"If someone automates himself out of a job, you bet your ass I'd find him 10 more jobs to automate himself out of. That guy is worth his weight in gold."
Thanks for the great advice. Now let me tell you how it works in the real world.
If you automate yourself out of a job, you are out of a job. Period. Most management I've seen rarely thinks further ahead then the quarter earning statements or their next department meeting.
Manager 1: "This guy set up a bunch of scriptsersumpins and now everything works automatically!"
Manager 2: "Great! Is his job done?"
Manager 1: "I think so."
Manager 2: "How much does he make?"
Manager 1: "$****** a year."
Manager 2: "His job is being done automatically now. That's another cost we can eliminate from our department."
Manager 1: "Will do."
Greatly over-simplified, but you get the idea. Down at our level, it's all about the project. The higher up you go, people start caring less about the projects and more about the bottom-lines. It's all very politcal, often with managers duking it out to try and get their piece of corporate pie for their departments/projects/ etc. Any sort of fat that can be trimmed, even if it's good unsaturated fat or omega-3 fatty acids, will get cut. Some do it out of self-preservation, some do it to climb the corporate ladder.
Managerial in-fighting has left more than one very good worker by the wayside.
This is why working for smaller companies can be an advantage. When the few upper levels know you and your work personally you are much better off and you will be appreciated for your innovations.
In bigger corporations, the upper levels merely see you as a cost. If you can be marginalized, you will be.
And this is where the world's problems begin. There are no absloutes. Good and evil are human ideaology, nothing more.
A volcano erupts and kills 10,000 people. Is this evil? The tsunami that recently struck Indonesia and killed over 200,000, is that evil?
The terrorists killed 2800 people in 9/11, were they evil? We've bombed and killed thousands of Iraqi's, are we evil?
What is good? What is evil? How do you define them? Defining these terms are much more difficult than many think. You may define evil as murder. In another society, it may just be a way to settle a dispute. You may define as evil the act of cutting of someone's hand who is guilty of theft. In another society, that may be defined as just punishment. You may define genocidal killings as evil, while another society may call it survival of the fittest.
Ideaologies vary greatly across the races and countries of this planet, and possibly across the universe. Your views are opinions, biased on your upbringing and environment. Don't be surprised if your definitions of good and evil are not shared by others.
Just because someone gives you gun doesn't necessarily mean you should shoot yourself in the foot.
C was designed to be a better programming language than assembler, while not taking away anything from it's raw power.
It seems you have never done any system level programming (hardware drivers and such). Or had the the need to take advantage of such a feature for optimization purposes (self-modifying code on a bank switching memory device at a constant address).
Keep in mind as well, programs in the early days could not afford the spare cycles for bounds checking, let alone garabge collecting. They could scarcely afford memory for storing a 4-digit date (a.k.a the Y2K problem).
Your response sounds more like something I would expect from someone who has only programmed in managed languages.
Before you start dolling out the stupid label, do yourself a favor and read up on some history. It also wouldn't hurt to get some exposure to the lower level programming taht goes on under the hood.
It's not so much the core spinning as the convection currents in the mantle. If our mantle was made of a non-conductive material (even at high pressures and temperatures) the core would have stopped spinning long ago.
The core itself is not magnetic. However the rotation of the Earth coupled with the movement of the outer core and mantle produce substantial electrical and magnetic fields.
Lucky for us, our planet has the size, rotation, and chemical composition that makes for a perfect geomagnetic dynamo. At least for life on this planet.
Mars seems to have lacked the mass to sustain it's interior convection system. As the overall planet cooled, the material turned to slush then solidified. The martian day is similar to ours, but without the interior convection the dynamo probably just died over time.
Venus is not too much smaller than Earth, and has a similar composition. However, it lacks a magnetic field as well. Why? Going with the dynamo theme Venus rotates much too slowly. A day on Venus is equivalent to it's year (243 days). The planet doesn't have enough momentum to create much of a dynamo.
The oddball of the inner planets is Mercury. It has a relatively strong magnetic field despite only being slightly larger than our moon. This has lead some to speculate that Mercury is a solidifed bar magnet. More info will be known in 2011 when a mercury probe swings by for a peek.
In the 1800's you had teenagers drinking, smoking, getting married and having babies, all the while carrying a gun at their side.
You are confusing your puritanical vision of propriety with reality again.
Video games don't make violent people. Environment and genetics do. If someone is already psychologically unstable, violent video games will only hurt them.
That being said, there are millions of gamers out there who play violent video games. Your gun-toting wolf-pack image doesn't seem to be happening.
"There's a big difference between laws that curtail free speech and remove rights from people and laws that protect the citizens from themselves."
Back under the bridge Troll! It's thinking like this that let things like the Patriot Act get passed.
Last I checked, I'm an adult fully capable of protecting myself and deciding what is appropriate for myself. Last I checked, I'm a parent that is fully capable of deciding what is appropriate for my kid.
I don't need you or the government to tell me what to think or what is appropriate. I'm perfectly capable of doing this myself.
However, if you want the government to regulate media and content...well...I guess I'll just have to start referring to you as citizen #93678.
You say it's a non-essential service. That's your view. I'm sure there are a fair number of users out their who consider it to be an essential serivice (me being one of them, I telecommute occasionally).
I believe the recent articles on this topic are referring to small towns setting up their own broadband. They're not interested in filtering content, they're interested in just getting broadband.
Most likely, such a venture would be funded by a hike in town taxes.
Sure, that money could be put to other uses. But if a town already has it's expenses covered and the townsfolk want broadband, then why take that privilege away from them?
It's simple. If the telecos can't make the money they want, then they don't build. They aren't a democracy and no one can force the telecos to build infrastructure if they don't want to.
What it comes down to is a simple question. Does small town x do without broadband until company y wants to provide the service, or does small town x gather enough resources and do it themselves?
Broadband, I think, is extremely important. Especially if you want to attract other businesses to your town.
Remember, according to the CDC statistics on fatalities you're 80 times more likely to die in your own bathtub over the course of your life than die in a terrorist attack.
~X~
"Being afraid of the wrong things makes you more likely to die from the right things."
Average speed on freeway: 75 mph Distance per second: 110 feet Average following distance*: 3 car lengths (60 ft) Average reaction time:.75 seconds
*Benefit of the doubt. On the freeways I usually see people following closer than that.
You're an asshole if you think 1/10 of a second won't make a difference between saving you're ass and plowing into somebody else's.
Or maybe you're just ignorant about the laws of biology and physics.
A hundreth of a second means you're 2 ton vehicle will travel a little more than a foot. This will produce roughly around 80000 newtons of force, or a little more than being hit 15 times harder than a proffesional linebacker (American football) at top speed. And that's just what happens in the first hundreth of a second of a collision.
Do me favor. Stay off the road. You are dangerous. You will probably end up taking yourself out, or worse, somebody else.
Talking on the cellphone = drunk driver? I didn't need a study to tell me that!
1. They are both dangerous. 2. They both insist that they can drive perfectly fine.
Everyday on my drive to work I usually see at least two individuals talking on their cells either come close to having an accident, have an accident, or almost cause someone else to have an accident.
Let's say you buy a car. You take your car in for a tune-up and afterwards you realize you lights don't work. You take it back to the shop and tell them about. They say "Sorry, but you're going to have to upgrade your car."
They are deliberately disabling features that already work in their software to force users to buy an upgrade.
This is an extremly bad business practice, if not an illegal one. If they choose to alter their product this way, then the users should be entitled to some sort of compensation.
Imagine for instance that you own a c/c++ compiler, and the company who made it suddenly said that they were going to disable the c++ compiler and you would now have to buy that seperately.
The GPL is the "gift that keeps on giving". It ensures that you work, and any work based on your work is freely distributable throughout the community.
Any enhancements or improvements done to your code is free to everyone, including yourself. In this respect, it helps keep software evolving.
How is that cowardly?
True, with a less restrictive liscense like BSD your code can be plucked by anyone. But enhancements and improvements might not make it back to the community. Any company can pick up that code and modify it and sell it. But at the same time, they don't have to release that code back to the original developer(s). Worse, they can lock you out of your own IP. As an example, they develope a feature you were thinking about but they went and got a patent on it before you had time to implement it. Unless you come up with a different implementation, your free code can't contain that feature.
With GPL, the innovations come back. People contribute, the program gets better, more people use it, suggestions are made, people contribute, rinse wash repeat.
I don't see how you get "cowardly" out of that. The GPL isn't about preventing corporations from making money (indeed you can sell GPL software), it's more about keeping the software innovation process alive and open. It ensures they ability of the developers to keep developing and improving without the fear that company XYZ is going to patent their software.
The GPL is very empowering when you understand it.
But the liscense may not be right for you or you're project. You might want the widest distribution of your code. In that case, choose BSD. You might not want your code distributed without payment. In that case choose a commercial liscense.
However, before you start deriding the GPL, please RTFL and understand it first.
Reminds of how I dumped the gameboy advance rom. You wouldn't access the rom memory directly no matter what you did. However, that didn't stop you from using the video interrupts with a pointer at location zero.:)
And even more related, you could do the same thing with the sound registers, except that you could get a hardware buffer instead of interpreting the sounds.
They won't disappear. However they may be modified to obey things like the "broadcast flag".
If DRM is built directly into these chips, you'll have a hard time getting around it.
Me? I'm just waiting for the whole thing to collapse. Eventually, the conglomerates will reach critical mass (i.e piss off enough people) that the whole thing will implode on itself.
But until then, I think we'll see the US slip further behind the rest of the world, technologically speaking.
"When it comes to sexual obscenity in general, there is more to consider than simply individual liberty. There is a undeniable cost to society from the dissemination of sexually obscene material, although I will be the first to admit the difficulty of quantifying that cost."
Approximately $9 billion a year according to latest figures. And that's not too shabby for our supposed "moral majority".
The rest of your post makes some sense, but this intro got my goatse.
Listen, I know you have your beliefs and everything but you need to stop and think for a sec.
Be fruitful and multiply. Sound familiar? Most creatures on this planet do something called reproduction. It's kinda how life continues on this little blue-green ball of rock called Earth on the ass of the galaxy. This is a rather important function for life, and therefore life has evolved (or designed or created or whatever you want to believe) to make sure that this action gets carried out, and frequently.
For us, and much of the animal kingdom, the act of reproduction is pleasurable. The brain releases endorphins and oxytocin generating a feeling of euphoria and release.
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. It is not dirty, or evil, or perverted. It is natural and, in fact, REQUIRED act for our species to survive.
But we have something the animals do not have. PORN. Oh it's so carnal and evil isn't it. Imagine using sex for something other than reproducion, and involving man-made prosthetics. Evil evil evil! No other animal does these things!
Well, how pornographic would porn be if everyone went around naked?
For a related question, how much higher are the incidences of orgies, rapes, sexual assault, and other such deviant behavior (and often wrongly associated with pornography) in nudist colonies? (Here's a hint, it's less.)
The "cost", as you put it, is there though. It's the irreperable damage being caused to generation after generation from being ill-informed about sex. It's the cost of bringing everyone up to believe that a fundamental act of nature is inherently evil. The cost is thousands of individuals who end up needlessly feeling guilty, ashamed, and depressed because the "moral majority" says you are an evil child molesting pervert for having a sex with someone of the same gender.
We send kids off to distant shores only to be shipped back in boxes (for a pack of lies, no less). That's fucking obscene. That should be regulated. Strike that, that shouldn't be allowed. Ever.
But heaven forbid someone ever see a woman's bare breast.
There's a huge difference between being educated and being regulated. How about we do more of the former and less of the latter.
Slashdot Mirror
"If someone automates himself out of a job, you bet your ass I'd find him 10 more jobs to automate himself out of. That guy is worth his weight in gold."
Thanks for the great advice. Now let me tell you how it works in the real world.
If you automate yourself out of a job, you are out of a job. Period. Most management I've seen rarely thinks further ahead then the quarter earning statements or their next department meeting.
Manager 1: "This guy set up a bunch of scriptsersumpins and now everything works automatically!"
Manager 2: "Great! Is his job done?"
Manager 1: "I think so."
Manager 2: "How much does he make?"
Manager 1: "$****** a year."
Manager 2: "His job is being done automatically now. That's another cost we can eliminate from our department."
Manager 1: "Will do."
Greatly over-simplified, but you get the idea. Down at our level, it's all about the project. The higher up you go, people start caring less about the projects and more about the bottom-lines. It's all very politcal, often with managers duking it out to try and get their piece of corporate pie for their departments/projects/ etc. Any sort of fat that can be trimmed, even if it's good unsaturated fat or omega-3 fatty acids, will get cut. Some do it out of self-preservation, some do it to climb the corporate ladder.
Managerial in-fighting has left more than one very good worker by the wayside.
This is why working for smaller companies can be an advantage. When the few upper levels know you and your work personally you are much better off and you will be appreciated for your innovations.
In bigger corporations, the upper levels merely see you as a cost. If you can be marginalized, you will be.
Very sad, but true.
~X~
"There are some absolutes in this world."
And this is where the world's problems begin. There are no absloutes. Good and evil are human ideaology, nothing more.
A volcano erupts and kills 10,000 people. Is this evil? The tsunami that recently struck Indonesia and killed over 200,000, is that evil?
The terrorists killed 2800 people in 9/11, were they evil? We've bombed and killed thousands of Iraqi's, are we evil?
What is good? What is evil? How do you define them? Defining these terms are much more difficult than many think. You may define evil as murder. In another society, it may just be a way to settle a dispute. You may define as evil the act of cutting of someone's hand who is guilty of theft. In another society, that may be defined as just punishment. You may define genocidal killings as evil, while another society may call it survival of the fittest.
Ideaologies vary greatly across the races and countries of this planet, and possibly across the universe. Your views are opinions, biased on your upbringing and environment. Don't be surprised if your definitions of good and evil are not shared by others.
~X~
Just because someone gives you gun doesn't necessarily mean you should shoot yourself in the foot.
C was designed to be a better programming language than assembler, while not taking away anything from it's raw power.
It seems you have never done any system level programming (hardware drivers and such). Or had the the need to take advantage of such a feature for optimization purposes (self-modifying code on a bank switching memory device at a constant address).
Keep in mind as well, programs in the early days could not afford the spare cycles for bounds checking, let alone garabge collecting. They could scarcely afford memory for storing a 4-digit date (a.k.a the Y2K problem).
Your response sounds more like something I would expect from someone who has only programmed in managed languages.
Before you start dolling out the stupid label, do yourself a favor and read up on some history. It also wouldn't hurt to get some exposure to the lower level programming taht goes on under the hood.
~X~
It's not so much the core spinning as the convection currents in the mantle. If our mantle was made of a non-conductive material (even at high pressures and temperatures) the core would have stopped spinning long ago.
The core itself is not magnetic. However the rotation of the Earth coupled with the movement of the outer core and mantle produce substantial electrical and magnetic fields.
Lucky for us, our planet has the size, rotation, and chemical composition that makes for a perfect geomagnetic dynamo. At least for life on this planet.
Mars seems to have lacked the mass to sustain it's interior convection system. As the overall planet cooled, the material turned to slush then solidified. The martian day is similar to ours, but without the interior convection the dynamo probably just died over time.
Venus is not too much smaller than Earth, and has a similar composition. However, it lacks a magnetic field as well. Why? Going with the dynamo theme Venus rotates much too slowly. A day on Venus is equivalent to it's year (243 days). The planet doesn't have enough momentum to create much of a dynamo.
The oddball of the inner planets is Mercury. It has a relatively strong magnetic field despite only being slightly larger than our moon. This has lead some to speculate that Mercury is a solidifed bar magnet. More info will be known in 2011 when a mercury probe swings by for a peek.
~X~
"Translation: being interoperable is easiest when you don't have to interoperate with more than one implementation."
Very true.
But uh, they don't even interoperate with themselves.
~X~
In the 1800's you had teenagers drinking, smoking, getting married and having babies, all the while carrying a gun at their side.
You are confusing your puritanical vision of propriety with reality again.
Video games don't make violent people. Environment and genetics do. If someone is already psychologically unstable, violent video games will only hurt them.
That being said, there are millions of gamers out there who play violent video games. Your gun-toting wolf-pack image doesn't seem to be happening.
"There's a big difference between laws that curtail free speech and remove rights from people and laws that protect the citizens from themselves."
Back under the bridge Troll! It's thinking like this that let things like the Patriot Act get passed.
Last I checked, I'm an adult fully capable of protecting myself and deciding what is appropriate for myself. Last I checked, I'm a parent that is fully capable of deciding what is appropriate for my kid.
I don't need you or the government to tell me what to think or what is appropriate. I'm perfectly capable of doing this myself.
However, if you want the government to regulate media and content...well...I guess I'll just have to start referring to you as citizen #93678.
~X~
"It's not necessary to use unsafe languages to get performance any more."
And that's why all games are written in java right? And all those big number-crunching science apps are in java as well?
Don't get me wrong, I like Java. It does have it's place. But when I'm looking for critcal performance, Java is the last place I look.
This goes double if I need to access hardware.
Java is getting better, but it's still not there yet.
~X~
P2P is the killer app!
~X~
*bang* flop.
You have no rights, everything is a privilege.
You say it's a non-essential service. That's your view. I'm sure there are a fair number of users out their who consider it to be an essential serivice (me being one of them, I telecommute occasionally).
I believe the recent articles on this topic are referring to small towns setting up their own broadband. They're not interested in filtering content, they're interested in just getting broadband.
Most likely, such a venture would be funded by a hike in town taxes.
Sure, that money could be put to other uses. But if a town already has it's expenses covered and the townsfolk want broadband, then why take that privilege away from them?
It's simple. If the telecos can't make the money they want, then they don't build. They aren't a democracy and no one can force the telecos to build infrastructure if they don't want to.
What it comes down to is a simple question. Does small town x do without broadband until company y wants to provide the service, or does small town x gather enough resources and do it themselves?
Broadband, I think, is extremely important. Especially if you want to attract other businesses to your town.
~X~
Because, coward, even remote towns in the us have access to electricity, water, etc. .
But if the telecos don't want broadband in your area, then you aren't getting it.
Often they say, "Well get there..." and towns wait...and wait...and wait.
People eventually get pissed at this and take matters into their own hands.
If it was more like the town saying, "We want broadband!", and the telecos have trucks out there the next day I would agree with you.
But for some services which are commericalized, you just aren't going to get the service unless company X can make Y% profit.
~X~
Remember, according to the CDC statistics on fatalities you're 80 times more likely to die in your own bathtub over the course of your life than die in a terrorist attack.
~X~
"Being afraid of the wrong things makes you more likely to die from the right things."
Average speed on freeway: 75 mph .75 seconds
Distance per second: 110 feet
Average following distance*: 3 car lengths (60 ft)
Average reaction time:
*Benefit of the doubt. On the freeways I usually see people following closer than that.
You're an asshole if you think 1/10 of a second won't make a difference between saving you're ass and plowing into somebody else's.
Or maybe you're just ignorant about the laws of biology and physics.
A hundreth of a second means you're 2 ton vehicle will travel a little more than a foot. This will produce roughly around 80000 newtons of force, or a little more than being hit 15 times harder than a proffesional linebacker (American football) at top speed. And that's just what happens in the first hundreth of a second of a collision.
Do me favor. Stay off the road. You are dangerous. You will probably end up taking yourself out, or worse, somebody else.
~X~
Talking on the cellphone = drunk driver? I didn't need a study to tell me that!
1. They are both dangerous.
2. They both insist that they can drive perfectly fine.
Everyday on my drive to work I usually see at least two individuals talking on their cells either come close to having an accident, have an accident, or almost cause someone else to have an accident.
~X~
Let's say you buy a car. You take your car in for a tune-up and afterwards you realize you lights don't work. You take it back to the shop and tell them about. They say "Sorry, but you're going to have to upgrade your car."
They are deliberately disabling features that already work in their software to force users to buy an upgrade.
This is an extremly bad business practice, if not an illegal one. If they choose to alter their product this way, then the users should be entitled to some sort of compensation.
Imagine for instance that you own a c/c++ compiler, and the company who made it suddenly said that they were going to disable the c++ compiler and you would now have to buy that seperately.
I know I'd be pretty pissed about that.
~X~
Cowardly? Yet another who doesn't understand.
The GPL is the "gift that keeps on giving". It ensures that you work, and any work based on your work is freely distributable throughout the community.
Any enhancements or improvements done to your code is free to everyone, including yourself. In this respect, it helps keep software evolving.
How is that cowardly?
True, with a less restrictive liscense like BSD your code can be plucked by anyone. But enhancements and improvements might not make it back to the community. Any company can pick up that code and modify it and sell it. But at the same time, they don't have to release that code back to the original developer(s). Worse, they can lock you out of your own IP. As an example, they develope a feature you were thinking about but they went and got a patent on it before you had time to implement it. Unless you come up with a different implementation, your free code can't contain that feature.
With GPL, the innovations come back. People contribute, the program gets better, more people use it, suggestions are made, people contribute, rinse wash repeat.
I don't see how you get "cowardly" out of that. The GPL isn't about preventing corporations from making money (indeed you can sell GPL software), it's more about keeping the software innovation process alive and open. It ensures they ability of the developers to keep developing and improving without the fear that company XYZ is going to patent their software.
The GPL is very empowering when you understand it.
But the liscense may not be right for you or you're project. You might want the widest distribution of your code. In that case, choose BSD. You might not want your code distributed without payment. In that case choose a commercial liscense.
However, before you start deriding the GPL, please RTFL and understand it first.
Otherwise, you just sound like a braying ass.
~X~
Reminds of how I dumped the gameboy advance rom. You wouldn't access the rom memory directly no matter what you did. However, that didn't stop you from using the video interrupts with a pointer at location zero. :)
And even more related, you could do the same thing with the sound registers, except that you could get a hardware buffer instead of interpreting the sounds.
~X~
What about developement software?
:)
That's one of the things that irritates me about windows but love about linux.
~X~
"Just goes to show, when a company is about to go under, they at least go down fighting."
:)
^^^^^^^^
Uh, I think misspelled whining.
~X~
Okay. Um...dude. I think you need to get help. :)
~X~
Why are you repeating SCO's legal arguments?
That's totally off-topic!
~X~
They won't disappear. However they may be modified to obey things like the "broadcast flag".
If DRM is built directly into these chips, you'll have a hard time getting around it.
Me? I'm just waiting for the whole thing to collapse. Eventually, the conglomerates will reach critical mass (i.e piss off enough people) that the whole thing will implode on itself.
But until then, I think we'll see the US slip further behind the rest of the world, technologically speaking.
~X~
You're forgetting his best buds. Professor Chaos and General Disarray!
~X~
Oh. You must be new here. Here's your tinfoil hat, and remeber not to feed the trolls.
~X~
Not necessarilly an off-by-one, if you think of elements in a C array. The 42nd index is referencing the 43rd element.
:)
In that case, our question should be:
To be or not to be?
0x2B | !0x2B = 0xFF
By combining Doublas Adams whith Shakespear, we apparently have everything in life, the universe, and everything...if it were a byte.
Well I think that proves I'm a raging nerd.
~X~
"When it comes to sexual obscenity in general, there is more to consider than simply individual liberty. There is a undeniable cost to society from the dissemination of sexually obscene material, although I will be the first to admit the difficulty of quantifying that cost."
Approximately $9 billion a year according to latest figures. And that's not too shabby for our supposed "moral majority".
The rest of your post makes some sense, but this intro got my goatse.
Listen, I know you have your beliefs and everything but you need to stop and think for a sec.
Be fruitful and multiply. Sound familiar? Most creatures on this planet do something called reproduction. It's kinda how life continues on this little blue-green ball of rock called Earth on the ass of the galaxy. This is a rather important function for life, and therefore life has evolved (or designed or created or whatever you want to believe) to make sure that this action gets carried out, and frequently.
For us, and much of the animal kingdom, the act of reproduction is pleasurable. The brain releases endorphins and oxytocin generating a feeling of euphoria and release.
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. It is not dirty, or evil, or perverted. It is natural and, in fact, REQUIRED act for our species to survive.
But we have something the animals do not have. PORN. Oh it's so carnal and evil isn't it. Imagine using sex for something other than reproducion, and involving man-made prosthetics. Evil evil evil! No other animal does these things!
Well, how pornographic would porn be if everyone went around naked?
For a related question, how much higher are the incidences of orgies, rapes, sexual assault, and other such deviant behavior (and often wrongly associated with pornography) in nudist colonies? (Here's a hint, it's less.)
The "cost", as you put it, is there though. It's the irreperable damage being caused to generation after generation from being ill-informed about sex. It's the cost of bringing everyone up to believe that a fundamental act of nature is inherently evil. The cost is thousands of individuals who end up needlessly feeling guilty, ashamed, and depressed because the "moral majority" says you are an evil child molesting pervert for having a sex with someone of the same gender.
We send kids off to distant shores only to be shipped back in boxes (for a pack of lies, no less). That's fucking obscene. That should be regulated. Strike that, that shouldn't be allowed. Ever.
But heaven forbid someone ever see a woman's bare breast.
There's a huge difference between being educated and being regulated. How about we do more of the former and less of the latter.
~X~