Can you get this Xbox without the two-year requirement? If you attempt to get out of the two-year requirement, Microsoft will take you to court where there are people with guns.
Footnote: Putting punctuation inside of a quotation that it was not part of is counter-intuitive, illogical, unethical, and in some cases dangerous. English standards are incorrect, so I substitute my own.
First principle: I own my own body. OR if you prefer: I control my own body.
This is an irrefutable axiom! If you attempt to deny it, you validate it. In other words, you’d have to exercise control of your body to produce the sound waves that deny that you control your body. Similar to Mises’ first principle – man acts. You have to act in order to say or demonstrate that man does not act.
Again, the fact that one can exercise some control over one's body does not mean that one has total control over it. Another false dichotomy.
Also, the writer does not distinguish between responsibility and ownership.
And if the non-aggression principle is wrong? And as for free-market environmentalism, who owns the stuff in the first place? And is your free-market dogma any less lazy than the positions you attack?
Slashdot Mirror
Can we get Odd Job to throw his hat at Larry Ellison?
True, but if you don't pay the early-termination fee, then we're back to court.
Can you get this Xbox without the two-year requirement? If you attempt to get out of the two-year requirement, Microsoft will take you to court where there are people with guns.
Correct, they're more parrotish.
They also host Wikileaks. They have a broader view of internet freedom than merely downloading in violation of copyright.
Footnote: Putting punctuation inside of a quotation that it was not part of is counter-intuitive, illogical, unethical, and in some cases dangerous. English standards are incorrect, so I substitute my own.
Thank you!
Sure, you can call it "lazy"---in that people don't meddle in other people's business.
And if the environment is other people's business? Can someone own the air? It's not obvious how one goes from self ownership to air ownership.
If the non-aggression principle is wrong, then it's perfectly okay for me to come over there and settle this debate through violence.
So either it's never correct to initiate violence, or it's always correct. Yep, I detect a logical fallacy here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy
From your freekeene.com link:
Again, the fact that one can exercise some control over one's body does not mean that one has total control over it. Another false dichotomy.
Also, the writer does not distinguish between responsibility and ownership.
Considering the user ID, Khasim isn't a new anything.
How does Google affect the adoption of Bing or Yahoo?
You don't have to use Windows either.
True, I'm using Linux. But I did have to buy Windows. And about the only way I could have avoided that was buying a Mac.
And if the non-aggression principle is wrong? And as for free-market environmentalism, who owns the stuff in the first place? And is your free-market dogma any less lazy than the positions you attack?
But if they are friendly, we don't want them toppled. That's why we don't want them toppled by climate-related revolutions.
Did they get fired for that?
That would be the correct answer to "Why should I want a dominatrix to spank me?", not "Why should I use PHP?".
and rejected the principles of liberalism and freedom that our society is supposed to be based upon.
And who is making this supposition? What makes that kind of liberty moral?
Arguing over the factuality of climate change misses the most important point
So if North Africa runs out of water, the people should die of dehydration rather than violate your sense of liberty?
But what if climate change leads to the toppling of friendly (to the US) governments?
AGW isn't science. It's politics. Flat-earth, no-growth, global-socialism politics. And it's ugly.
Yeah, it's so much easier to accept the unsupported claims of an Anonymous Coward than to do actual science.
Higher taxes + more bureaucracy = bigger government = more power. How do you not see how this helps them?
It may help them.
Good Republicans are for smaller, less powerful government.
Unless you have a working vagina:
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/87be7156f5/republicans-get-in-my-vagina?playlist=featured_videos
What do environmental groups need with fucking GUNS
To show the Republicans that they support the Second Amendment!
Why should I use PHP?
No mod points, but +5 damn you nailed it.
What about tuxpaint?
http://tuxpaint.org/
If I got to ask Gates McFadden a question, it wouldn't be about artesian wells.
I failed to include the squashed packages. Mine was pretty much a full CD (~700 MB).