Fornication is sin. Just thinking about adultery is a sin that we are all guilty of (Matthew 5:28). Furthermore lust for the same sex it listed specifically as a sin (1 Corinthians 6:9, Roman 1:26-27) Dear AC, you missed. The OP said:
I don't want to read what your manufactured religion wants me to read, I want a real Catholic or Christian to give me a piece of their mind. What you did was regurgitate some crap that someone else made up.
Have you ever told a lie? [heavy snippage about god and law and rule breaking and fines]
This is why humanity needs Jesus. We cannot pay our fine. [more snippage of the same sort] That is the core of Christianity. See Romans 3:21-26.
After you die and stand in the courtroom on judgment day will you try to justify yourself? What courtroom? what law? what fine? what need?
All of this claptrap and babbling is based on a fundamentally flawed concept -- that the universe is ruled by some all-powerful bogeyman who wanders around making up a set of rules that noone could possibly adhere to. Once you are able to divorce yourself from this fallacy, then you will become truly enlightened and see the universe for what it really is. And you will understand how all that drivel you just spewed is the ravings of a delusional self-flagellator. I wish you luck in this, as it will not be divine intervention that leads you from your dark, disturbed place.
hmmm.. interesting. Another similar take: a candidate has to be selected by more than 50% of the *eligible voters*. That means the candidate actually represents the majority of the electorate instead of the plurality of voters. Big difference. Of course you'd have to get people to actually vote in that case.
If you couple that with instant run-off it starts to look pretty good to me. Not only are you getting more voters involved, but you're also breaking the duopoly of the current two-party thing. We've got some locals just elected who are pushing instant run-off. Should be interesting.
The nice thing about printing the vote is that you get the electronic tally right away, so the world can know a "tentative" result by that evening, while a full count could take all night, or or maybe even a few days to certify. So what happens when a candidate sees the tentative vote and concedes the election? This is veering OT for this thread but I've always been stumped by this. I think Kerry did this: conceded the vote while it was still in contention. IOW, he just gave up. Do they then stop counting? All you have to do is rig the electronic results enough to make someone not want to bother with the hand count, and the election is over.
I don't think candidates should be allowed to concede an election. An election isn't over until all the votes are counted and certified. period. If the candidate concedes before then, that should nullify the election as the voters were not choosing from the actual candidates. They were instead choosing between one person who wanted the job and another person who wanted to distract voters in some fashion.
It would also cook for me, rub my back and have sex with me anytime! now that I've fixed that for you, why would you care about the rest of it: recording, parsing, researching etc...
Thanks for the links, but the horrible multi-color flashing NEW from sometime in the mid '90s just kills the credibility for me. It also makes me want to gouge my eyes out, but that's a different type of crater.
I'm a hack musician and I've never understood this. There is no device I've ever seen that requires training to make a decent sound. All you do is fiddle with the thing until it makes a sound you like. That's the whole history of rock/pop music right there. A bunch of guys fiddling with equipment, saying "hey that's cool" and putting it down on tape. Hell, a lot of that fiddling involved guys with no clue wielding soldering irons, or flipping the tape over to run backwards, or kicking the box in just the right spot, or any number of other plain ugly hacks and we applaud a lot of that music today.
Now, if you're trying to make a piece of equipment make *a particular* sound or replicate someone else's work, then yes, that needs training, practice and expertise. But then, that's not really creating, it's reproducing or mimicking and that's a different thing altogether.
Having said all that, one must have a good ear, reasonable taste, and personal honesty (i.e. admit that it sucks) to make it work. If a person doesn't have at least some musical talent and creative drive, then it will just sound like crap. You're probably right, 80-90% of home recording enthusiasts have little to no understanding of compression, but that *doesn't* mean they can't tweak some knobs, listen to the results, and determine whether they like the sound or not.
Pundits can agree about all sorts of things and that doesn't mean jack. That's why they're pundits instead of done-dits, or however you'd make "they actually get it done" rhyme with pundit. Pundits will probably also agree that a microphone in the wrong hands can do more harm than good. It's the same with any piece of equipment. The problem is the definition of "wrong hands". Who determines what "wrong hands" means? The technicians and pundits want to say the wrong hands are anyone else's hands. The reality is the "wrong hands" are hands attached to ears and brains that can't hear what sounds like crap. Often times these wrong hand overlap with the other wrong hands and you get shit like modern hit music.
The problem is that it's highly likely that the PTB's will cut the funding for this project shortly after it gets started. We'll only have enough time to send out a few seconds of signal. Some poor sap at the other end will draw a circle around the printed representation of the signal and scribble the equivalent of "Wow" in the margin. And that will be the end of it. oh well.
You cowardly little turd pile AC. You crack me up. What will you do when they come for your mom? huh? How will you get your ass to school then? hmm?
At what point will it be bad enough for you to change? You clearly think it's bad since you bothered to say "still better". That's an admission that it's worsening. So what does it take? How bad does it have to be before there is one country better? And will that be enough? or will you just say "The US is still better than any other country in the world, except that one?"
And furthermore, you ass-drip, why is "better than any other" good enough? Are you satisfied to beat everyone else even if you didn't play as hard as you could? That's pretty hollow isn't it? There's nothing quite like *not* giving it your all. Wouldn't it be so much more awesome to say "better than any other" and getting better all the time? Wouldn't that be great?
This implies a couple of things which I think are wrong.
1. That skilled medical personnel are of no use when they aren't performing medical procedures, which is patently false. Highly skilled medical personnel are *at least* capable of reasoned thought and probably capable of carrying out all sorts of rigorous experimental procedures. They may not be qualified to analyze the data, but they are certainly qualified to operate equipment, take measurements etc etc. And don't forget that at least *some* of the scientific advancement of the last couple centuries was carried out by people initially educated in whatever passed for medicine at the time. Sure there was some quackery, but there were also good minds trying to solve problems. S
2. That human life doesn't have the right to skilled medical care. This is obviously a philosophical point to be debated, but its totally reasonable that there should be a "ship's surgeon." Even if all he does is prance around in a skimpy bathrobe mackin' on the ladies, there's at least comic relief. Laughter is the best medicine!
Funny that is, but wait until you have to pay for the right to the "score" that is used to "perform" the surgery on you're loved one and SIAA (surgical industry AA) is knocking on your door wanting to look at your hard drive to see if you made that available over the internet for others to use. Sure it's one thing, and fair-use mind you, to go ahead and do the operation on you sister, kid, neighbor, they can't really stop that. But if you leave that thing lying on the front porch and people start doing their own appendectomies willy-nilly, well, you're in for a heap of trouble.
I'm not sure this AC is really trolling. I mean this is pretty much how I feel about it too. They're all a bunch of liars trying to see which one can spin out the right lie to get the sheeple to bend over and take some more. shrug.
brightness is irrelevant to whether someone happens to have the right synapses fire in the right order to solve a particular problem.
And that was my point. Just because someone is bright, doesn't mean they will automatically think of every solution to a particular problem. Intelligence is not a free pass to discovering stuff (though it helps a lot!).
In the case of this particular example, she had done several other things in an effort to solve the problem, any number of which were potentially viable solutions, but didn't happen to think of this particular solution.
In my experience, the solution to a particular problem can come from any number of sources, some of which aren't necessarily the expected or "sanctioned" sources. Just because someone is both intelligent and an expert in their field does *not* mean they will think of the little bit that makes for a better solution.
To swerve randomly back on topic: it is conceivable that the electrocution hazard occurs during a particularly simple portion of the repair portion that can be performed in just a few minutes. A little scheduling to ensure that this particular action occurs during ISS "night" would be a good idea, in that case. It is entirely possible that no one at NASA thought of this. It is also exceedingly unlikely that they *didn't* think of it, but it certainly makes sense for someone to speak and say "hey, maybe we should do that at night, just in case."
Sort of like (car analogy) going ahead and double-checking with the guys at the tire store "you got the lug nuts all torqued down, right?" because sometimes they forget. Yeah sure, it's their job to do that and they're the experts and no one who's not an expert should suggest it because surely they thought of that, right? But don't you feel like an idiot watching your wheel bounce down the road.
And I know there's going to be a ton of posts implying that the NASA folks should have thought of [insert idea here]. Of course they did. While I largely agree with all you've said here... Sometimes people just don't think of things, no matter how bright they are. Case in point: an actual phone call I received at 1:30 AM the other day -- "the dishwasher is stuck on and we can't figure out how to stop it". My response: um... just unplug it? "oh, heh, yeah, okay." This was from a grad student (physics) working for me part time. She's very bright and generally has practical skills too. Sometimes people just don't think of things.
Now, having said all that, is/. the place to come for that spark of genius that will save ISS? prolly not.
Ubuntu has done a fabulous job with Debian's beginnings [...] Personally, I love Ubuntu. And I've grown to love it [...] for it's product as well. I think Ubuntu is great in that it is helping people migrate away from the default OS.
But I have to say, Debian *itself* is a great product. There seems to be this idea that Ubuntu is the usable Debian, and that's just not true. Debian has become really a very advanced OS in terms of usability, portability, and reliability. Debian is so much more than just a great beginning for other OSes to build on.
Granted, its not the bee's knees in terms of the latest versions of apps and so forth (talking stable here), but talk about a system you can rely on...
Finally, to those who complain that Debian is too slow to upgrade: Look at how often the average user upgrades their windows system... umm... how old is XP? How many win98/2k boxes are still out there? There is nothing wrong with using Debian stable for 2-3 years and then upgrading. The payoff is a rock solid system that "just works".
Frankly, just about everything *any* user would need already exists.
In some respects, its hard now to contribute anything new -- it's all done. Granted, there's lots of bug fixing and feature improvement to be done, but practically speaking, there's nothing that can't be done.
It's almost boring at this point. What, you need to solve what problem? apt-get install foo. done.
Come on, you remember the little guy sitting on the steps, "... yes I'm only a bill..."
well, what happens is some fat dude comes out of the capitol building, grabs that little guys and starts bellowing something about "what's your function!" and then proceeds to rend him to little shreds and then stomps off stage right.
if a license will scale well from a few employees to a few hundred (or even a few tens) then this is very true. A micro/small business is stuck buying more capacity than they will ever use and since admin is typically done by a principal or one valued, multi-function employee (kinda like one of those print/scan/copy things) the cost of admin isn't really a factor. In my businesses, regardless of the cost of the software, I'm still doing the admin. So a license that costs a few hundred to a few thousand dollars is a big deal. If you factor in sunsetting (lookin' at you Intuit*) then it gets to be a HUGE deal.
* Yeah, Intuit, your forced sunsetting drove me away from windows for good, and I *still* thank you guys. It was the best thing that ever happened to me in the world of computing. thanks again:-P
Slashdot Mirror
This is why humanity needs Jesus. We cannot pay our fine. [more snippage of the same sort] That is the core of Christianity. See Romans 3:21-26.
After you die and stand in the courtroom on judgment day will you try to justify yourself? What courtroom? what law? what fine? what need?
All of this claptrap and babbling is based on a fundamentally flawed concept -- that the universe is ruled by some all-powerful bogeyman who wanders around making up a set of rules that noone could possibly adhere to. Once you are able to divorce yourself from this fallacy, then you will become truly enlightened and see the universe for what it really is. And you will understand how all that drivel you just spewed is the ravings of a delusional self-flagellator. I wish you luck in this, as it will not be divine intervention that leads you from your dark, disturbed place.
that was from all the smoking...
I think you're right, but I'm pulling this joke from the ether having no install of windows... So...
Clippy sez:
It looks like you're trying to criticize a poorly implemented slashdot meme...
You have chosen to not load a number of libraries that you will probably never use. Are you sure? (Y/N)
hmmm.. interesting. Another similar take: a candidate has to be selected by more than 50% of the *eligible voters*. That means the candidate actually represents the majority of the electorate instead of the plurality of voters. Big difference. Of course you'd have to get people to actually vote in that case.
If you couple that with instant run-off it starts to look pretty good to me. Not only are you getting more voters involved, but you're also breaking the duopoly of the current two-party thing. We've got some locals just elected who are pushing instant run-off. Should be interesting.
I don't think candidates should be allowed to concede an election. An election isn't over until all the votes are counted and certified. period. If the candidate concedes before then, that should nullify the election as the voters were not choosing from the actual candidates. They were instead choosing between one person who wanted the job and another person who wanted to distract voters in some fashion.
I don't know...
Good god man! You've just invented spam!
Thanks for the links, but the horrible multi-color flashing NEW from sometime in the mid '90s just kills the credibility for me. It also makes me want to gouge my eyes out, but that's a different type of crater.
in space!
I'm a hack musician and I've never understood this. There is no device I've ever seen that requires training to make a decent sound. All you do is fiddle with the thing until it makes a sound you like. That's the whole history of rock/pop music right there. A bunch of guys fiddling with equipment, saying "hey that's cool" and putting it down on tape. Hell, a lot of that fiddling involved guys with no clue wielding soldering irons, or flipping the tape over to run backwards, or kicking the box in just the right spot, or any number of other plain ugly hacks and we applaud a lot of that music today.
Now, if you're trying to make a piece of equipment make *a particular* sound or replicate someone else's work, then yes, that needs training, practice and expertise. But then, that's not really creating, it's reproducing or mimicking and that's a different thing altogether.
Having said all that, one must have a good ear, reasonable taste, and personal honesty (i.e. admit that it sucks) to make it work. If a person doesn't have at least some musical talent and creative drive, then it will just sound like crap. You're probably right, 80-90% of home recording enthusiasts have little to no understanding of compression, but that *doesn't* mean they can't tweak some knobs, listen to the results, and determine whether they like the sound or not.
Pundits can agree about all sorts of things and that doesn't mean jack. That's why they're pundits instead of done-dits, or however you'd make "they actually get it done" rhyme with pundit. Pundits will probably also agree that a microphone in the wrong hands can do more harm than good. It's the same with any piece of equipment. The problem is the definition of "wrong hands". Who determines what "wrong hands" means? The technicians and pundits want to say the wrong hands are anyone else's hands. The reality is the "wrong hands" are hands attached to ears and brains that can't hear what sounds like crap. Often times these wrong hand overlap with the other wrong hands and you get shit like modern hit music.
The problem is that it's highly likely that the PTB's will cut the funding for this project shortly after it gets started. We'll only have enough time to send out a few seconds of signal. Some poor sap at the other end will draw a circle around the printed representation of the signal and scribble the equivalent of "Wow" in the margin. And that will be the end of it. oh well.
must resist... must resist... can't resist!
You cowardly little turd pile AC. You crack me up. What will you do when they come for your mom? huh? How will you get your ass to school then? hmm?
At what point will it be bad enough for you to change? You clearly think it's bad since you bothered to say "still better". That's an admission that it's worsening. So what does it take? How bad does it have to be before there is one country better? And will that be enough? or will you just say "The US is still better than any other country in the world, except that one?"
And furthermore, you ass-drip, why is "better than any other" good enough? Are you satisfied to beat everyone else even if you didn't play as hard as you could? That's pretty hollow isn't it? There's nothing quite like *not* giving it your all. Wouldn't it be so much more awesome to say "better than any other" and getting better all the time? Wouldn't that be great?
just sayin'.
This implies a couple of things which I think are wrong.
1. That skilled medical personnel are of no use when they aren't performing medical procedures, which is patently false. Highly skilled medical personnel are *at least* capable of reasoned thought and probably capable of carrying out all sorts of rigorous experimental procedures. They may not be qualified to analyze the data, but they are certainly qualified to operate equipment, take measurements etc etc. And don't forget that at least *some* of the scientific advancement of the last couple centuries was carried out by people initially educated in whatever passed for medicine at the time. Sure there was some quackery, but there were also good minds trying to solve problems. S
2. That human life doesn't have the right to skilled medical care. This is obviously a philosophical point to be debated, but its totally reasonable that there should be a "ship's surgeon." Even if all he does is prance around in a skimpy bathrobe mackin' on the ladies, there's at least comic relief. Laughter is the best medicine!
Dude, they covered that in "Master and Commander". Its called a mirror.
oh. and good whiskey helps.
Funny that is, but wait until you have to pay for the right to the "score" that is used to "perform" the surgery on you're loved one and SIAA (surgical industry AA) is knocking on your door wanting to look at your hard drive to see if you made that available over the internet for others to use. Sure it's one thing, and fair-use mind you, to go ahead and do the operation on you sister, kid, neighbor, they can't really stop that. But if you leave that thing lying on the front porch and people start doing their own appendectomies willy-nilly, well, you're in for a heap of trouble.
I'm not sure this AC is really trolling. I mean this is pretty much how I feel about it too. They're all a bunch of liars trying to see which one can spin out the right lie to get the sheeple to bend over and take some more. shrug.
brightness is irrelevant to whether someone happens to have the right synapses fire in the right order to solve a particular problem.
And that was my point. Just because someone is bright, doesn't mean they will automatically think of every solution to a particular problem. Intelligence is not a free pass to discovering stuff (though it helps a lot!).
In the case of this particular example, she had done several other things in an effort to solve the problem, any number of which were potentially viable solutions, but didn't happen to think of this particular solution.
In my experience, the solution to a particular problem can come from any number of sources, some of which aren't necessarily the expected or "sanctioned" sources. Just because someone is both intelligent and an expert in their field does *not* mean they will think of the little bit that makes for a better solution.
To swerve randomly back on topic: it is conceivable that the electrocution hazard occurs during a particularly simple portion of the repair portion that can be performed in just a few minutes. A little scheduling to ensure that this particular action occurs during ISS "night" would be a good idea, in that case. It is entirely possible that no one at NASA thought of this. It is also exceedingly unlikely that they *didn't* think of it, but it certainly makes sense for someone to speak and say "hey, maybe we should do that at night, just in case."
Sort of like (car analogy) going ahead and double-checking with the guys at the tire store "you got the lug nuts all torqued down, right?" because sometimes they forget. Yeah sure, it's their job to do that and they're the experts and no one who's not an expert should suggest it because surely they thought of that, right? But don't you feel like an idiot watching your wheel bounce down the road.
rambling...
Now, having said all that, is
But I have to say, Debian *itself* is a great product. There seems to be this idea that Ubuntu is the usable Debian, and that's just not true. Debian has become really a very advanced OS in terms of usability, portability, and reliability. Debian is so much more than just a great beginning for other OSes to build on.
Granted, its not the bee's knees in terms of the latest versions of apps and so forth (talking stable here), but talk about a system you can rely on...
Finally, to those who complain that Debian is too slow to upgrade: Look at how often the average user upgrades their windows system... umm... how old is XP? How many win98/2k boxes are still out there? There is nothing wrong with using Debian stable for 2-3 years and then upgrading. The payoff is a rock solid system that "just works".
I love debian. There I said it.
Frankly, just about everything *any* user would need already exists.
In some respects, its hard now to contribute anything new -- it's all done. Granted, there's lots of bug fixing and feature improvement to be done, but practically speaking, there's nothing that can't be done.
It's almost boring at this point. What, you need to solve what problem? apt-get install foo. done.
It should be 10 computers, as in one more than 1 computer.
You can take that and shove it in your ATM machine!
Come on, you remember the little guy sitting on the steps, "... yes I'm only a bill..."
well, what happens is some fat dude comes out of the capitol building, grabs that little guys and starts bellowing something about "what's your function!" and then proceeds to rend him to little shreds and then stomps off stage right.
if a license will scale well from a few employees to a few hundred (or even a few tens) then this is very true. A micro/small business is stuck buying more capacity than they will ever use and since admin is typically done by a principal or one valued, multi-function employee (kinda like one of those print/scan/copy things) the cost of admin isn't really a factor. In my businesses, regardless of the cost of the software, I'm still doing the admin. So a license that costs a few hundred to a few thousand dollars is a big deal. If you factor in sunsetting (lookin' at you Intuit*) then it gets to be a HUGE deal.
:-P
* Yeah, Intuit, your forced sunsetting drove me away from windows for good, and I *still* thank you guys. It was the best thing that ever happened to me in the world of computing. thanks again