supporting the US was unethical, supporting Vietnamese was ethically right.
Have you ever downloaded an image from Corbis? Have you RTFA? I may be wrong, but it increasingly seems they are talking about visible watermark that say "Corbis" right on the image. And the article says you only need to get an account to get non-watermarke? images. I have an account and all it took was an e-mail address and a minute of my time. Now I can use the huge collection of Corbis images for free. No watermarks.
Of course, the free images are low-res, but still they are extremely useful (unless you need to do quality printing). And needless to say, if I ever need to do quality printing, I know where I will head to buy the images...
If they said these terrorist groups were the greatest threat to our safety, then I'd buy it. Psst! Wrong. Airliners falling from the sky by themselves are a greater threat. Trains derailing are a greater threat. Car accidents are a greater threat. Even hairdriers are probably a greater threat...
Well, we planned to do a completely different report this month, but figured Yahoo is probably what is on the mind of many SEO experts at the moment. Hopefully this research provides some useful data you might be able to incorporate into your SEO efforts.We have plans for our next report but it will probably change in the coming weeks. If you have any ideas please let us know. You can email us at info at gorank.com. We plan to do many more reports. If you would like to join our mailing list to be notified when we issue a new report please enter your email address below.
Please feel free to mod down (-1: Uninformative)...:)
If there are pictures of people having sex with indisputably dead people (and not made up actors) then it is illegal. Oh, really? How about drawings, they are pictures too. And are you sure necrophilia porn is outlawed in every country? Heck, in my country even child porn is not outlawed (sexual exploitation of the kids for production is, though).
The reasoning about kiddie porn went that it should be outlawed, since production by necessity harms children (which is actually false, but it's irrelevant now). Please tell me, how the production of necrophilia porn harms anyone.
The UK's Hi-Tech Crime Unit wants to control the Internet in order to protect us from necrophilia?
From Wikipedia: Necrophilia is also lesser known in some contexts as "the desire to control". This term has been used in this sense by certain authors, for example, by Erich Fromm, for describing those with so much need for control of others that the extent of control which the victims are subjected to is such that, in effect, they are dead, ie, they have zero self control.
So she forced her views on modesty on the viewers.
One of the first intelligent comments I've ever heard about that debacle. Actually it isn't intelligent, it is rather stupid. The only thing she forced on the viewers was her boob. She didn't force anyone to think it was modest or decent to show the boob, everyone is still free to think that she was Satan's spawn for pulling that. BTW, she might even have the same views on modesty but have acted despite them.:)
P.S. As a Russian I completely fail to understand the American infatuation with boobs and blowjobs.
How about "Jail all stupid journalists and close all tabloid rags" campaign? Now that would be really useful, since cannibals kill one person per year or so, but tabloids manage to dumb and besot millions of people every day a new issue hits the stands.
Please bear in mind that cannibalism and necrophilia are not unethical. They may be immoral, disgusting and offensive to many people, but there is nothing unethical about eating or fucking a dead body. It's just a ethical as burning it, shooting the ash into space, burying it in the ground, freezing it in liquid nitrogen, hanging it on the tree, etc.
It has been considered normal and even worthy to eat parts of the dead in many cultures. It is considered totally acceptable to engage in the acts of kissing with the dead, caressing them and talking to them. I don't see any principal difference from necrophilia or cannibalism.
It is indeed not mainstream, but then Internet censorship is not mainstream either. And I am not suggesting a crackdown on the UK's Hi-Tech Crime Unit. BTW, doesn't it disturb you that the UK has a Hi-Tech Crime Unit? Where is the world going? The next thing you know, the UK will get itself a "Raping Innocent Children Team" or "Blatant Corruption Division"...
If this is not the case where you live, please send me an application to your gated community.
Finland, may be? Other than a few sucky teachers, everybody was simply excellent. Hotel stuff, waiters, sales clerks, register clerks, administrative clerks, bus drivers, taxi drivers, fast-food employees, doctors, nurses, post-office clerks, everyone. And I mean it. People seemed to love you just for coming to their store/office/hospital/bank/etc. And all that in great English. Yes, the country is psomewhat]expensive and the taxes are [relatively] high, but ultimately it's the quality of life that matters, not how much you have in your bank account.
Take a subjective topic like anything someone would call for technical support and try to apply "METRICS" to it to be able to grade employees. It's a fallacy of a capitalism-driven economy that everything should be measured. I would recommend a different approach. Create a corporate culture of helping customers. Get good employees. Pay them well and create good working conditions. Let the only metric be the percentage of problems solved for the customer and let it be shared by a group of employees. Encourage mutual support where the more knowledgeable employee would help others handle the issues. Solicit customer feedback. Interview stuff regularly to find out who is trying to cheat the system instead of helping the customers.
Develop a brand. Turn the customer support from a cost-centre into the quality that helps sell more computers.
I don't think I will buy more Samsung products (that that is possible) or anything from a small shop I was a frequent customer of (this one is extremely unlikely), after they made me wait 2+ months for a replacement HDD covered by the warranty (still don't know when I will have it).
Since they are sending the guy out of the country anyway, there is no point in giving him a lesson. When your own citizens commit a crime, you need to turn them back into nice people. With this Caribean guy you just ignore him and never let him back in Canada. Some people speculated that this will cause an influx of Caribean theives, but there is no evidence for that.
Returning back to your question, yes, I think that money should always be a part of the equation. When deciding for the best sentence for the pickpocketer, you need to see the whole picture. How much is he expected to steal in the future? What is the relation between jail time and the likelyhood of a repeat offence? How much does it cost to keep him jailed? How much will he add to the society when released? Answer all these questions, put the numbers into a neat equation and get the instructions - release him, jail him, send him out of the country (or to a labour camp in Northern Canada) or just kill him.
I am simply saying that every decision made by the state should maximise the net benefits to the society. If sending a criminal away does that, fine.
But it is amazing how people repeatedly repeat the same mistake - pretending that things will forever stay as they are. You just demonstrated it with your MS joke. No, the truth is that MS can die out extremely quickly, but as usually, their Novell status would be just as surprising to everyone as Google's possible demise is.
Another good example are advanced technologies, i.e. nanoassemblers and physical immortality. People pretend that nothing will change, we will always have factories, capitalism and free markets, and people will always die...
I order all kinds of stuff online, wouldn't the receipt emails look like spam?
i built a rudementary filter that looks for viagra,free,debt,enlarge, etc... if the sender is not in my address book, and the email contains these words, it is sent to a "check these out" folder...
"Check these out"? You are buying that stuff? So we have to thank you for making spam profitable...
Check out this site, it has everything you might need in the future. All kinds of stuff.
Not exactly. You can't counter the weapon, you can only attempt to minimize its effect on you. And you can't counter the defence, you can only attempt to maximize the effect of the weapon. In the world of open source military hardware an equilibrium would be reached soon, not unlike the equilibrium between predators and prey in nature, until the next technological advance comes and is quickly assimilated.
There is simply no ultimate weapon, since cost is always the issue. The US can protect its territory from Soviet (Russian/Chinese/Iraqi/Al-Quaeda/Martian) nukes, but that would require a 10000 km high and 10 km wide diamondoid wall along the US border.:) Possible? Certainly. Doable? Not yet.:)
P.S. I know you'd need the roof as well. Call it poetic license.:)
So much for free markets in the US... In other countries, in BETTER countries, I should say (including a good deal of Europe, most of South-East Asia, Japan, Russia and probably many countries in South America and Africa as well), there are laws against consumer discrimination, and they are enforced. Companies may be trying to get away with that sometimes, but the law is usually quite clear - no discrimination is allowed, unless specified otherwise by the law (needless to say, the law allows it only in very limited circumstances). I like to think that if someone tries to pull the "private property, we refuse to serve you" on me, I can shove the article 426 of the Civil Code in their faces and if they still refuse, sue them under the article 445. And no "private club, members only" shit, since by law they can't restrict the membership anyway.
It was a huge mistake, my American friends, to grant your corporations the same rights as you grant humans... A rabid dog should sit in the cage, I say, no sense in letting him free.
Funny, your post made me remember my sister again. She doesn't like the story in games, she usually ignores the cut scenes and goes straigt to the shooting, running, jumping, whatever.:) When playing GTA, Tomb Raider, XIII or something else she would inevitably miss some important information about what you were actually supposed to do in some particular level and come to me begging to download her a walkthrough.:) So much for stereotypes...
Why would they do this at the risk of losing real money in a competive environment? Isn't that giving the advantage to female players?
Genetically guys aren't programmed to compete with girls, they compete FOR girls with other male players.
Personally, I don't care about the human person on the other end of the connection at all. I am playing with game characters in a virtual world. It's not like I can get laid in UT2004 Onslaught game - the matches are too short, there is no privacy, you can get killed at any moment and player models don't have private parts anyway.:) So my teammates are just that - teammates, colleagues, friends for a few hours...
There are many games which can be played by girls. Tomb Raider is a great example. An adventure game with a sympathetic female lead character. My sister and my mom both loved it (incl. the TRAOD). But, as I heard, one of the TR games was marketed in the UK in a very sexist way, trying to appease the guy audience. Of course, the female UK audience was less interested as a result.
The point is, stop marketing the games to guys, market them to the general audience. Do it with the same games, Civ, Quake, etc. May be change them a bit, make them a bit richer, to appeal to both genders, but essentially the same game can be played by everyone. Just don't pretend it's for macho players only. At least, the FPS developers got it right after Quake II and there are always female player models included...
I don't find it particularly offensive or disturbing, just stupid and somewhat annoying. I've been playing UT2004 demo for a week and until today I was lucky to land on good servers with decent players. That is, no racist or homophobic comments, no shooting your teammates, etc.
Today I joined a particular Onslaught server with ~26 players and the first message I saw was something about niggers. Of course, it didn't end there... And people would regularly shoot their teammates when someone gets into the vehicle faster, etc. When we were leaving the base in the very beginning, some would be left behind to go on foot and those would always shoot us in the backs. Harmless, but really annoying. Totally reckless behaviour during the rest of the game...
I much prefer to have a challenging and difficult game against a strong team, and regardless of the outcome I would be saying "good game" to them in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not a Christian (because it is silly to believe in things that do not exist), but according to what I've read, the original Jewish word in that commandment actually meant "murder", not "kill". But after a few translations the original meaning transformed, which actually suited modernised Christianity better.
And, however many NVA my ship killed, I'll bet we saved more American lives, and that's all that matters to me.
Do you think it is all that matters to God? "There is no Jew, no Hellene", like St.Paul the Apostle said. You are an excellent example of the hypocrisy and perversion of the modern American Christianity. As for carrying the shells, blood is still on your hands, remember the Pilate.
P.S. There is no god, obviously. But you are still a murderer. And a retard to boot.
When Darth Vader killed the Emperor, he betrayed him. But still his betrayal was ethical. When USA attacked Vietnam, supporting the US was unethical, supporting Vietnamese was ethically right.
Have you ever downloaded an image from Corbis? Have you RTFA? I may be wrong, but it increasingly seems they are talking about visible watermark that say "Corbis" right on the image. And the article says you only need to get an account to get non-watermarke? images. I have an account and all it took was an e-mail address and a minute of my time. Now I can use the huge collection of Corbis images for free. No watermarks.
Of course, the free images are low-res, but still they are extremely useful (unless you need to do quality printing). And needless to say, if I ever need to do quality printing, I know where I will head to buy the images...
If they said these terrorist groups were the greatest threat to our safety, then I'd buy it.
Psst! Wrong. Airliners falling from the sky by themselves are a greater threat. Trains derailing are a greater threat. Car accidents are a greater threat. Even hairdriers are probably a greater threat...
For those too lazy to RTFA:
:)
Conclusion
Well, we planned to do a completely different report this month, but figured Yahoo is probably what is on the mind of many SEO experts at the moment. Hopefully this research provides some useful data you might be able to incorporate into your SEO efforts.We have plans for our next report but it will probably change in the coming weeks. If you have any ideas please let us know. You can email us at info at gorank.com. We plan to do many more reports. If you would like to join our mailing list to be notified when we issue a new report please enter your email address below.
Please feel free to mod down (-1: Uninformative)...
If there are pictures of people having sex with indisputably dead people (and not made up actors) then it is illegal.
Oh, really? How about drawings, they are pictures too. And are you sure necrophilia porn is outlawed in every country? Heck, in my country even child porn is not outlawed (sexual exploitation of the kids for production is, though).
The reasoning about kiddie porn went that it should be outlawed, since production by necessity harms children (which is actually false, but it's irrelevant now). Please tell me, how the production of necrophilia porn harms anyone.
The UK's Hi-Tech Crime Unit wants to control the Internet in order to protect us from necrophilia?
From Wikipedia: Necrophilia is also lesser known in some contexts as "the desire to control". This term has been used in this sense by certain authors, for example, by Erich Fromm, for describing those with so much need for control of others that the extent of control which the victims are subjected to is such that, in effect, they are dead, ie, they have zero self control.
See also this one.
One of the first intelligent comments I've ever heard about that debacle.
Actually it isn't intelligent, it is rather stupid. The only thing she forced on the viewers was her boob. She didn't force anyone to think it was modest or decent to show the boob, everyone is still free to think that she was Satan's spawn for pulling that. BTW, she might even have the same views on modesty but have acted despite them.
P.S. As a Russian I completely fail to understand the American infatuation with boobs and blowjobs.
How about "Jail all stupid journalists and close all tabloid rags" campaign? Now that would be really useful, since cannibals kill one person per year or so, but tabloids manage to dumb and besot millions of people every day a new issue hits the stands.
Please bear in mind that cannibalism and necrophilia are not unethical. They may be immoral, disgusting and offensive to many people, but there is nothing unethical about eating or fucking a dead body. It's just a ethical as burning it, shooting the ash into space, burying it in the ground, freezing it in liquid nitrogen, hanging it on the tree, etc.
It has been considered normal and even worthy to eat parts of the dead in many cultures. It is considered totally acceptable to engage in the acts of kissing with the dead, caressing them and talking to them. I don't see any principal difference from necrophilia or cannibalism.
It is indeed not mainstream, but then Internet censorship is not mainstream either. And I am not suggesting a crackdown on the UK's Hi-Tech Crime Unit. BTW, doesn't it disturb you that the UK has a Hi-Tech Crime Unit? Where is the world going? The next thing you know, the UK will get itself a "Raping Innocent Children Team" or "Blatant Corruption Division"...
If this is not the case where you live, please send me an application to your gated community.
Finland, may be? Other than a few sucky teachers, everybody was simply excellent. Hotel stuff, waiters, sales clerks, register clerks, administrative clerks, bus drivers, taxi drivers, fast-food employees, doctors, nurses, post-office clerks, everyone. And I mean it. People seemed to love you just for coming to their store/office/hospital/bank/etc. And all that in great English. Yes, the country is psomewhat]expensive and the taxes are [relatively] high, but ultimately it's the quality of life that matters, not how much you have in your bank account.
Take a subjective topic like anything someone would call for technical support and try to apply "METRICS" to it to be able to grade employees.
It's a fallacy of a capitalism-driven economy that everything should be measured. I would recommend a different approach. Create a corporate culture of helping customers. Get good employees. Pay them well and create good working conditions. Let the only metric be the percentage of problems solved for the customer and let it be shared by a group of employees. Encourage mutual support where the more knowledgeable employee would help others handle the issues. Solicit customer feedback. Interview stuff regularly to find out who is trying to cheat the system instead of helping the customers.
Develop a brand. Turn the customer support from a cost-centre into the quality that helps sell more computers.
I don't think I will buy more Samsung products (that that is possible) or anything from a small shop I was a frequent customer of (this one is extremely unlikely), after they made me wait 2+ months for a replacement HDD covered by the warranty (still don't know when I will have it).
"And these people call our socialist economy inefficient and oriented not towards creating actual results, but the impression of results only."
Leonid Brezhnev, the Secretary General of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, after RTFA.
Since they are sending the guy out of the country anyway, there is no point in giving him a lesson. When your own citizens commit a crime, you need to turn them back into nice people. With this Caribean guy you just ignore him and never let him back in Canada. Some people speculated that this will cause an influx of Caribean theives, but there is no evidence for that.
Returning back to your question, yes, I think that money should always be a part of the equation. When deciding for the best sentence for the pickpocketer, you need to see the whole picture. How much is he expected to steal in the future? What is the relation between jail time and the likelyhood of a repeat offence? How much does it cost to keep him jailed? How much will he add to the society when released? Answer all these questions, put the numbers into a neat equation and get the instructions - release him, jail him, send him out of the country (or to a labour camp in Northern Canada) or just kill him.
I am simply saying that every decision made by the state should maximise the net benefits to the society. If sending a criminal away does that, fine.
But it is amazing how people repeatedly repeat the same mistake - pretending that things will forever stay as they are. You just demonstrated it with your MS joke. No, the truth is that MS can die out extremely quickly, but as usually, their Novell status would be just as surprising to everyone as Google's possible demise is.
Another good example are advanced technologies, i.e. nanoassemblers and physical immortality. People pretend that nothing will change, we will always have factories, capitalism and free markets, and people will always die...
I order all kinds of stuff online, wouldn't the receipt emails look like spam?
i built a rudementary filter that looks for viagra,free,debt,enlarge, etc... if the sender is not in my address book, and the email contains these words, it is sent to a "check these out" folder...
"Check these out"? You are buying that stuff? So we have to thank you for making spam profitable...
Check out this site, it has everything you might need in the future. All kinds of stuff.
Apparently most people don't have spammer friends, who write letter like that. I feel really sorry for you...
Not exactly. You can't counter the weapon, you can only attempt to minimize its effect on you. And you can't counter the defence, you can only attempt to maximize the effect of the weapon. In the world of open source military hardware an equilibrium would be reached soon, not unlike the equilibrium between predators and prey in nature, until the next technological advance comes and is quickly assimilated.
:) Possible? Certainly. Doable? Not yet. :)
:)
There is simply no ultimate weapon, since cost is always the issue. The US can protect its territory from Soviet (Russian/Chinese/Iraqi/Al-Quaeda/Martian) nukes, but that would require a 10000 km high and 10 km wide diamondoid wall along the US border.
P.S. I know you'd need the roof as well. Call it poetic license.
Would you be happier if they sent him to jail for two years, spending additional $64,000 CAD on him?
So much for free markets in the US... In other countries, in BETTER countries, I should say (including a good deal of Europe, most of South-East Asia, Japan, Russia and probably many countries in South America and Africa as well), there are laws against consumer discrimination, and they are enforced. Companies may be trying to get away with that sometimes, but the law is usually quite clear - no discrimination is allowed, unless specified otherwise by the law (needless to say, the law allows it only in very limited circumstances). I like to think that if someone tries to pull the "private property, we refuse to serve you" on me, I can shove the article 426 of the Civil Code in their faces and if they still refuse, sue them under the article 445. And no "private club, members only" shit, since by law they can't restrict the membership anyway.
It was a huge mistake, my American friends, to grant your corporations the same rights as you grant humans... A rabid dog should sit in the cage, I say, no sense in letting him free.
Funny, your post made me remember my sister again. She doesn't like the story in games, she usually ignores the cut scenes and goes straigt to the shooting, running, jumping, whatever. :) When playing GTA, Tomb Raider, XIII or something else she would inevitably miss some important information about what you were actually supposed to do in some particular level and come to me begging to download her a walkthrough. :) So much for stereotypes...
OK, so guys like to show off in front of girls ...
:) So my teammates are just that - teammates, colleagues, friends for a few hours...
Why would they do this at the risk of losing real money in a competive environment? Isn't that giving the advantage to female players?
Genetically guys aren't programmed to compete with girls, they compete FOR girls with other male players.
Personally, I don't care about the human person on the other end of the connection at all. I am playing with game characters in a virtual world. It's not like I can get laid in UT2004 Onslaught game - the matches are too short, there is no privacy, you can get killed at any moment and player models don't have private parts anyway.
There are many games which can be played by girls. Tomb Raider is a great example. An adventure game with a sympathetic female lead character. My sister and my mom both loved it (incl. the TRAOD). But, as I heard, one of the TR games was marketed in the UK in a very sexist way, trying to appease the guy audience. Of course, the female UK audience was less interested as a result.
The point is, stop marketing the games to guys, market them to the general audience. Do it with the same games, Civ, Quake, etc. May be change them a bit, make them a bit richer, to appeal to both genders, but essentially the same game can be played by everyone. Just don't pretend it's for macho players only. At least, the FPS developers got it right after Quake II and there are always female player models included...
I don't find it particularly offensive or disturbing, just stupid and somewhat annoying. I've been playing UT2004 demo for a week and until today I was lucky to land on good servers with decent players. That is, no racist or homophobic comments, no shooting your teammates, etc.
Today I joined a particular Onslaught server with ~26 players and the first message I saw was something about niggers. Of course, it didn't end there... And people would regularly shoot their teammates when someone gets into the vehicle faster, etc. When we were leaving the base in the very beginning, some would be left behind to go on foot and those would always shoot us in the backs. Harmless, but really annoying. Totally reckless behaviour during the rest of the game...
I much prefer to have a challenging and difficult game against a strong team, and regardless of the outcome I would be saying "good game" to them in the end.