We don't understand something fully? Wow... that's about as brilliant as deciding to cut my sandwich in triangles instead of in squares.
The truth is this. We have such a little understanding of actually governing laws that we can't begin to fathom it. However, that doesn't stop us in progression to learning. Just because this theory might not be right (and probably isn't) doesn't mean we are any less an idiotic species. We've been working on these theories for many millenia. One of them turning out to be wrong won't be a surprise... it's a probability. Without the wrong hypthosesis, we can never stumble onto the correct ones. Its Edison's, "Every time I fail, I know one more way how to NOT build it" idea.
That's nothing compared to me trying to put GameCube Discs into my GameBoy Advance... Seriously, screw backwards compatibility... I wan't FORWARDS compatibility.
I watch Everybody Loves Raymond. As does my circle of friends. Personal feelings aside, it's won award after award for a comedy series, it's one of the few family safe comedies left on television, and is very clever in taking cliche ideas and plots and twisting them completely around.
Your assertion that nobody watches those shows is debunked by the discovery of me. Remember... never and always usually make a statement not true, so always remember to never use them.
A lot of games simply wouldn't be feasible without the harddrive or would require such insane load times that it would greatly annoy a user. The only two games worth owning for X-Box, Halo and Knights of the Old Republic, use the harddrive to cache information extensively. Neither of these games is feasible on a GameCube or PS2 (BTW, I'll take my GameCube over X-Box any day....).
Oh! And as with any harddrive, and with the help of a modchip, you could store porn on it!(/end cliche slashdot comment...)
Whoa whoa whoa... because I'm tired and don't want to respond with a huge post, I'll nail the main points.
-Which branch of the Catholic church do you follow? Protestant? Baptist? What, you mean to say those aren't branches of the Catholic church? Much the way the Catholic church splintered, there were those in the church who split off into their own groups, thus completely breaking off from the LDS church. They are not a branch and shouldn't be considered part of the LDS church. -For questions on polygamy inside the LDS religion, read the Book of Mormon, read Doctrine & Covenants, and then pray about it. That's a Mormon's answer for anything.;-)
Except that it was common place in Samuel's time to have concubines and multiple wives... so why again do so many Christian sects have a problem with it now?
Was that executive action or did it have to be passed partially by congress as well? In other words, there's a lot more people to blame then just Bush. (And they should all be blamed.)
Similarly, guns serve a purpose other then to kill people and the election analogy is just idiocy at its finest. Drugs ARE legal when prescribed by a doctor and under medical watch. (Morphine, etc.) The war on drugs gets rid of drugs which serve no purpose but a purpose which would break the law. Which is also why owning child porn is illegal. Does it serve any purpose besides the purpose which breaks a law? Nope.
Which brings up the interesting question... should child porn be legal? I mean really... if a 14 year old girl decides to do that and her parents are fine with it, who is anyone hurting?
Holy crap. For you, and the thousand others who don't get... we don't make laws based on what's viable. Do we set the speed limit at 85 because we know that we can't stop people all the time? NO. Do we allow murder because we know we can't stop all of it? NO. The same follows for drugs. It is a law to state that is illegal. Therefore, it has consequences.
Someone remind me to pick up my "Neoanarchism Safety Kit" before a/.er gets ellected president of the world.
Well, we've decided we can prevent all crime, so we aren't going to try!
*sigh* And once again, I'm not arguing for the complete illegalization of drugs. I'm just saying, with their illegalization, drug related deaths are NOT a problem. (Which is why we have the war on drugs...) Whether I agree with the war on drugs or the legalization, doesn't matter. Just that there is a cause and effect. Without drugs, drug related deaths can't occur. Which, for the umpteenth time, is why we have the war on drugs.
Alright let's put this in order.
Someone argues: How does the war on drugs stop second hand drug related deaths? (IE. Someone get's stoned and hits someone with a car.)
I refute: The war on drugs SHOULD end those types of deaths. It is in place to stop drugs from being used. If no drugs are used, no drug-related deaths can occur.
You argue: Well, alchohol is legal, just drinking while drunk isn't.
I argue now: Thank you captain obvious. Drugs could be legal and have the same laws and alchohol, and it would have the same effect. However, that doesn't take away the fact that the illegalization of drugs ALSO stops those types of deaths.
I leave by saying... and I wouldn't mind alchohol being completely illegal either....;-)
Very easy. If there's no drugs, there's no way people can use them and get behind the wheel of a car.
Not saying its happening, but your logic that the war on drugs conceptually doesn't help, is flawed. If the war on drugs worked perfectly, no one would ever feel the consequences of drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
But will it run linux?
We don't understand something fully? Wow... that's about as brilliant as deciding to cut my sandwich in triangles instead of in squares.
The truth is this. We have such a little understanding of actually governing laws that we can't begin to fathom it. However, that doesn't stop us in progression to learning. Just because this theory might not be right (and probably isn't) doesn't mean we are any less an idiotic species. We've been working on these theories for many millenia. One of them turning out to be wrong won't be a surprise... it's a probability. Without the wrong hypthosesis, we can never stumble onto the correct ones. Its Edison's, "Every time I fail, I know one more way how to NOT build it" idea.
Equals digital porn.
Surely you mean something she won't wear for long...
Does it run Linux?
(/end cliche Slashdot post)
-Lennon
That's nothing compared to me trying to put GameCube Discs into my GameBoy Advance... Seriously, screw backwards compatibility... I wan't FORWARDS compatibility.
Ooo... what an AMAZING argument!
(/end sarcasm)
Really, slashdot, while filled with technically savy and intelligent people, can't avoid people who post random insults guised as arguments.
I watch Everybody Loves Raymond. As does my circle of friends. Personal feelings aside, it's won award after award for a comedy series, it's one of the few family safe comedies left on television, and is very clever in taking cliche ideas and plots and twisting them completely around.
Your assertion that nobody watches those shows is debunked by the discovery of me. Remember... never and always usually make a statement not true, so always remember to never use them.
A lot of games simply wouldn't be feasible without the harddrive or would require such insane load times that it would greatly annoy a user. The only two games worth owning for X-Box, Halo and Knights of the Old Republic, use the harddrive to cache information extensively. Neither of these games is feasible on a GameCube or PS2 (BTW, I'll take my GameCube over X-Box any day....).
Oh! And as with any harddrive, and with the help of a modchip, you could store porn on it!(/end cliche slashdot comment...)
Whoa whoa whoa... because I'm tired and don't want to respond with a huge post, I'll nail the main points.
;-)
-Which branch of the Catholic church do you follow? Protestant? Baptist? What, you mean to say those aren't branches of the Catholic church? Much the way the Catholic church splintered, there were those in the church who split off into their own groups, thus completely breaking off from the LDS church. They are not a branch and shouldn't be considered part of the LDS church.
-For questions on polygamy inside the LDS religion, read the Book of Mormon, read Doctrine & Covenants, and then pray about it. That's a Mormon's answer for anything.
Except that it was common place in Samuel's time to have concubines and multiple wives... so why again do so many Christian sects have a problem with it now?
I played it on Linux, and she played on Windows, and there were no problems!
Yeah, till you get married... that's like marrying outside the covenant buddy.
"Brian, what's the plural for ox?" "Oxes...." "Oxen!" "What's the plural for box...?" "Boxen...?"
Lord help us when Slahdot becomes evidence in a court of law....
Was that executive action or did it have to be passed partially by congress as well? In other words, there's a lot more people to blame then just Bush. (And they should all be blamed.)
Hardly circular logic. Things are made laws, therefore, breaking them has consequences. Where's the circle?
Similarly, guns serve a purpose other then to kill people and the election analogy is just idiocy at its finest. Drugs ARE legal when prescribed by a doctor and under medical watch. (Morphine, etc.) The war on drugs gets rid of drugs which serve no purpose but a purpose which would break the law. Which is also why owning child porn is illegal. Does it serve any purpose besides the purpose which breaks a law? Nope.
Which brings up the interesting question... should child porn be legal? I mean really... if a 14 year old girl decides to do that and her parents are fine with it, who is anyone hurting?
Honest mistake, no big deal.
Holy crap. For you, and the thousand others who don't get... we don't make laws based on what's viable. Do we set the speed limit at 85 because we know that we can't stop people all the time? NO. Do we allow murder because we know we can't stop all of it? NO. The same follows for drugs. It is a law to state that is illegal. Therefore, it has consequences.
/.er gets ellected president of the world.
Someone remind me to pick up my "Neoanarchism Safety Kit" before a
Well, we've decided we can prevent all crime, so we aren't going to try!
You didn't. The guy who replied to your thread did. I was arguing with him.
Thank you.
*sigh* And once again, I'm not arguing for the complete illegalization of drugs. I'm just saying, with their illegalization, drug related deaths are NOT a problem. (Which is why we have the war on drugs...) Whether I agree with the war on drugs or the legalization, doesn't matter. Just that there is a cause and effect. Without drugs, drug related deaths can't occur. Which, for the umpteenth time, is why we have the war on drugs.
Do I agree with it? Doesn't matter.
Alright let's put this in order.
;-)
Someone argues: How does the war on drugs stop second hand drug related deaths? (IE. Someone get's stoned and hits someone with a car.)
I refute: The war on drugs SHOULD end those types of deaths. It is in place to stop drugs from being used. If no drugs are used, no drug-related deaths can occur.
You argue: Well, alchohol is legal, just drinking while drunk isn't.
I argue now: Thank you captain obvious. Drugs could be legal and have the same laws and alchohol, and it would have the same effect. However, that doesn't take away the fact that the illegalization of drugs ALSO stops those types of deaths.
I leave by saying... and I wouldn't mind alchohol being completely illegal either....
Very easy. If there's no drugs, there's no way people can use them and get behind the wheel of a car. Not saying its happening, but your logic that the war on drugs conceptually doesn't help, is flawed. If the war on drugs worked perfectly, no one would ever feel the consequences of drugs.
Everybody's doing it. Which is why it is also okay to do drugs, jump of cliffs, and buy Windows XP.