I can't sign in in firefox until I open IExplorer and attempt to sign in. It rejects me, and then when I try again in firefox its already 'half-signed ' in: I just need to supply the password in the re-login page. Weird.
I'm getting rid of the account because its not even worth using for an internet forum signup account.
Never mention reproduction. You gotta fuck with their heads and focus minds on shiny tech because people will only stop having too many kids if they have serious mental problems - like fetishizing hardware.
Seems like day in day out, the last thing any moron will ever give up is the "right" to reproduce up to 20 children a couple. "Oh, the west is oppressing my human rights to splooge offspring all over the lower east side".
Personally, I think anyone who has over 4 kids should be class action sue-able.
Seems so similar (i guess its linked anyways) to how migration is an untouchable issue; as if the sole issue associated with migration is racism.
it's not like public domain vectors haven't been available for, what, 20 years
Uh, i'd say millions of years, as they predate mankind.
So how long until Monsanto sues Bioos for an infected kernel?
Mmmm, militaristic offspring of apartheid. Yummmy!
Oooh, multiple front companies, and member connections to attempted coups. Tasty!
uh, uh, cherry... on.. top...
proxy for nation-states and companies to escape culpability, and a chance for citizens to avoid responsibility for their collected influence on another countries' citizens.
Ugh... I'm spent. What a tasty dessert.
Since I'm rich and a cannibal, and the year is 2015 and the world is predominately a free market free-for-all, I have sent this email to you and your wife.
I am offering your wife 50 million dollars (US western hemisphere dollars) for the opportunity to eat you. Since you do not have enough money to counter this offer (my associates have checked - you really do work too hard for that spare change you call an income), I am sure we can come to a tri-mutually 'satisfactory' arrangement.
If not, I will be pleased to enact a hostile takeover of your familly corporate unit, since you look so yummy!
But fear not!!!
I have found that my productivity increases twofold after consuming a human being!
Hey, I don't like the other parties or the associated structure either, but your last post is laughably delusional. On the other hand, its been decades since the US has had a half decent prez, so maybe that's like a drug to US citizens (bad trip?).
Show me a state with no income tax and I'll show you the same state as a parasite on other countries that do (unless they solely get their money from a pathetic sales tax system - then they'd just be inept).
Btw, although persistent debt is problematic, saying 'force a balanced budget' is ridiculous. Countries should be able to swing from surplus to debt and back (and inbetween) as need be, since forcing them to have only one option would be idiocy. Would you force individuals in the US to have balanced budgets too? What timespan?. The US economy could easily face a situation where carrying debt (deficits) is necessary to prevent a tanking of the economy/social system/etc. Yeah, now the US gov. is on a moronic spending spree, but that doesn't discount borrowing totally.
And the 'selling the unconstitutional National Parks' is pure class - I'm sure Bush and Halliburton would agree with you. Kind of indicative of the rest of your crackpot post, in that your idea of a 'Libertarian' society would lead to the sort of society in which small groups would quickly accumulate power (whos to stop them? there's no state policing since there are no taxes which means no state revenue, which means those with the most money get the strongest 'police-force' aka security squad aka militia).
OOOoooh, the CONSTITUTION would stop them.
With paper cuts!
Then they would proceed (and already be in the process of) to crush every one of your shiny pearl-like platonic solid libertarian ideals. Oh the irony.
Finally, to rebuke my control HAHA, you return a volley of communist style rhetoric: "if anyone is against the Libertarian Party, they are against the Constitution itself". Is this party a platonic solid too?
I really think you should consider joining the Natural Law Party. I can feel the positive vibes reinforcing the strength of the CONSTITUTION as we speak:
Wawawawa....jejejeje..
......wawawwa....jejejeje..
Psychic Libertarian Constitutional Defenders Unite!
Vote Libertarian and people will have money to get everything that they want and don't have to pay for sh!t they don't want
1. It doesn't matter who you vote for: people in general will never have enough money to get everything they want.
2. It doesn't matter what type of government you vote in: That government will be a product of politics in which people agree to coexist with other people and the corresponding ideas/lifestyles etc. they disagree with. "They" will always pay for "sh!t they don't want" because that sh!t is for other people who are paying for sh!t they don't want but "They" (*you*) do.
3. HAHA, you said 'Libertarian Control'.
Get ready for Livertarian Corruption!!!
"Do you have pride in what happens to B.C. softwood lumber?"
Not particulary pride, but I'd like the people involved to be treated with a bit of respect.
A couple of years ago, on Mt. Logan some friends and I put a 2x4x8 across a crevass which turned out to be the only route used to the top of the mountain.
Written in black marker on it was:
"29% lumber duty for Americans only"
It was all for a laugh, but the incredulity of the American climbers ended up being the biggest laugh of all.
And this article is stamped with the peaty - like a good whisky - odour of behavioural and quasi-rational economics. Good to see they're poking brains now, though the growing addiction to brain scan tech in the social sciences reminds me of those french economics students protesting another myopic specialization: the over-mathematization of economics. I guess all the statistics was ok for them though, because its not actually a math.
OTOH, maybe economists want to buy a new Nobel category!
(in all fairness, I find economics extremely interesting, like wrt roegan/godel veins of thought. Its just economists i hate:) )
That's cool, I'd turn down things from people I didn't respect either. But that certainly does not make the OBE, or any other official title, a joke.
Actually, the first sentence in the quoted pair is a good reason it can be a joke. If an award is from a group of dunces, can it be anything other than a joke?
The leader of the first British team to reach the north pole by dogsled turned down an OBE because it was 'bestowed' as an insult as the justified title was obviously a knighthood. Unfortunately, said leader made the mistake of pointing out the idiocy of the armchair 'advice' given during the expedition by the same people who would later influence the knighthood decision.
It took a few decades, but eventually he got knighted. As far as i remember, 75% of the team members thought the OBE was a joke, and the last 25% was a religious nut that nobody ever heard from again. (Hi Ken:) )
Wow! You are a persistent moron... but you should refrain from contradicting yourself in regards to your earlier posts.
Then you should look up 'ordinal numbers' and 'cardinal numbers' think a bit more about your ridiculous arguments, taking into consideration the added possibility that reality may not consist solely of numbers.
Finally, you should pick up a few books on rationality, and for good measure anything about the completeness of logic, polishing that off with a side-foray into quasi-rational thinking (hmm... I bet you could benefit from a book on quasi-rational economics since you're probably the type to troll economic related threads with your outstanding obtuseness, and that dash of juvenile arrogance). It should take you a few months before you post again.
Really, I'm finding myself much more irritated by the amazingly irrational posts from self-agrandizing technical geeks than any 'irrational' and kind-hearted posts from lay geeks.
Especially in the sciences.
My dad works for the canadian gov. under 'contract' for 0$ a year, maintaining glaciological arctic research that would be seriously hit if he left.
The unions hate him.
A woman he worked with did the same thing for a few years to finish off her work(except she wasn't under 'contract').
The newer cast are unfortunately more devoted to getting flat screens and credentials, though there are great exceptions.
don't know about your question, but i've been looking at lcd's lately and will buy the above one.
It uses the same panel as the apple's (its the exact same panel as in the g5 iMac 20") and is half the price of the similar cinema displays.
Never bought anything dell before, and never expected too. The 2005FPW looks nice and MUCH more reasonably priced.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't sign in in firefox until I open IExplorer and attempt to sign in. It rejects me, and then when I try again in firefox its already 'half-signed ' in: I just need to supply the password in the re-login page. Weird.
I'm getting rid of the account because its not even worth using for an internet forum signup account.
nah, if you have three you just get sued by your neighbour instead of a class action.
Never mention reproduction. You gotta fuck with their heads and focus minds on shiny tech because people will only stop having too many kids if they have serious mental problems - like fetishizing hardware.
Seems like day in day out, the last thing any moron will ever give up is the "right" to reproduce up to 20 children a couple. "Oh, the west is oppressing my human rights to splooge offspring all over the lower east side".
Personally, I think anyone who has over 4 kids should be class action sue-able.
Seems so similar (i guess its linked anyways) to how migration is an untouchable issue; as if the sole issue associated with migration is racism.
it's not like public domain vectors haven't been available for, what, 20 years Uh, i'd say millions of years, as they predate mankind. So how long until Monsanto sues Bioos for an infected kernel?
showing off is more effective when money is thrown away.
If you can throw $ away, obviously your better than other people.
if "colour changes" is a paradigm shift....
Its better to burn out on re-entry than to fade away...
Mmmm, militaristic offspring of apartheid. Yummmy!
Oooh, multiple front companies, and member connections to attempted coups. Tasty!
uh, uh, cherry... on.. top... proxy for nation-states and companies to escape culpability, and a chance for citizens to avoid responsibility for their collected influence on another countries' citizens.
Ugh... I'm spent. What a tasty dessert.
Hi, I'm rich.
I'm also a Cannibal.
Since I'm rich and a cannibal, and the year is 2015 and the world is predominately a free market free-for-all, I have sent this email to you and your wife.
I am offering your wife 50 million dollars (US western hemisphere dollars) for the opportunity to eat you. Since you do not have enough money to counter this offer (my associates have checked - you really do work too hard for that spare change you call an income), I am sure we can come to a tri-mutually 'satisfactory' arrangement.
If not, I will be pleased to enact a hostile takeover of your familly corporate unit, since you look so yummy!
But fear not!!! I have found that my productivity increases twofold after consuming a human being!
You will be put to good use.
Hey, I don't like the other parties or the associated structure either, but your last post is laughably delusional. On the other hand, its been decades since the US has had a half decent prez, so maybe that's like a drug to US citizens (bad trip?).
..jejejeje..
......wawawwa.. ..jejejeje..
:D :P :D
Show me a state with no income tax and I'll show you the same state as a parasite on other countries that do (unless they solely get their money from a pathetic sales tax system - then they'd just be inept).
Btw, although persistent debt is problematic, saying 'force a balanced budget' is ridiculous. Countries should be able to swing from surplus to debt and back (and inbetween) as need be, since forcing them to have only one option would be idiocy. Would you force individuals in the US to have balanced budgets too? What timespan?. The US economy could easily face a situation where carrying debt (deficits) is necessary to prevent a tanking of the economy/social system/etc. Yeah, now the US gov. is on a moronic spending spree, but that doesn't discount borrowing totally.
And the 'selling the unconstitutional National Parks' is pure class - I'm sure Bush and Halliburton would agree with you. Kind of indicative of the rest of your crackpot post, in that your idea of a 'Libertarian' society would lead to the sort of society in which small groups would quickly accumulate power (whos to stop them? there's no state policing since there are no taxes which means no state revenue, which means those with the most money get the strongest 'police-force' aka security squad aka militia).
OOOoooh, the CONSTITUTION would stop them. With paper cuts!
Then they would proceed (and already be in the process of) to crush every one of your shiny pearl-like platonic solid libertarian ideals. Oh the irony.
Finally, to rebuke my control HAHA, you return a volley of communist style rhetoric: "if anyone is against the Libertarian Party, they are against the Constitution itself". Is this party a platonic solid too?
I really think you should consider joining the Natural Law Party. I can feel the positive vibes reinforcing the strength of the CONSTITUTION as we speak:
Wawawawa..
Psychic Libertarian Constitutional Defenders Unite!
balmer was a corporate drone.
Vote Libertarian and people will have money to get everything that they want and don't have to pay for sh!t they don't want
1. It doesn't matter who you vote for: people in general will never have enough money to get everything they want.
2. It doesn't matter what type of government you vote in: That government will be a product of politics in which people agree to coexist with other people and the corresponding ideas/lifestyles etc. they disagree with. "They" will always pay for "sh!t they don't want" because that sh!t is for other people who are paying for sh!t they don't want but "They" (*you*) do.
3. HAHA, you said 'Libertarian Control'. Get ready for Livertarian Corruption!!!
4. You mispelt RepubliCUNTS.
5. You mispelt DemoCrUNTS.
5. You mispelt LiverCUNTS.
"Do you have pride in what happens to B.C. softwood lumber?"
Not particulary pride, but I'd like the people involved to be treated with a bit of respect.
A couple of years ago, on Mt. Logan some friends and I put a 2x4x8 across a crevass which turned out to be the only route used to the top of the mountain.
Written in black marker on it was: "29% lumber duty for Americans only"
It was all for a laugh, but the incredulity of the American climbers ended up being the biggest laugh of all.
And this article is stamped with the peaty - like a good whisky - odour of behavioural and quasi-rational economics. Good to see they're poking brains now, though the growing addiction to brain scan tech in the social sciences reminds me of those french economics students protesting another myopic specialization: the over-mathematization of economics. I guess all the statistics was ok for them though, because its not actually a math.
:) )
OTOH, maybe economists want to buy a new Nobel category!
(in all fairness, I find economics extremely interesting, like wrt roegan/godel veins of thought. Its just economists i hate
hey, quit bashing the wax museums
Actually, the first sentence in the quoted pair is a good reason it can be a joke. If an award is from a group of dunces, can it be anything other than a joke?
The leader of the first British team to reach the north pole by dogsled turned down an OBE because it was 'bestowed' as an insult as the justified title was obviously a knighthood. Unfortunately, said leader made the mistake of pointing out the idiocy of the armchair 'advice' given during the expedition by the same people who would later influence the knighthood decision.
It took a few decades, but eventually he got knighted. As far as i remember, 75% of the team members thought the OBE was a joke, and the last 25% was a religious nut that nobody ever heard from again. (Hi Ken
Wow! You are a persistent moron... but you should refrain from contradicting yourself in regards to your earlier posts. Then you should look up 'ordinal numbers' and 'cardinal numbers' think a bit more about your ridiculous arguments, taking into consideration the added possibility that reality may not consist solely of numbers. Finally, you should pick up a few books on rationality, and for good measure anything about the completeness of logic, polishing that off with a side-foray into quasi-rational thinking (hmm... I bet you could benefit from a book on quasi-rational economics since you're probably the type to troll economic related threads with your outstanding obtuseness, and that dash of juvenile arrogance). It should take you a few months before you post again. Really, I'm finding myself much more irritated by the amazingly irrational posts from self-agrandizing technical geeks than any 'irrational' and kind-hearted posts from lay geeks.
I'd use the word 'bore'.
Especially in the sciences.
My dad works for the canadian gov. under 'contract' for 0$ a year, maintaining glaciological arctic research that would be seriously hit if he left. The unions hate him.
A woman he worked with did the same thing for a few years to finish off her work(except she wasn't under 'contract').
The newer cast are unfortunately more devoted to getting flat screens and credentials, though there are great exceptions.
Gay, super-artistic, black beret wearing, wealthy right-wing apple photoshoppers uber alles!!! (right-wingers have great asses!!!)
don't know about your question, but i've been looking at lcd's lately and will buy the above one. It uses the same panel as the apple's (its the exact same panel as in the g5 iMac 20") and is half the price of the similar cinema displays. Never bought anything dell before, and never expected too. The 2005FPW looks nice and MUCH more reasonably priced.
so they're stored as '1's
entropy wouldn't exist. aka: the applied economist's pipe dream.
whining how we would have been wiped out long ago in the past if his numbers are right:
Statistics were only recently discovered, hence they didn't apply back then.
Stupids.
they just mispelt 'chile'