When state controls tell you exist what you can do where, to the point that it has absolute control over your life, you're a slave. You exist to serve the communist party.
HAHA... spoken like a person who's never lived and worked there.
You can't believe every bit of propaganda some human rights group prints up.
You have Nation A with its citizens producing 1 unit of pollution. However, Nation A has a huge population, which means its total combined units of pollution is really high.
Then you have Nation B, with each of its citizens producing 10 units of pollution. However, Nation B combined is less than Nation A's pollution.
What would produce a better result? Trying to squeeze Nation A to produce less pollution, or have Nation B produce less pollution? Nation A is already near the minimum pollution per capita, the only way to reduce pollution further would be to cull the herd, and we know that isn't an option. So realistically, to get better results, we get Nation B to reduce pollution despite the fact that their combined pollution is lower than A.
Sort of like getting more fuel efficiency out of a Toyota Echo as opposed to a Ford Expedition. One's going to be harder than the other.
Basically what it boils down to is: if evolution is taught, then some of those kids will realise that God is an unnecessary addition to their worldview and will drop him into the same bin where they already put Santa Claus.
Whoa whoa whoa there partner, you better back that truck up! You're telling us that God is in the same league as Santa? Now you're just talking crazy!!!!
In fact, I'd like to tell you that I've SEEN Santa with my own eyes. I talked to him and even sat in his lap. Perhaps he doesn't visit your local mall, but I know that he's here at the ones I go to. He's scheduled to make appearances later in November, perhaps you should keep your eyes open.
Anyway, you had me up to the point you mentioned Santa. Pfft... damn heathens!
You're missing the point. Bad movies or not, the people who produce and distribute them are asking you to pay for them. It's not like that's going to come as a surprise to anyone. I see stuff on TV all the time that I would not (well, beyond the cable rate I'm paying) pay for, ever. But that's not the same as, essentially, sneaking into a theater to see the same, not getting caught/lectured by anyone, and saying, "Well, no one told me I had to pay, at least, not to my face..."
They are asking you to pay, but people are beginning to see less and less value for the stuff they pay for. As of late, the movie industry hasn't produced anything really good, but the admission prices keep climbing.
If producers are willing to sell movies on market pressure, i.e. lower prices of movies to the point where supply and demand meet, people will start coming out.
There is no reason other than profit whoring for these high prices. These actors (or as I like to call them, "people who play pretend for a living") do not need to command multi-million dollars per movie, especially shit movies. When the industry realizes it's no longer a money making factory will it then go back to the basics, producing good movies.
For some people, downloading movies is the only way to get back at the industry for making the last movie you saw one that you would claim, "You couldn't pay me to watch that garbage!".
Price of gas - $2.50 a gallon. Price of water - $1.50 for 20oz.
Unless you're driving a racing version with high compression, you don't have to run on premium water like Evian for top performance.
You can fill on regular tap water for a couple of cents per cubic metre. Or, if you're one of those environmentalist, you get an engine conversion done and you can get your water from sewage pipes and septic tanks for free!
I agree there should be a more elegant way to detect submarines. One thought that I had was that you bring both oceans to boiling and all the submarines in the ocean will pop to the top.
You wouldn't have to re-buy all your DVDs. Just as there are VCR/DVD combo units, any Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player would play normal DVDs. So what's the problem?
Oh really now? As if when George Lucas re-re-re-releases the Star Wars Blu-Ray Collector Series Box Set, nerds everywhere won't be flocking to stores to pick it up?
We have our share of those, too. Perhaps not all are fat, but they are annoying, nagging, stupid, and very scared of everything. And envious. And gossip a lot. And speak in riddles. Perhaps they just watch too much TV. Or something.
And that is different from women anywhere else around the world in what way?
Musicians don't make music to just give it away (some do) but they also need to eat. I have no problems handing over some cash for a CD I like.
What I don't like doing is handing over 25.99 for a cd, and having 23.99 go to a label,.50 to a another schmuck, and then.50 to the musician.
Exactly! The music industry has obviously skipped the class on economics about pricing.
People are fed up of paying that kind of money for the product they receive. This is evident with the iTunes revolution. Had they just priced a CD accordingly, sales would be just as strong since demand is always there for good stuff. It's too bad they can't look beyond their dreams of printing money to realize that.
"Even if you should be able to carry box cutters on to a flight, what reaction do you think other passengers will have?"
I don't care. It's none of their business.
So basically you're saying it's ok for others to carry box cutters on to a flight and it's none of your business that there is no conceivable use for box cutters on a flight (that they can't be in checked in luggage). I'm sure others, especially those that were on the flights during 9/11 if they could pass their thoughts on would say that it is a ludicrous idea after learning the events that transpired.
I shouldn't have to keep track of the things that you're paranoid about. You, on the other hand, have a handy list of things that I have a right to do. (That is, loosely speaking, almost anything that doesn't cause direct harm to my fellow humans.).
Without deviating from why I asked if the incident was before or after the bombings, no, you shouldn't have to keep track, but you also shouldn't be blatantly doing things that would draw suspicion to yourself. i.e. no matter how friendly your intentions are, don't be waving a gun around in a bank sort of thing. Which goes back to the guy photographing the buses. If the tensions were high after learning about the London bus bombings, why draw attention to yourself in the matter, regardless of how legal it may be.
Very far. I am not afraid of terrorists. I am very concerned about police states. Historically, police states are much more dangerous than wackos with box cutters/sticks of dynamite/RPG's.
You are afraid of having a police state? Why have police at all then? I'm not advocating a police state if that's what you're thinking, but I feel that they should have some tools available to them if we ask them to protect us.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess you forgot about the head taxes these "Virtual Slaves" had to pay to get into the country?!
When state controls tell you exist what you can do where, to the point that it has absolute control over your life, you're a slave. You exist to serve the communist party.
HAHA... spoken like a person who's never lived and worked there.
You can't believe every bit of propaganda some human rights group prints up.
I would readily agree to a contract where I'm not bound to do anything, too.
You mean like NAFTA?
You have to measure by per capita.
Take this example for instance.
You have Nation A with its citizens producing 1 unit of pollution. However, Nation A has a huge population, which means its total combined units of pollution is really high.
Then you have Nation B, with each of its citizens producing 10 units of pollution. However, Nation B combined is less than Nation A's pollution.
What would produce a better result? Trying to squeeze Nation A to produce less pollution, or have Nation B produce less pollution? Nation A is already near the minimum pollution per capita, the only way to reduce pollution further would be to cull the herd, and we know that isn't an option. So realistically, to get better results, we get Nation B to reduce pollution despite the fact that their combined pollution is lower than A.
Sort of like getting more fuel efficiency out of a Toyota Echo as opposed to a Ford Expedition. One's going to be harder than the other.
-40 Kelvin??? Umm niiice...
this would answer a number of questions, such as: why is this planet so fucked up? or, why did steve gutenberg have a career?
Are you denying that Short Circuit was a good movie?
Basically what it boils down to is: if evolution is taught, then some of those kids will realise that God is an unnecessary addition to their worldview and will drop him into the same bin where they already put Santa Claus.
Whoa whoa whoa there partner, you better back that truck up! You're telling us that God is in the same league as Santa? Now you're just talking crazy!!!!
In fact, I'd like to tell you that I've SEEN Santa with my own eyes. I talked to him and even sat in his lap. Perhaps he doesn't visit your local mall, but I know that he's here at the ones I go to. He's scheduled to make appearances later in November, perhaps you should keep your eyes open.
Anyway, you had me up to the point you mentioned Santa. Pfft... damn heathens!
The geocentric model of the solar system is a far more compelling idea, frankly.
I beg to differ. I believe the flat earth theory is much more compelling.
On that note, how easy would it be to score 100% on the Intelligent Design tests?
Question 1: Identify and describe the method in which humans obtained stereoscopic sight.
a) With binoculars.
b) God, the designer himself.
c) Crazy Theory of Evolution.
d) All of the above.
Question 2: Identify and describe the method in which humans obtained opposable thumbs.
a) Double jointed.
b) God, the designer himself.
c) Crazy Theory of Evolution.
d) None of the above.
Isn't it possible to be fundamentally deluted???
Absolutely!
Here's proof there's a final cut here
You're missing the point. Bad movies or not, the people who produce and distribute them are asking you to pay for them. It's not like that's going to come as a surprise to anyone. I see stuff on TV all the time that I would not (well, beyond the cable rate I'm paying) pay for, ever. But that's not the same as, essentially, sneaking into a theater to see the same, not getting caught/lectured by anyone, and saying, "Well, no one told me I had to pay, at least, not to my face..."
They are asking you to pay, but people are beginning to see less and less value for the stuff they pay for. As of late, the movie industry hasn't produced anything really good, but the admission prices keep climbing.
If producers are willing to sell movies on market pressure, i.e. lower prices of movies to the point where supply and demand meet, people will start coming out.
There is no reason other than profit whoring for these high prices. These actors (or as I like to call them, "people who play pretend for a living") do not need to command multi-million dollars per movie, especially shit movies. When the industry realizes it's no longer a money making factory will it then go back to the basics, producing good movies.
For some people, downloading movies is the only way to get back at the industry for making the last movie you saw one that you would claim, "You couldn't pay me to watch that garbage!".
Great, it runs on water.
Price of gas - $2.50 a gallon.
Price of water - $1.50 for 20oz.
Unless you're driving a racing version with high compression, you don't have to run on premium water like Evian for top performance.
You can fill on regular tap water for a couple of cents per cubic metre. Or, if you're one of those environmentalist, you get an engine conversion done and you can get your water from sewage pipes and septic tanks for free!
I agree there should be a more elegant way to detect submarines. One thought that I had was that you bring both oceans to boiling and all the submarines in the ocean will pop to the top.
This seafood soup sounds tasty.
I thought it was 100z0rZ.
No. I think you're thinking about "Lusers".
What do we call ATRAC then?
You wouldn't have to re-buy all your DVDs. Just as there are VCR/DVD combo units, any Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player would play normal DVDs. So what's the problem?
Oh really now? As if when George Lucas re-re-re-releases the Star Wars Blu-Ray Collector Series Box Set, nerds everywhere won't be flocking to stores to pick it up?
Anyone taking bets on the winning format yet?
It's called a wagon.
Looks more like a skateboard to me.
Er, so #6 isn't a habit for you? Maybe you should get some more fiber in the diet;-)
;-)"
"Er, so #6 is a habit for you? And how would you go about breaking that habit?
I believe if you start taking Tylenol 3, or codeine, you can induce constipation.
We have our share of those, too. Perhaps not all are fat, but they are annoying, nagging, stupid, and very scared of everything. And envious. And gossip a lot. And speak in riddles. Perhaps they just watch too much TV. Or something.
And that is different from women anywhere else around the world in what way?
Musicians don't make music to just give it away (some do) but they also need to eat. I have no problems handing over some cash for a CD I like.
.50 to a another schmuck, and then .50 to the musician.
What I don't like doing is handing over 25.99 for a cd, and having 23.99 go to a label,
Exactly! The music industry has obviously skipped the class on economics about pricing.
People are fed up of paying that kind of money for the product they receive. This is evident with the iTunes revolution. Had they just priced a CD accordingly, sales would be just as strong since demand is always there for good stuff. It's too bad they can't look beyond their dreams of printing money to realize that.
I'm sick of green energy, I want energy in designer colours.
Yellow energy ! Blue energy ! Striped energy ! Polka dotted energy ! I want my energy to match my shirt !
Say no to energy uniformity !
You're thinking "Hypercolor" shirts. The ones where your armpits change colour before the rest of the shirt does.
You're basically subscribing to a mild form of anarchy.
"Even if you should be able to carry box cutters on to a flight, what reaction do you think other passengers will have?"
I don't care. It's none of their business.
So basically you're saying it's ok for others to carry box cutters on to a flight and it's none of your business that there is no conceivable use for box cutters on a flight (that they can't be in checked in luggage). I'm sure others, especially those that were on the flights during 9/11 if they could pass their thoughts on would say that it is a ludicrous idea after learning the events that transpired.
I shouldn't have to keep track of the things that you're paranoid about. You, on the other hand, have a handy list of things that I have a right to do. (That is, loosely speaking, almost anything that doesn't cause direct harm to my fellow humans.).
Without deviating from why I asked if the incident was before or after the bombings, no, you shouldn't have to keep track, but you also shouldn't be blatantly doing things that would draw suspicion to yourself. i.e. no matter how friendly your intentions are, don't be waving a gun around in a bank sort of thing. Which goes back to the guy photographing the buses. If the tensions were high after learning about the London bus bombings, why draw attention to yourself in the matter, regardless of how legal it may be.
Very far. I am not afraid of terrorists. I am very concerned about police states. Historically, police states are much more dangerous than wackos with box cutters/sticks of dynamite/RPG's.
You are afraid of having a police state? Why have police at all then? I'm not advocating a police state if that's what you're thinking, but I feel that they should have some tools available to them if we ask them to protect us.