Perhaps she is one of those "people" who gets confused trying to send email and you are a professional nerd who can run Unix System V blindfolded with no beeps? Perhaps your relationship flags because she can't grasp technology and technology is your primary interest?
The trouble with this whole discussion is that there is no "one" answer that works for everyone. For anything. People may need a different OS, some want a sports car others want a truck, perhaps one want to play tennis and the other wants to go sailing, whatever.
I've had people tell me that something I do "is the problem" before, and usually the real problem is a lack of common interests. Especially in relationships. Most start with a "hey you're pretty, let's hump" kind of thinking. After awhile you realize you have little at all in common.
So what, get over it. Get an other with the same likes as you. It's not like the "big bad internet" is heroin or something that kills you and makes you feel the need to do sexual favors for a hit.
These guys just need girls who like being online too. Then that "addiction" will like as not "strengthen" the relationship.
As for "If you are going to kill, say so, don't say "I defended my self" or some silly fluffy nonsense.", this is just stupid. There's a world of difference between self-defense and premeditated murder.
No, there is not. The end result of all of those is a corpse. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
I fail to understand how it is you think I'm lying, but in case you failed to read it all the way through I'll quote the whole of my first statement for you.
"Execution is not murder, self defense is not murder, military combat is not murder,..."
Yes, those things are murder also. You've merely been conditioned to believe they are not.
"Murder is an illegal killing, the preceding are legal."
No, they are not. Circumstance is used to determine if punishment may be waived. Killing is always illegal. Proceeding with prosecution is at the whim of the State. Your State makes available the definitions of all crimes, read up on them.
Goodness, it seems that my first post on this subject was in response to someone suggesting there is such a thing as legal killing. Wow, you are correct, being able to read parent posts is really cool.
What makes matters worse is that you are assuming I consider murder to be a bad thing. Which is a statement I never made. I'm not a person who thinks in absolutes. Murder in and of itself is not something I consider to be "bad". A given situation in which murder occurs may be a bad situation, but the act itself contains no "good" or "bad". The decision to commit the act might be shown to be a "bad" or "good" decision, but I don't confuse the ideas of "the act" with "the decision to commit the act". They are mutually exclusive.
You certain win the award for most conclutions jumped to. No, I don't think any of what you assume, I merely stated the fact that in our country killing is never "legal". I just think people shouldn't sugar coat it. If you are going to kill, say so, don't say "I defended my self" or some silly fluffy nonsense. A spade is a just shovel, call things what they are.
Given that I've worked for an attorney who sues police officers for the past four years I can assure you that in every instance of the use of deadly force there is an inquest and any officer involved is relieved of duty for the duration. Only when the inquest finds that the officer's actions were unavoidable is he allowed to return to duty. If it was an avoidable the officer is punished accordingly. This happens without fail. It is never outright legal.
Execution is not murder, self defense is not murder, military combat is not murder,...
Yes, those things are murder also. You've merely been conditioned to believe they are not.
Murder is an illegal killing, the preceding are legal.
No, they are not. Circumstance is used to determine if punishment may be waived. Killing is always illegal. Proceeding with prosecution is at the whim of the State. Your State makes available the definitions of all crimes, read up on them.
Wait, weren't all you Bush-lovers spouting a few years ago that the "UN is irrelevent" when they didn't support invading Iraq but instead were asking for our help with North Korea?
Hmm, now the UN is the one with all the power, you say? Interesting point, almost Kerry-esk in it's flip-flop-atude.
Yeah, that's kind of what the President of the United States of America does. The decisions get made between him and Congress, and it's the responsibility of the rest of the government to carry out the orders given to them.
Actually that is wrong. The way our system is supposed to work is the President makes ZERO decisions, that's Congress's job and theirs alone. After Congress makes the decisions the the President executes those decisions. Hence why it is called the "Executive" branch of the government.
Funny how those such storys only came about *after* Murdock bought MySpace. Also funny how those those story *all* seem to originate on media sources also own by Murdock. And it's amazing how MySpaces web traffic has *skyrocketed* due to all the media attention.
Many People in Business get used to their system working one way. Every single one of my clients in the legal field has at one time or another paid me to replace XP on their system with either 2k or 98.
As one of them recently put it after buying his new computer, "I thought I'd give XP a try since it came installed, but it's all sizzle and no steak. How much will you charge to put 2000 back on it?"
The government's job is to pass laws - not pay for things. They pass laws saying I have to register my car - they're not expected to pay for it, too."
But they do have to pay for the installation of the infrastructure used by the people to do the registration, the employees to handle the registration, the database of the registered information, the upkeep of the system, replacement equipment, rent on registration offices, the equipment to retrieve registry information, the clean up of out dated records, so on, and so on.
It'd be pretty stupid to require registration and then supply no means to register, don't ya' think?
Interestingly enough, I had a myspace band page for a about a year until a month ago when I deleted it. During that time I had about 30 listens to my music via myspace and roughly 200 downloads of.ogg files from unique IPs for the same music on my site. I've never gone "out of my way" to promote my personal site at all. My site gets more traffic than my livejournal too. Which is sad actually, I update the site far less than the journal, and I don't do that often.
It is possible that not everything that works for some works for all.
I nearly added that "s" to "internet" but I assumed you'd take my post as satire/sarcasm without it. Perhaps you should lighten up a bit?
"Maybe it's just me, and not to troll, but is there anything wrong with paper voting?"
Depends on your point of view. If you are a citizen who wants to have their vote counted and counted correctly then no, nothing is wrong with paper. If you are a corrupt politico who want's to continue to abuse your position of power the people's will be damned, then paper is a flawed system that must be done away with.
Slashdot Mirror
One word. Fallopian.
Yes.
Except, these weren't designed for third world countries, they are meant for second world nations that have infrastucture but not industry.
If you call a one page form with only 6 half-page width lines a ton...
Perhaps she is one of those "people" who gets confused trying to send email and you are a professional nerd who can run Unix System V blindfolded with no beeps? Perhaps your relationship flags because she can't grasp technology and technology is your primary interest? The trouble with this whole discussion is that there is no "one" answer that works for everyone. For anything. People may need a different OS, some want a sports car others want a truck, perhaps one want to play tennis and the other wants to go sailing, whatever. I've had people tell me that something I do "is the problem" before, and usually the real problem is a lack of common interests. Especially in relationships. Most start with a "hey you're pretty, let's hump" kind of thinking. After awhile you realize you have little at all in common. So what, get over it. Get an other with the same likes as you. It's not like the "big bad internet" is heroin or something that kills you and makes you feel the need to do sexual favors for a hit. These guys just need girls who like being online too. Then that "addiction" will like as not "strengthen" the relationship.
Yes, alcoholics go to meetings.
Sure, I'll help ban TV, but you'll have to pry my SecondLife account out of my cold dead fingers.
No, there is not. The end result of all of those is a corpse. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
I fail to understand how it is you think I'm lying, but in case you failed to read it all the way through I'll quote the whole of my first statement for you.
Goodness, it seems that my first post on this subject was in response to someone suggesting there is such a thing as legal killing. Wow, you are correct, being able to read parent posts is really cool.
What makes matters worse is that you are assuming I consider murder to be a bad thing. Which is a statement I never made. I'm not a person who thinks in absolutes. Murder in and of itself is not something I consider to be "bad". A given situation in which murder occurs may be a bad situation, but the act itself contains no "good" or "bad". The decision to commit the act might be shown to be a "bad" or "good" decision, but I don't confuse the ideas of "the act" with "the decision to commit the act". They are mutually exclusive.
You certain win the award for most conclutions jumped to. No, I don't think any of what you assume, I merely stated the fact that in our country killing is never "legal". I just think people shouldn't sugar coat it. If you are going to kill, say so, don't say "I defended my self" or some silly fluffy nonsense. A spade is a just shovel, call things what they are.
Given that I've worked for an attorney who sues police officers for the past four years I can assure you that in every instance of the use of deadly force there is an inquest and any officer involved is relieved of duty for the duration. Only when the inquest finds that the officer's actions were unavoidable is he allowed to return to duty. If it was an avoidable the officer is punished accordingly. This happens without fail. It is never outright legal.
Yes, those things are murder also. You've merely been conditioned to believe they are not.
No, they are not. Circumstance is used to determine if punishment may be waived. Killing is always illegal. Proceeding with prosecution is at the whim of the State. Your State makes available the definitions of all crimes, read up on them.
Wait, weren't all you Bush-lovers spouting a few years ago that the "UN is irrelevent" when they didn't support invading Iraq but instead were asking for our help with North Korea?
Hmm, now the UN is the one with all the power, you say? Interesting point, almost Kerry-esk in it's flip-flop-atude.
Actually that is wrong. The way our system is supposed to work is the President makes ZERO decisions, that's Congress's job and theirs alone. After Congress makes the decisions the the President executes those decisions. Hence why it is called the "Executive" branch of the government.
Never before have I laughed this hard at a slash post.
You sir have pwned me.
Funny how those such storys only came about *after* Murdock bought MySpace. Also funny how those those story *all* seem to originate on media sources also own by Murdock. And it's amazing how MySpaces web traffic has *skyrocketed* due to all the media attention.
Until he releases the un-edited original THX-1138 on DVD nothing he does is news worthy IMHO.
There is always things like apt. No need to have it all on the install media.
Just fill the passenger compartment (and passenger's lungs) with an 02 saturated liquid and accelleration ceases to be an issue.
Many People in Business get used to their system working one way. Every single one of my clients in the legal field has at one time or another paid me to replace XP on their system with either 2k or 98.
As one of them recently put it after buying his new computer, "I thought I'd give XP a try since it came installed, but it's all sizzle and no steak. How much will you charge to put 2000 back on it?"
Quod Erat "fucking" Demonstrandum.
The government's job is to pass laws - not pay for things. They pass laws saying I have to register my car - they're not expected to pay for it, too."
But they do have to pay for the installation of the infrastructure used by the people to do the registration, the employees to handle the registration, the database of the registered information, the upkeep of the system, replacement equipment, rent on registration offices, the equipment to retrieve registry information, the clean up of out dated records, so on, and so on.
It'd be pretty stupid to require registration and then supply no means to register, don't ya' think?
Interestingly enough, I had a myspace band page for a about a year until a month ago when I deleted it. During that time I had about 30 listens to my music via myspace and roughly 200 downloads of .ogg files from unique IPs for the same music on my site. I've never gone "out of my way" to promote my personal site at all. My site gets more traffic than my livejournal too. Which is sad actually, I update the site far less than the journal, and I don't do that often.
It is possible that not everything that works for some works for all.
I nearly added that "s" to "internet" but I assumed you'd take my post as satire/sarcasm without it. Perhaps you should lighten up a bit?
"Maybe it's just me, and not to troll, but is there anything wrong with paper voting?"
Depends on your point of view. If you are a citizen who wants to have their vote counted and counted correctly then no, nothing is wrong with paper. If you are a corrupt politico who want's to continue to abuse your position of power the people's will be damned, then paper is a flawed system that must be done away with.
Guess which of the two makes the rules.
"But can you automatically hook it into a network of millions from the getgo?"
Yes, it's called the "internet". I hear it's a network of millions of networks.